I did suggest keeping the gas cylinder outside when this first came up. They are determined that it would still be "dangerous" (disagree) and against the lease (true - there is a clause prohibiting outside storage). That doesn't seem to stop the tenants of adjacent units from keeping things outside, or heating with butane. I'm sure the LL would say that is none of my business, and indeed there is a clause in the lease to say that non-parties cannot enforce any of its terms. One thing I've learned from this is that in a business-to-business transaction, the letter of the lease is all that matters. The diesel heater idea is a good one and I shall investigate further. This all arose out of an Energy Performance Certificate inspection. The unit was let to me without an EPC in place, but the particulars claimed it was grade E. The LL noticed that the EPC was missing. Now the EPC is done it's rated grade G, and listed as heated entirely by electricity.

Planning designation B1, business is electronic engineering.

I rent an industrial unit. It is purpose built, and not connected to any office, retail or residential space. I have used a propane space heater there. My landlord says this is unsafe, and against the terms of the lease. I can challenge the 'unsafe' accusation by showing that the gas is used and stored in accordance with all regulations and suppliers guidelines. I am less certain about the lease. It does not mention bottled gas specifically, but... "The Tenant will not store at or bring to the Property an article, substance or liquid of a radioactive, combustible, inflammable or dangerous nature." There is no doubt that propane is flammable. But then so is a piece of paper. Am I being unreasonable?

That's right - the ack has been submitted within 14 days of deemed service. Now I need to enter a defence before 28 days from service (25th November). The County Court don't know that DF started this action even though the CCA says they can't while I'm waiting for them to produce a "true copy" of the agreement.

CCA request sent to DrydensFairfax 15 October 2013 County court claim issued 23 October 2013 Particulars of claim (1, 2 and 3 below):- 1. The claim is for the sum of xxxx in respect of monies owing by the defendant on a credit agreement held by the defendant with Lloyds Banking Group under account number xxxx upon which the defendant failed to maintain payments. 2. A default notice was served upon the defendant and has not been complied with. 3. By virtue of a sale agreement between Lloyds Banking Group and the claimant, the claim vested in the claimant who has a genuine commercial interest. The defendant has been notified of the assignment by letter. DrydensFairfax acknowledgement of CCA request dated 30 October 2013 (text above) I entered an acknowledgement of service of the County Court claim online on 4th November 2013

CapQuest bought a defaulted Halifax credit card account. The debt is real, but also contains a lot of penalties and late fees. I sent their solicitors, DrydensFairfax, a CCA request. Six days later, they issued a County Court claim. Subsequently they acknowledged the CCA request. "We acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 15 October 2013 [the CCA request] and we note all your comments. "As a result of your letter, we have contacted our client [CapQuest] to clarify the current position and seek their further instructions. We will write to you, further, once they have responded. We confirm that, in the meantime, the matter is on hold. "We trust this resolves any immediate concerns but, if you do have any further queries, please let me know." So they say it's "on hold", but the clock is ticking on the County Court claim that they should never have started in the first place. I have made an acknowledgement of service. I need to put in a defence or they could get judgement in default. Any suggestions?

I've been lurking seven years - wow. The mention of ActionFraud touched a nerve with me. I won't hijack the thread with details, but in my experience the fraud has to be huge before the police will get out of bed. Four figures and a cast-iron ID on the perpetrator just doesn't register. Been there. Another thing the OP absolutely mustn't do is have anything to do with CIFAS. In principle, if you believe you are at risk of identity theft, you can put a 'protective registration' on your name and address, which means a lender should take extra care to check that you are who you say you are. In practice, every credit application that you or anyone else at you address makes will be turned down. They're not supposed to do that, but they don't have the manpower to check and it's simpler for them just to say no.

ActionFraud don't investigate anything, ever. They fill a database and run statistical reports.