Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver.  (Although earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.  I don't clearly understand it, but legal advice was something to do with the role the receiver has acting as an agent for the borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against the receiver ???).  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate app for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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

NOSP Ground 8 rent arrears Catalyst housing association


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5211 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

Please really need some help. My Housing association have told me they want to hand me a ground 8 Notice of seeking possession order due to rent arrears of more than 2 months.

 

They have not really consulted with me whether i can afford to make payments, but have told me to pay more than £10 per week for the arrears is now £1783.

 

Unfortunately some of the arrears acquired due a previous tenancy which was transferred to them, and when i was working. I am already paying £10 per week although i am on benefits and by law required to pay £3.75.

 

I have a meeting with the manager on the phone before Christmas who told me that i either paid a big amount as £10 will take forever and they would seriously seek a NOSP ground 8 where the judges have no discretion.

 

Can anybody help on what to do at the next meeting with the manager, who just seems he just wants to kick me out!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

The manager is correct, if you have 2 months rent owing on an 'AST' tenancy agreement then they can issue a section 8, ground 8 notice, and when it eventually goes to court the judge has no alternative but to give the association possession.

 

So, you need to find a compromise with the manager. Remember, your housing is a priority.

 

You say the court order is for £3.75 per week? And you are paying £10? So you can show that you are making an effort. I presume all your current rent payments are up to date?

 

When did you last sign a tenancy agreement with the HA? (This could be very important) How much is your rent per month? Do you claim all the benefits you're entitled to? Could you find somewhere cheaper to live? (A new landlord wouldn't / couldn't evict you for a debt to someone else).

Edited by Rooster-UK
Reference to unauthorised website removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

the HA can only take as prescribed in law for a person on benifits not what they want to demand , contact the welfare rights @ your local council urgently, a NOSP when issed will not be actioned if an agreement is kept to, ( and this must comply with the law ) also once the arrears are cleared it becomes null and void, the best way is to get DWP to make the amount they can legaly demand deducted from your benifit and paid direct,

 

Also a strong letter to the CEO of the HA complaining about the Managers demands should be done urgently, and also to your local councillor and MP

NEVER FORGET

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Help Our Hero's Website

 

http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/

 

HIGHWAY OF HEROES

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/181826-last-tribute-our-lads.html

 

Like Cooking ? check the Halogen Cooker thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/218990-cooking-halogen-cookers.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and thanks so much for your replies.

  • The tenancy is an assured.
  • i moved into the property in Feb 09 with another landlord and Catalyst took over in July.
  • Catalyst have not provided me with a tenancy agreement as to date or a rent book
  • Also because I am classed as having a disability would this apply:
    22.— Discrimination in relation to premises.
     
    (1) It is unlawful for a person with power to dispose of any premises to discriminate against a disabled person—
    (a) in the terms on which he offers to dispose of those premises to the disabled person;
     
    (b) by refusing to dispose of those premises to the disabled person; or
     
    © in his treatment of the disabled person in relation to any list of persons in need of premises of that description.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, firstly, I think your 'disability' clause is a bit of a red-herring - you could only rely on it if you could prove a non-disabled person in the same financial situation would be dealt with differently.

 

However...

 

It might be worth getting advice on who you actually owe the rent arrears to. It is my understanding that although your tenancy transferred to Catalyst, the arrears won't have done. Any rent you should have paid to Old Landlord is still owed to OL, not Catalyst. Therefore all the money you have paid to catalyst, since Catalyst took over, should have gone to pay rent from the date catalyst took over. Does that make sense?

 

Example:

 

Apr Rent Due £1000, Rent Paid £100, Owed £900

 

May Rent Due £1000, Rent Paid £100, Owed £1800

Jun Rent Due £1000, Rent Paid £100, Owed £2700

=====Catalyst take over=====

Jul Rent Due £1000, Money Paid to Catalyst £500, Owed to OL £2700, Owed to Catalyst £500

Sep Rent Due £1000, Money Paid to Catalyst £1000, Arrears Paid to OL £500, Owed to OL £2200, Owed to Catalyst £500

Oct Rent Due £1000, Money Paid to Catalyst £1000, Owed to OL £2200, Owed to Catalyst £500

 

Substitute your own figures, but so long as rent due to Catalyst remains below 2 months worth or rent, then you can fight a section 8 ground 8 re-possession.

 

An easy way to check might be to phone old landlord and ask if you owe them any money - if they will put in writing that you owe (say) £1000, then that is £1000 that Catalyst can't claim you owe them.

 

The above is my UNDERSTANDING of your situation, it is not a situation I have been in, so I may have misunderstood either your situation or the law. Put this suggestion to someone who knows about tenancy matters (CAB Solicitor?) and see if they agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the HA can only take as prescribed in law for a person on benifits not what they want to demand

 

This is true, but while it stops them taking too much money it doesn't prevent them applying for possession of the property.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info I have been scurring the website for info as well even lexix nexis.

 

The property is Housing Association and I have developed a plan to pay off more than half (3/4) the arrears in 3 years would that seen reasonable to them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...