Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Electricity meter clock and register errors


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4819 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I have had two Horstmann S123 multi tariff electricity meters replaced this year due to faulty operation.

 

The most obvious problems were clock errors. The first meter was over two hours out and the second meter was over 1 hour out when compared to the GMT radio time signal. The meters should be aligned to GMT during the winter period. This means that a lot of off peak usage would be recorded as peak usage as one tends to program high energy usage for off peak times. The energy supplier has offered an adjustment, but I am not entirely happy about how this is calculated.

 

I also believe that the first meter was either subject to storm damage due to very local lightning strikes shortly after it was installed or had an inherently faulty register/memory. The register/memory, that records the number of units of electricity used, began reading much higher than usual after this storm event. A check meter was installed in February last year to monitor the erroneous meter. I made regular comparison readings during the time the check meter was installed and these showed the erroneous meter suffered from variable errors in the number of electricity units recorded over this period that were outside the allowed meter accuracy limits defined by OFCOM. Strangely the electricity supplier is denying this although they are admitting the clock errors exist.

 

The house has thermal insulation that exceeds current building regulations and although the heating uses an electric central heating boiler, it should be very economical to heat due to this high level of insulation. This is not reflected in the size of the bills being presented for the period the first meter was in use.

 

Has anyone had problems with their electricity meter accuracy, either clock errors, or wildly varying recorded consumption of electricity that bears no relation to actual use of electricity.

 

I have discussed the clock error issue with the electricity supplier and they have admitted that they have been having clock errors with meters but so far will not give any details about these errors and their frequency in writing. I wonder why? It may be that there are many meters showing problems with clock errors, which could be very embarrassing considering that the meters are supposedly certified as accurate. I believe that a large proportion of meters may be running incorrectly and it could be a good idea to check the time on your meter clock to ensure it is operating correctly. If you find that you have a clock error you will have been overcharged for some of your off peak usage.

 

Please report your findings on this thread.

 

AfonScimitar

Edited by AfonScimitar
Title should have been in bold
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you mean OFGEM not OFCOM, you can get at least 6 years worth of data from the supplier, so you can compare usage from various periods. You can also get the meter inspected independantly with the suppliers permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello rebel11,

 

You are correct I did mean OFGEM.

 

I have already requested all data held on the account since it was opened in 1997 by means of a SAR via Special Delivery on 11/01/11, which was delivered on 14/01/11. The energy supplier has until 23rd February to supply the data.

 

Historical usage comparison is tricky as the supply was first instigated on 09/07/07 to enable the house to be renovated. At this time the house had no electrical wiring as it had been gutted previously to enable ground-up renovation. Unfortunately the mortgage funds were delayed due to technicalities and the renovation subcontractors did not start work on the house until September 2007 after the funds were released. Residence did not begin until 5th December, as the house was not habitable until then. The old mechanical mechanism meter was for economy 7 and economy 10 was required for the under floor heating system so the new solid-state (integrated circuit) Horstmann S123 meter was fitted on 29/04/08. The early bills were estimated and they were so close to actual that they were paid without adjustment. Following a bad local thunderstorm the meter began to read much higher than previously and several telephone communications were made with the supplier’s customer service department concerning a much higher bill than usual. None of the customer services operatives were technically competent and all tried to override anything I said with their customer complaint script sheet. I did finally get through to someone who had the authority to adjust bills and this resulted in cancellation of a fairly high bill. When further higher bills arrived they were disputed until I eventually requested that the meter be checked for accuracy. The check meter was installed on 08/02/10 and removed on 29/06/10 along with the faulty meter. During the check period I took readings of both meters and found discrepancies between them. The supplier is denying this as they have a different set of figures for start and finish for this period. With access to these meters being no longer available, it is my word against theirs and, as the law stands firmly behind utility providers, I am doubtful that I can contest this, as would be the case on a level legal playing field. This is why I have asked for others who have had similar experiences to let me know on this thread, as it will help my case and theirs too should battle commence.

 

The first meter was removed on 29/06/10 when the second meter was fitted. I requested in writing that the old meter was retained for evidence and independent testing on 13/07/10. This communication was completely ignored. I have repeated this request several times by telephone and in writing with no further action on their part to verify retention of the meter until very recently. I consider this meter to be a crucial piece of evidence should the dispute escalate further. I have disputed the amount on the bills that were presented through the period that the faulty meter was in operation. I have also requested that the check meter and the second (replacement) meter that has been found to have a faulty clock be retained as evidence. It would appear that meters are not retained until disputes are settled, but are sent for exchange from the manufacturer at their earliest convenience thus removing any evidence of malfunction from scrutiny.

 

 

AfonScimitar

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello mattlamb,

This is somewhat worrying as the meter clock accuracy is important to ensure correct tariff billing. This means that there will be many people with dual tariff meters billed incorrectly.

I have been looking briefly for information about clock accuracy regulations but I have not found anything so far. Do you know the limits of accuracy allowed for the clock?

AfonScimitar

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...