Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
    • Massive issues from Scottish Power I wonder if someone could advise next steps. Tennant moved out I changed the electric into my name I was out the country at the time so I hadn't been to the flat. During sign up process they tried to hijack my gas supply as well which I made it clear I didn't want duel fuel from them but they still went ahead with it. Phoned them up again. a few days later telling them to make sure they stopped it but they said too late ? had to get my current supplier to cancel it. Paid £50 online to ensure there was money covering standing charges etc eventually got to the flat no power. Phoned Scottish Power 40 minutes to get through they state I have a pay as you go meter and that they had set me up on a credit account so they need to send an engineer out which they will pass my details onto. Phone called from engineer asking questions , found out the float is vacant so not an emergency so I have to speak to Scottish Power again. Spoke with the original person from Scottish Power who admitted a mistake (I had told her it was vacant) and now states that it will take 4 weeks to get an appointment but if I want to raise a complaint they will contact me in 48 hours and it will be looked at quicker. Raised a complaint , complaints emailed me within 24 hours to say it will take 7 days till he speaks with me. All I want is power in the property would I be better switching over to EON who supply the gas surely they could sort it out quicker? One thing is for sure I will never bother with Scottish Power ever again.    
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1875 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

My wife owns a second property, and recently recieved a notice from the Freehold managers demanding payment of £100 ground rent and £146.88 in "Administration Expenses" i have tried unsucessfully (so far ) to extract a breakdown of the costs that have been applied to the account.

 

There had been no previous correspondance from this firm although they have since informed me that the ground rent was due on 31st March 2005, the letter which also contained a "copy" of the original invoice. The "Copy" of the original invoice was dated the day before the letter demanding the total of £246.88.

 

I pointed this out to the company involved and they now say that it was a reprint and not a copy.

 

Can i ask for a breakdown of charges under the DPA in this instance ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it would be covered by the DPA. Did your wife use a solicitor when she purchased the lease? If so, they may be able to provide a copy.

 

The amount of the ground rent would be set out in the lease and doesn't seem outrageous. Under the lease it may be possible for the management company to levy an administration fee but the amount being claimed seems excessive to say the least. Unfortunately without knowing what's in the lease, it's quite difficult to advise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If this property is a flat then, there will be ground rent, unless the owners own the Freehold between them.

 

As for the other charge. This is not unreasonable, it is for the upkeep of the common parts, ie communal gardens, parking areas, communal lighting, and of course Building Insurance, which can be quite expensive.

 

If there is a managing agent they are entitled to add up to 15% of everything that they spend on the upkeep of the property.

 

Also if you have just recently purchased this property, then you cannot be charged for ground rent or service charges that are for last year if someone else owned the property.

 

Your solicitor should have asked about the management of the Freehold when you purchased the property, and you should have had a copy of the lease.

 

Hope this helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree on a couple of points.

 

"Administration Expenses" could be anything. Taken at face value it seems to be a charge for administering the ground rents process. Normally leases will be quite specific about what is being charged for and good practice dictates that a service charge bill will be sufficiently detailed to enable the leaseholder to check that the costs fall within the definitions included in the lease. Indeed the ODPM has just finished consulting on a minimum standard for service charge invoices. If these expenses are indeed for services, then the leaseholder has a statutory right to inspect the accounting records and I would suggest that they do so in this case.

 

The 15% administration expenses is a common misconception. Again this is determined by what's in the lease. They will sometimes specify a fixed percentage. Others say that the charge should be based on actual costs. 15% is likely to be the maximum amount chargeable in such cases but quite often these charges have been reduced by Leasehold Valualtion Tribunals to much lower levels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ground rent can be the money for rent of the land... we get ground rent and we do not include other things in the ground rent like maintenance which is extra. i suppose we could call those "administrative fees." if you have lots of properties its actually cheaper to call maintenance that rather than detail it individually, would you rather have a full invoice with everything detailed that costs £10 because someone had to work out 15% of painting the outside to meet conservation area standards, 15% of a new lightbulb, 15% of tree pruning?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "Admin fees" are due to the unpaid rent, they are nothing to do with the maintenance costs which are paid to a seperate entity, When i wrote to them asking them how "admin Expenses" OF £146.88 could be incurred within 2 days of the issue of the invoice, i sent them a cheque for £100 for the ground rent in full and final settlement of the account as i did not think that their charges were reasonable.

 

They wrote back returning the cheque and threatened to inform the mortgage company that we had not paid the ground rent, and that they were going to approach them (the mortgage co) for payment.

 

I wrote again requesting a breakdown of how such charges could be accrued in 2days from the issue of the original invoice.

 

They wrote back with a list of the charges that they charged for things for example

 

A breakdown of "Administration Expenses" would cost me £17.82

 

A copy of the lease would cost me £x

 

Etc etc.

 

I have since written back confirming that we have no intention of paying any unsubstantiated "Admin Expenses" and that i had informed the mortgage provider of the situation and that i had offered to pay the Ground Rent but refused to pay such ridiculous charges.

 

Will the DPA letter get me the breakdown of charges ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Try the following website:

 

http://www.leaseholdadvisoryservice.co.uk/

 

You are entitled to a breakdown of Service Charges, which should show all expenditure on your behalf, plus the Management Fees. This should not be charged for if you are a Leaseholder.

