Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.    Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.   The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved.  Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
    • I was referring to #415 where you wrote "I was forced to try to sell - and couldn't." . And nearer the start in #79 .. "I couldn't sell.  I had an incredibly valuable asset. Huge equity.  But the interest accrued / the property market suffered and I couldn't find a buyer even at a level just to clear the debt." In #194 you said you'd tried to sell for four years.  The reason for these points is that a lot of the claims against for example your surveyor, solicitor, broker, the lender and now the receiver are mainly founded in a belief that they should have been able to do something but did not. Things that might seem self evident to you but not necessarily to others. Pressing these claims may well need a bit more hard evidence, rather than an appeal to common sense. Can you show evidence of similar properties, with similar freehold issues, selling readily? And solid reasons why the lender should have been able to sell when you couldn't.
    • You can use a family's address.   The only caveat is for the final hearing you'd need to be there in person   HOWEVER i'd expect them to pay if its only £200 because costs of attending will be higher than that
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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 4313 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,

i am worried about court because I have received a letter from RLP saying that if they take me to court it will cost loads more.

 

I have been to see a solicitor and he said to pay because if I keep denying it and they have proof and take me to court I will have to pay their court costs which can be in the thousands.

 

I'm really reluctant to pay though because they sent my grandmother a letter and it was only when I showed them a copy of her passport

to show that she is 67 years old that they said they would suspend the case but that if she did it again they would reopen the case!

 

I know I did wrong but all she did was point to the items and it was me who took them.

 

I took full responsibility and they still wrote to her.

 

I hate them and they disgust me.

 

If I thought they would take me to court then I would pay because I can’t afford to pay thousands.

 

My solicitor has said that the claim has been issued.

 

Not sure what this means,

but really would like to find out if they will actually take me to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 398
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi jonny

 

Welcome to CAG

 

You've got your own thread. What documents have you received? and from whom?

 

To date RLP haven't taken anyone to court, they do like to send out letter's which are speculative invoices.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by the following:- 'My solicitor has said that the claim has been issued.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Rebel - you say that the solicitor said that "....they will take you to court" then that the solicitor said that "...the claim has been issued". Which is true?

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He said that I have to give my defence by next week. He said that I can say that because I'm on benefits, I can't afford to pay, and that I need my car to take my grandmother to and from her hospital appointments. I haven't got any documents, but I don't know what documents my solicitor has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesnt make sense.

 

Have you received a claim form from the Court ?. or have you only received a letter from RLP ?

 

Many of us here would be very surprsied if you have actually received a court claim, for us to help you we will need more info, a scan of letters/court docs (with names & address redacted) would help.,

 

Benfits and cars/granmdmothers are irrelevant at this stage, lets deal with the facts.

 

Why do you not know what doc your solicitor has ?, surely the only docs he has are ones youve given them !?

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I too am worried about court because I have received a letter from RLP saying that if they take me to court it will cost loads more. I have been to see a solicitor and he said to pay because if I keep denying it and they have proof and take me to court I will have to pay their court costs which can be in the thousands. I'm really reluctant to pay though because they sent my grandmother a letter and it was only when I showed them a copy of her passport to show that she is 67 years old that they said they would suspend the case but that if she did it again they would reopen the case! I know I did wrong but all she did was point to the items and it was me who took them. I took full responsibility and they still wrote to her. I hate them and they disgust me. If I thought they would take me to court then I would pay because I can’t afford to pay thousands. My solicitor has said that the claim has been issued. Not sure what this means, but really would like to find out if they will actually take me to court.

 

RLP won't take you to court - they haven't suffered any losses.

 

You haven't really said what happened, but if you were stopped and any goods taken were recovered then it's difficult to see what the store's losses were. In general, you would not be responsible for paying any of the store's security costs

 

How much are RLP asking for? Most amounts they claim would be covered by the small claims court where costs cannot be claimed.

 

Any claim should have been sent direct, so you should know what is happening.

 

You will have to provide more detail of what has happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for all your comments.

