Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Agree it is not a modification that needs to be disclosed to Insurers as changing the seats has not changed the risk.  
    • Frpm David Frost and Robert Jenrick: 'Conservatives must show we respect the votes in 2016 and 2019 and not give the Opposition the chance to undo the benefits of leaving the EU'   Sweep away the Brexit gloom – or Labour will unravel a huge gain ARCHIVE.PH archived 22 Apr 2024 05:47:50 UTC  
    • Please please help we were miss sold full fibre by EE July 22  Install couldn’t go ahead no equipment sent and no. Survey it was hell  foind out no full fibre in road so we had to go back to cooper no choice we involved. Ceo and they put in a man from customer resolution s  he was vile he told me I had to go to engineers  something very odd about the ex resolution s in bt basically they took my drive up said they Would put ducting in ready for full fibre we have got £ 40 for a hours upon hours phones stress and more told to go to ombudsman  then bill was £35 we called twice told it was that price as they had treated us appalling two weeks later all sky package gets pulled we call again our bill goes to 165 the next two weeks was hell trying to get yo bottom why it’s off our package it was all on in the end I spent a day on the phone  341 mins was the call anyway I got to the bottom it was this resolution man coveting up the other issue another deadlock  to cover it all up  they hide data  ee did so couldn’t get the miss sell in writing I have now only from sept  Basically now we tried getting full fibre and they have found my drive had to be taken up again which has sunk .  The engineer has placed the wrong ducting again under my drive and need s to be taken to again apparently and the pipe sticks up middle of the drive near gate not behind look so odd it’s a big as a drain pipe open to water and it’s below touching the electrical cables to hot tub . I was sent a letter from the ex resolution to say I had stopped the work  I haven’t  it’s so sadistic she covering up for her mate in that team as the orginal install he didn’t check it had been done correctly  I took to Twitter and posted on open reach they ignored me then after 3 calls of two weeks they sent a engineer bt ignored me ceo emails blocked tag on Twitter unanswered then we get someone from twitter send a engineer he written report to say it’s dangerous since we have  had a  letter to say our problem can not be resolved  then a email to say sorry we are leaving and we can’t get into our account Bt will not talk to us ofcom tells us nothing they can do Citzens advice said go to the police  we can’t go back to virgin due so mass issue with them only option is sky  but point is they make out we have canceled we haven’t we have this mess on our drive dangeous work we are in hell  it’s like she covering up for this collegue it’s all very odd I am disabled and they like played mentaly with me open reach say bt resolved the issue no they have not  I recon they have terminated us making our we have  to hide it from mgt  Help it’s hell I don’t sleep we have 29 may we have tried  calling they just ignore me  at first they are so lovely as they say I am then they go to nnamager and say we can’t say anything to you end call  Scared police are rubbish I need help even typing is so painfull  Thankyou  anyone hello be so grateful     
    • There's a thread somewhere about someone sending the baillifs against Wizzair that is quite hilarious. I would love to see someone do the same to Ryanair. Question is, should you be the one to take that role. You are entitled to the £220, if your flight was from the UK. If it was TO the UK I suppose it is more of a grey area... though the airlines I know have been using £220 as standard. Not that surprising for Ryanair, the worst cheapskates in the universe, to go for the lower amount, and if you forward this to the CEO he will probably have a jolly good laugh and give his accountants a verbal bonus. After all he's the one who said and I paraphrase "F*** our customers, they'll fly with us again anyway". While we would all love to see Ryanair get wooped in court again, I have to join my fellow posters in thinking it's not worth the hassle for (hypothetically) £7 and not sure it will expedite the payment either. It's already an achievement that you got them to accept to pay.
    • The US competition watchdog has taken legal action to stop Tapestry's $8.5bn takeover of rival Capri.View the full article
  • 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

Do I have to pay this?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4809 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, This is a bit long so i will try and keep it as short as possible, i have accepted that i will have to pay it for my own mistake but if there is someone out there that knows some way i can get out of it, then bonus.

 

ok, i moved in to a flat Nov 2009, there are three flats above a shop, it was advertised as 450 pcm, council tax included. The agency also confirmed in person that it was CT included and i took the flat on that basis.

 

Cue the other day, i receive a bill for £1317 for CT from when i moved in. It wasnt in the tenancy aggreement that is was CT included, i only signed a 6mth one at the start and nothing since.

 

the girl upstairs said she had the same problem, receiving a bill in her name but her tenancy had it written in pencil and the agency (a diff one to the one i went with) wrote a letter confirming it was included so she has got off paying it.

 

My agency said i need to speak to the landlady who just said send it to me and i will have a look but she is saying it wouldnt have been CT included otherwise she wouldnt have made any money by the renting of it.

 

I feel i am pretty much stuck due to me not getting it written in the contract. I did have a copy of the advert after what happened to the girl upstairs but when my hard drive went last year i lost it.

 

The landlady also says the girl upstairs is now paying it but i know she has received no bills as it was sorted by the letter her agency gave her saying it was included.

 

The landlady is a bit dodgy basically and i am now probably moving out next week to avoid her. Is there anyway i can get this bill put onto the landlady's name or am i stuck because i signed (6mths only, over a year ago) a contract saying i would pay it?

 

Any help would be appreciated but i think i need to just pay it and learn the lesson.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A verbal contract with an agency could be proved to be legally binding.. ask for a full details of your contract and write down exactly what was said to you in order for you to take the contract in the first place..if you can prove that it was reasonably expected that the council tax was included in your rental payments then you could be in the clear..ask your neighbours what they pay and if Council tax is included in their rental payments..good luck..:-)

ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well one neighbour I never see, he apparently has the place just for when he argues with his wife and needs somewhere to stay, not seem him in 6 months.

 

The girl upstairs doesn't pay council tax, but it was written in her contract. Although mine was advertised as included it wasn't written in my contract...my fault for not getting it added in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you could go down the route of False advertising... If something is advertised as one thing then becomes another ..its dodgy to start with and as your upstairs neighbour pays inclusive you could reasonably argue that you thought it was included and put the pressure back to the landlord..It certainly sounds like she's trying to pull a fast one..Explain the situation to the council tax office and see what happens.. at this stage you have nothing to lose.

ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

Link to post
Share on other sites

The tax office said as i am the tenant i have to pay unless i have a letter from the landlady saying its inclusive. The agency just fobbed me off saying i have to speak to the landlady. I cant prove false advertising as i dont have a copy of the advert anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would assume as you are using the agency as a "agent" they must have a copy of the original advertisement, Ask for a original un-adjusted copy of it. If you can't get one then It may prove very hard to get your case across..

ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

Link to post
Share on other sites

The tenancy can say what ever it likes however the liability for council tax is governed only by council tax legislation.

 

If you rent the flat above the shop and you are the sole tenant of that flat then you are liable for the council tax on that property, not the landlord, unless it falls under the regulations governing council tax HMO's.

 

Is the property banded separately for council tax ? (check at http://www.voa.gov.uk )

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was only banded after i put myself on the electorol roll last year, they then had the date i moved in from and have billed me from there. They said they didnt know it was being used to residential purposes until they had notification about me living there so the landlady hadnt registered the property for it at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was only banded after i put myself on the electorol roll last year, they then had the date i moved in from and have billed me from there. They said they didnt know it was being used to residential purposes until they had notification about me living there so the landlady hadnt registered the property for it at all.

 

That is unfortunate but providing it is a valid dwelling (as it is now) then , again assuming its not an HMO, then you are the liable person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...