Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Council liability for plumbing repairs?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5390 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

Hi there

 

I am a plumber and a couple of months ago I was called to the home of an elderly council tenant who was experiencing problems. She was finding that her washing machine was filling up with dirty water after use. She suspected the plumbing of her flat was at fault but the council believed otherwise. Council contractors visited her flat, the first of which made a hole in the pipework causing the kitchen floor to become saturated and his subsequent efforts to stop the leak were futile. The puddling on the floor continued for a couple of weeks - the tenant having to use several of her own towels to absorb the water - before another contractor attended and replaced this section of pipe. This stopped the leak but the washing machine still continued to fill with dirty water. The council maintained that the problem was with the washing machine and it was the responsibility of the tenant to pay for any repair work required.

 

When I visited I drained the water from the washing machine and disconnected the waste hose from the wastepipe of the flat and ran a cycle with the machine empty. The waste water was collected in several buckets. The cycle ran perfectly well eliminating the washing machine as being the cause of the problem. I noticed that the pipework was incorrectly positioned to allow for proper drainage so I ended up replacing this section. Following this I ran the washing machine which worked fine and all the wastewater drained away as it should.

 

As the council contractors have never properly identified the cause of the problem and it has been left to the tenant to resolve the issue, I feel the council should meet the costs of this work and reimburse the tenant for my charges. This, manifestly, has not happened, and following a considerable amount of written correspondence, including a comprehensive description of the work that I carried out, the council is denying any responsibility for costs incurred - £100. They state that, “before any repairs are carried out by the plumber the information should have been forwarded to us so that we can look into this matter and arrange for the necessary repair”. Of course this gives rise to the question why could the contractors not establish what the problem was in the first instance and carry out the correct repairs accordingly? Despite this the council remain resolute in their position and deny that the tenant should be recompensed.

 

I am prepared to help the tenant as much as I possibly can as she is in pretty poor health and I get infuriated when I see people like this being treated so shabbily. But what should we do at this stage? Should we make a formal complaint to the council? Or would it be better to visit one of her local councillors or, indeed, her MP? As the tenant is pretty much house bound I could do this quite easily on her behalf.

 

Any thoughts? Thanks in advance for any advice offered. ;)

Edited by Plumbfounded
Amending title
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi (and welcome!),

 

I'm no housing expert but I do work for a Local Authority and I'd say do all of the above. Ward councillors, MP the works. Get onto the Council's website where you should be able to get contact details for most people and find out who the ward councillors are (they'll probably come round and see the lady). There should also be details of the complaints procedure. I would also write to the big boss of "Housing" (or as appropriate). He might be called an Executive Head, Director, Assistant Director or similar... If you can't find him on the website ring and ask for his name so you can address a letter personally. Failing that write to the Chief Executive - the way to make things happen is generally to get the big boys involved! Good luck - keep us posted!

 

Px

Link to post
Share on other sites

pink1: I have checked out who the ward councillors are and I think it might be better if I pay them a visit as the tenant might be a bit overwhelmed at the prospect of such attention. Likewise the MP. We will respond in writing to those you mentioned as well as with a formal complaint (the form can be downloaded from the council website).

 

Coniff: There was no “siphoning” taking place, though this can occasionally happen with a washing machine if connected incorrectly. Feel free to jump to the next paragraph if you get bored easily. :) The kitchen wastepipe had become misplaced and so the wastewater was trying to run uphill to the stack (the vertical pipe). This meant that residual wastewater had accumulated in this (about 2 metres) section of pipe. Any water draining from the kitchen sink will not be able to drain away as normal because a column of air is trapped by the accumulated water at the other end of the pipe. The water from the sink will try to find the path of minimum resistance which will be out of the trap via the spigot to the washing machine hose, hence the washing machine filling.

 

I fully understand you recommending approaching the papers, but I would be reluctant to pursue this path as I know the tenant would prefer to be as discreet as possible. This need not compromise our efforts otherwise.

 

I will certainly keep you informed of events as they unfold. Thanks for the advice. It is very much appreciated. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one thing I forgot to ask. Is it better for the complaint to be made in the tenants name, as it is the tenant for whom the services have failed? In some ways it would be easier, and more expedient, if I were to make the complaint, as I could do this on-line. On the other hand there might be more impact if the complaint is made, in name, by the affected party. Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see any reason why you shouldn't make the complaint on the tenants behalf - if you explain why (elderly, housebound etc) it might even serve to reinforce your point...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...