I called my solicitor and told him what you have all said.

 

He said that the claim is not against RLP but against TK Maxx and that if I want to deny liability

then there is a chance that the case will go to the fast track instead of the small claims court where I will have to pay TK Maxx costs if I lose.

 

He said that once he has submitted my defence the court will give him a date for the hearing when we find out which court it is in.

 

I asked him why I didn't get the forms and he said because he is my solicitor and that everything has to go to him.

 

He also said that he is acting pro bono so I won't have to pay any solicitor costs but that the amount would be higher.

I know he's (the solicitor) not trying to [problem] me because he's a friend of a friend.

 

He said that they have offered to close the case if I pay £100.00 and he thinks I should pay because otherwise it will be more.

 

He is going to send me a copy of the claim.

 

Really don't know what to do...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 2 grumpy, I think your information about going to court is out of date. I've also received court papers about a shoplifting in TK Maxx and the amount they are now claiming is the original £137.50 plus £80 court fees and £35 solicitor fees, so the bill is now £252.50. I looked on RLP's website and they show the cases they have taken to court recently. I don't know what to do now because one person has to pay £1900.00. I wish i'd paid the £137.50 now. I don't know what to do either :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to be some confusion here, No-one has ever actually seen a legitimate court claim from RLP, so would be very useful if the above posters would scan and post up the claim forms.

 

It is worth noting that claims under £5000 are allocated to the small track (where costs are limited to smallish fixed costs), as far as I'm aware denying libailty doesnt mean the case will go on the fast track, in fact, I'd strongly argue that it shouldnt, after all, the small track is 'designed' for low cost claims such as this.

 

No-one has any idea whether any of the court claims on the RLP are indeed true , there is no way of check county court claims, so they may all be fabricated.

 

Jonny..You still seem a bit confused as to what exactly your solicitor is doing, you really should be kept inthe loop and see all the forms, all he is doing at this stage is just the basic form filling that really anyone can do, its not that difficult.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes come-on

 

POST THE COURT PApers

 

urm.......thats two people saying they have them BUT NO PROOF YET..

 

here's the link to post up your PROOF

of court papers. or claim forms...

 

scan the required letters/agreements/sheets

as a picture[jpg] file

remove all pers info inc barcodes etc using paint program

but leave all figures and dates.

 

goto one of the many free online pdf converter websites

it would be better to upload a multipage pdf

than many single ones

or if you have PDF as an installed printer drive use that

or use word and save as pdf

open a new msg box here

hit go advanced below the msg box

hit manage attachments below that box

hit the add files button on the top right

hit select files, navigate to your file on your pc

hit upload files

NB:you can set where it goes in the post by hitting insert inline.

then hit reply button

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 2 grumpy,

I think your information about going to court is out of date.

I've also received court papers about a shoplifting in TK Maxx and the amount they are now claiming is the original £137.50 plus £80 court fees and £35 solicitor fees, so the bill is now £252.50.

 

I looked on RLP's website and they show the cases they have taken to court recently.

 

I don't know what to do now because one person has to pay £1900.00.

 

I wish i'd paid the £137.50 now.

 

I don't know what to do either :(

 

they HAVEN'T taken anyone to court

 

those reports are NOT TKmaxx

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone getting court papers for a claim initiated by RLP should definately contest the entire amount.

 

If the store is doing it, then you should also contest the entire amount, but make a cpr request to get all of the information and details and a breakdown of the amounts claimed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 2 grumpy, I think your information about going to court is out of date. I've also received court papers about a shoplifting in TK Maxx and the amount they are now claiming is the original £137.50 plus £80 court fees and £35 solicitor fees, so the bill is now £252.50. I looked on RLP's website and they show the cases they have taken to court recently. I don't know what to do now because one person has to pay £1900.00. I wish i'd paid the £137.50 now. I don't know what to do either :(

 

1. The cases RLP took to court - and there are very, very few of them - all relate to employee theft.

 

2. Post up the court papers so we can see them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for all your comments.

