Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
  • 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 House Waiting List


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4877 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

Hello hope I'm in the right section for my question.

 

 

If you put your name on a council house waiting list they sometimes ask if you want to be put on private housing associations lists as well.

 

If you are offered say two council houses or flats and you refuse as unsuitable you may have your application suspended for a year.

I've heard this rule is common amongst many councils.

 

When you go back on after a year are you back at the beginning or is the fact that you were on for perhaps a couple years taken into account when you go back after your years suspension ?

 

If you don't get offered any council properties but you are contacted by a private housing association after being referred by the council and have been offered say a couple of properties over say a two year period and you refuse as unsuitable does this affect your place on the council waiting list ?

 

When you first sign up for council housing do you get a booklet with all the rules regarding accepting and refusing properties ?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they are a bit behind the times then I believe by the end of 2010 they should have the bidding system in place. This takes away the old fashioned points sytem, puts each applicant into a colour band, ie., red, amber, green, red being lowest priority. They then advertise every social housing vacancy within their area (HA and Council) You are then required to "register your interest" in any property you like (although some will be restricted to the highest band), with the idea being that you will only bid for a property in an area you will accept, rather than the Council forcing you into an unsuitable property (hence choice based lettings). You;ll know when this is about to start because they have to inform every WL applicant of the banding and provide them with the means to bid for properties.

 

Your council operates a policy which is common, three strikes and out. So, after turning down three properties which THEY deem suitable, they believe your need for housing cannot be quite so urgent, therefore it won't hurt you to wait one year, AND THEN RESUME your place on the WL. They cannot or should not bar you completely, the suspension is usually 12 months only, and during that time no offer will be made to you.

 

It is standard practice for the council to ask you to consider HA properties as well. You will find they are responsible for ALL the social housing, they have nomination rights to the private HA properties as well. This is now how most local authorities work. Its not a bad thing to take a HA property, the only difference being is, provided they bypass the introductory tenancy, which is becoming very common place these days, you would have an ASSURED tenancy as opposed to a SECURE one with the LA's own stock.

 

Now, I've just noticed you are in Scotland, and much as I'd give my eye teeth to visit your part of the country, I'm not very up on their Housing Law, and there can be quite vast diffrences between you and England and Wales. So, whilst what I am saying is basically right, they may have longer to introduce the Choice based lettings scheme, if they are required to do it at all. But this is something your LA can confirm for you.

 

In any case, the general rule is three offers, no take up, suspended for twelve months. And since the Council obviously do work with the local HA's in your area I say that the offers of HA accommodation are going to count towards the three strikes.

 

I hope this helps, but do just check on the law where you are for peace of mind, and good luck, hang on in there and you will get what you want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that info.

 

Yes I agree Scottish law maybe slightly different to English regarding councils.

 

Can someone request a copy of the form they filled in when applying for council housing to check what the rules and requirements are ?

 

 

My local council says two strikes and you are barred for a year.

This is after being offered two properties within 18 months of registering with the council but not by the council themselves but a housing association.

 

I'm assuming then an offer for a council property and an offer for an HA property is the same then ?

I naively assumed that an offer for an HA property didn't apply to the two strikes and out otherwise the applicant might have stated council property offers only.

 

 

The applicant requested a property with gas CH but was offered two properties with concrete floors and an electrical hot air type unit fixed into the wall in each room.

 

Also one of the properties faced onto a lane where kids go up and down all the time and the property and the one next door according to the next door neighbour has had windows broken by the kids a couple of years before and as the applicant was over 50 and had trouble with kids and vandalism in a previous property felt unable to take this second property offered by the housing association.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The applicant requested a property with gas CH but was offered two properties with concrete floors and an electrical hot air type unit fixed into the wall in each room.

Is there a medical reason for this? Electric storage makes for very dry air so if a person had breathing problems such as asthma, then this sort of heating might be unsuitable, also for some skin conditions too. I would think that all that is needed is conf from the GP to this effect, point out the original request that was made, and that should remove one strike.

 

Also one of the properties faced onto a lane where kids go up and down all the time and the property and the one next door according to the next door neighbour has had windows broken by the kids a couple of years before and as the applicant was over 50 and had trouble with kids and vandalism in a previous property felt unable to take this second property offered by the housing association.

 

When the applicant had the trouble was it recorded with the local police? If so, get your beat officer to do a letter to confirm what happened and then the applicant has a good reason to refuse the second property. They have to consider people's perception of what will cause them fear, alrm and distress these days. They will also be very cross with the tenant who told the applicant about the damage to the neighbouring property, if they find out who it is!

 

You can also go to Shelter, and get them to write and point this out to the Council in case they have difficulty grasping these facts.

 

So, its two strikes in your Council then? Well, thats seems a bit tight to me, but there you go.

 

And yes, sounds like your LA has the nomination rights for ALL social housing - this is quite normal these days, they cannot stand the thought that anyone can get a property which is outside their remit in the first place! Although actually, its really to ensure that those that need the available social housing get it.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that.

 

 

They will also be very cross with the tenant who told the applicant about the damage to the neighbouring property, if they find out who it is!

 

 

That's a pity as people will sometimes ask neighbours what an area is like.

 

 

 

The applicant has and I believe may have stated in their application to the council that they had asthma.

 

The applicant asked a neighbour of the property she was about to view later that day about the area and the neigbour told her about the problems with the house she was being offered and that a couple of years before kids smashed the window in the house she was being offered and a few others including the neighbours.

There is a lane at the side of this house where the front door is and another lane that overlooks the livingroom and the bedroom.

The applicant didn't want to say to the housing officer who showed her the property that she'd found out from the neighbour in the house at the other side of the lane about the window smashing incase the housing officer said anything to the neighbour.

If she'd mentioned it the housing officer would have wanted to know who told her.

 

With her having problems a number of years before with kids and vandalism she felt unconfortable accepting the house and possibly encountering more problems.

 

Can an appeal be made if someone is put off the list for a year ?

 

 

The previous problem with kids and vandalism did have the police involved but the applicant may have trouble remembering the dates of the incidents as this was about 2001.

Not sure how much info the police need to check back into the incidents.

I wonder if the name address and year is enough to bring up the vandalism reports on the police computer.

Edited by EleanorRigby
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, definitely one strike gone for the asthma if you do like i said with a confirmation of it. You should have no problem viewing the original application form, just pop down and ask firstly, failing that there is the SAR route. Get your friend to ring up and say she keeps a copy of all her documents, and that this one is missing and she worries about things like that, you never know, they might be happy just to send a copy.

 

The problems she encountered in 2001 are some time ago, but then it depends what happened and how it affected her, did she see the GP, did it affect her mental health etc etc., is there a record of all this, so on and so forth. I expect a record at the cop shop could eventually be traced.

 

But also, try and look at this the other way, this worry about ASB in a new area, so the neighbour said a window was smashed 2 years ago. This happens every where from time to time, and note the neighbour did not say it was a frequent occurence. The kids that did it have grown up a little (or more likely progressed onto armed robbery;)) and there is no way to say what will or won;t happen in ANY area in this respect. Try and see how much of your friend's refusal is to how she perceives ASB, as opposed to what actually goes on in any area.

 

But anyway, I think you'll find we've got rid of one strike, and you can always putin a written appeal to the head of the Housing Dept, local councillor, member of Housing Committee etc.

 

Goodluck, I'm sure it will all work out in the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...