 

And the maximum that can be charged for managing is 15% on top of the amount of expenditure.

 

The ground rent should be billed for separately. And they have to give you 30 days in which to pay.

 

If they send the bill out late then you still have 30 days in which to pay.

 

If you are unhappy with the amount of service charges levied you can go to a tribunal.

 

Hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still cant see how the DPA letter will not make them give me a breakdown of charges to my account, They are charges to MY account only these are not for any maintenance, just charges due to "non payment of Ground Rent"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot see how they have arrived at this amount on top of the ground rent, unless they have gone to court and its court fees and interest.

 

If they will not give you a breakdown of these Administration charges, then tell them you will take them to a Leasehold Valuation Tribunal. That might flush them out.

 

There is a lot of information about how to deal with this and about your rights on the link below:

 

http://www.odpm.gov.uk/search/esearch.asp?search=Leasehold+publications&start=0&type=boolean&col=ODPM&perpage=10&sort=rank&summary=yes

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

My landlord is demanding, through yet another managing agent, payment for "outstanding" service charges and management fees, which he claims are 7 years old. Is there a legal limit to how far back demands can be made? We have a troublesome history with the freeholder and this seems to be another example of his underhand methods.:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have a copy of your Lease, it should contain the sum of the Ground Rent, and any increase that may be written into the Lease. This is the rent that you pay to the Freeholder for the ground on which the property stands. Most ground rents are paid twice yearly on Lady days, and if the Lease is fairly new it may contain increases set up every 25 years. The average ground rent is about £100 per year, but there are a lot of old leases still running from 90+ years ago that may only be about £10 per year.

 

If all the residents jointly own the Freehold then the Ground Rent is usually waived, as if you own it together you have no real need to pay it.

 

However, if it is Service Charges, then it is different. Service charges are made up of Insurance of the buildings, cost of keeping communal areas clean, cost of gardening and cost of Electricity to light the communal areas.

 

Its quite straightforward if it is managed properly by the residents themselves. You all pay the same for the management of the upkeep of the common parts and the building insurance.

 

You are entitled to have a copy of the Management Accounts every year and there should be an Annual General Meeting to discuss any increases in charges etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for message re ground rent - my problem relates to an OLD demand - i.e. one the freeholder 'discovered' has not been paid through an old, unreliable managing agent. This is 7 years olf - alledgedly. Can they make demands that far back ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • 7 months later...

There is an angle under the Data Protection Act 1998 that could address this issue. Under the Act, any person in control of information which relates to an individual, such details about service charges, is under a statory duty to ensure the information is 'accurate'. If it is not, then it is unfair processing under the Act and an indivudla can apply to a court for the information to be corrected. The person controlling the information, such as a freeholder, must show how the information is fair. Compensation can also be claimed for stress caused by the inaccuracy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Help Please anyone?

I have been unable to pay my ground rent since 1998 as that was the last time I had an address to send the money to, I always paid and it was not a problem. However, the organisation changed and I was no longer able to forward my ground rent. Conseqently last August I received a letter from a Property Management firm stating I owed 12 yrs (which is incorrect) and that as they had been appointed to collect the fees would I send a cheque. I was so angry that after all these years someone is just able to just demand the fees, which had I had the correct payee address, the Ground rent would have been paid. I wrote to my MP who wrote to the Property Management firm but they simply reported back to him as they had told me, I am owing 12 years, I have heard from another Property Management (where my Mum pays hers) that in Law they are not able to claim more than six years in arrears. Is this correct and should I ask my MP to investigate further?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

the whole system for service charges is set up to favour the freeholder. you have a lease and it talks about 'reasonable amount' to be charged. the management comp uses its discretion as to what should be spent on, such as upgarding fire escape but not on cleaning the estate, without asking the leaseholders. when you ask them for more info, they do not bother to reply.if you go to the leasehold valuation they invariably favour the freeholder. even if the leasehold valaution tribunal holds in your favour the freeholder can appeal to the lands tribunal and if they loose here they can go on appealing to the next court available to them. in the meantime legal costs built up by the freeholder are charged to the service charge account, which has to be paid by the leaseholders. the freeholder is always on a win-win situation and the leaseholder is the looser from every aspect. where is the justice here? private freeholders seem to be having a winner. the company getting away with this situation is freshwater and now county estate management(managing for wisestates ltd) seems to be getting to the action.

Edited by mart22
correcting information
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I own a 999 year lease at Bromyard House. Berkeley Homes is the landlord. I received in the post last week (June 25 2009) a demand notice for ground rent covering the periods 2007 and 2008. Is the landlord allowed to delay issung an invoice for ground rent beyond a 3-6 month period from when it becomes due? My lease is silent on the issue of when invoices should be issued to leaseholders for ground rent charges. Please advise if I could refuse to pay the 2007-2008 ground rents without fear of penalty or forefiture of my lease?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My freeholder is notorious for not issing invoices. He is not "bad" or "neglectful" - just elderly and rather absent-minded! I have simply paid the ground rent and an estimated amount for buildings insurance and electricity for shared areas into a savings account. The property is for sale and I suspect an invoice will be forthcoming when he gets notification from the solicitors at the time of the sale:(.

Kentish Lass

Information given is based on my knowledge and experience and is not to be considered as legal advice

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 9 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/07/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1875 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...