I called my solicitor and told him what you have all said.

 

He said that the claim is not against RLP but against TK Maxx and that if I want to deny liability

then there is a chance that the case will go to the fast track instead of the small claims court where I will have to pay TK Maxx costs if I lose.

 

He said that once he has submitted my defence the court will give him a date for the hearing when we find out which court it is in.

 

I asked him why I didn't get the forms and he said because he is my solicitor and that everything has to go to him.

 

He also said that he is acting pro bono so I won't have to pay any solicitor costs but that the amount would be higher.

I know he's (the solicitor) not trying to [problem] me because he's a friend of a friend.

 

He said that they have offered to close the case if I pay £100.00 and he thinks I should pay because otherwise it will be more.

 

He is going to send me a copy of the claim.

 

Really don't know what to do...

 

£100 is not going to be fast-tracked.

 

Without you scanning a copy of the court claim we can't really help much more

 

n.b. what type of work does your solicitor normally work in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My solicitor told me he sent me the papers on Fri, so they should be here by tomorrow at the latest.

 

I asked him about what you have all said and he said that TK Maxx have already applied to the court for damages and that I need to make a decision about the case this week.

 

I don't appreciate the slurs against my solicitor.

 

He is a genuine bloke and helping me as a friend.

 

He also said that the cases shown online on RLP's website are public record and hardly likely to be made up.

 

I'll post the claim forms when I get them but I think I'm just going to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My solicitor told me he sent me the papers on Fri, so they should be here by tomorrow at the latest. I asked him about what you have all said and he said that TK Maxx have already applied to the court for damages and that I need to make a decision about the case this week. I don't appreciate the slurs against my solicitor. He is a genuine bloke and helping me as a friend. He also said that the cases shown online on RLP's website are public record and hardly likely to be made up. I'll post the claim forms when I get them but I think I'm just going to pay.

 

Hello again.

 

You asked the guys here for their opinions and they've told you. Depending on what the claim forms say, hopefully they will have more advice for you and then you may have to decide between the advice here and your lawyer friend.

 

I'm happy to be proved wrong, but I don't remember anyone from this forum who received the same advice as the guys gave you ending up in court with RLP. You don't say how many similar cases your lawyer has dealt with.

 

Your friend may be right that the cases on the RLP website aren't made up, but the point being made here. was that the cases seemed to relate to theft by employees and not members of the public.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My solicitor told me he sent me the papers on Fri, so they should be here by tomorrow at the latest. I asked him about what you have all said and he said that TK Maxx have already applied to the court for damages and that I need to make a decision about the case this week. I don't appreciate the slurs against my solicitor. He is a genuine bloke and helping me as a friend. He also said that the cases shown online on RLP's website are public record and hardly likely to be made up. I'll post the claim forms when I get them but I think I'm just going to pay.

 

The advice you will get on here is DIRECTLY related to what the court claim forms say, like Ive said earlier..NO_ONE HAS EVER SEEN A VALID CLAIM FORM FROM RLP/TK MAXX, thats why people are very curious to see one.

 

If you are determined to pay and already have a solictor, Im a bit puzzled as to why you are asking for advice, its no skin off your Solicitors nose if you pay up, it wont cost him anything but it may not be the right choice.

 

Why do you need to know this week, IF a valid court claim has been served, you have 14 days or even you send an acknowledegemnet of service (which you or your solicitor SHOULD of done) you will have 28 days before you send in a defence, even then its only the begininng there wil still be allocation.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

My solicitor told me he sent me the papers on Fri, so they should be here by tomorrow at the latest.

 

I asked him about what you have all said and he said that TK Maxx have already applied to the court for damages and that I need to make a decision about the case this week.

 

I don't appreciate the slurs against my solicitor.

 

He is a genuine bloke and helping me as a friend.

 

He also said that the cases shown online on RLP's website are public record and hardly likely to be made up.

 

I'll post the claim forms when I get them but I think I'm just going to pay.

 

have already applied to the court for damages ...........

 

 

really

 

something smells here.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...