Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is kind of related but does anyone know since I have this ban from entering UAE because of my loan, can I visit Qatar? 
    • Thank you for that i thought id just ask as i was unsure.  Just hope its returned to me and doesnt spend the rest of its life going back and forth to Singapore  
    • Thanks @lolerz. I've attached it to the post. What do you think? What's the organ grinder? NTK.pdf
    • I'm afraid that if the value of the item was under declared then that is probably the best that you can hope for. Also, because the item was incorrectly addressed – even by a single letter, if that because the issue relating to the delivery then that has probably compounded the problem. There is probably very little that can be done. If you are lucky you will get the item back and then you can start again and declare it properly. Undervaluing parcels which are sent by any means is always going to cause a problem if the item is lost or damaged. It may mean that the cost of delivery is slightly less – but at the end of the day the risk becomes yours. When you enter into any kind of contract, effectively you declare it a level of risk to your contracting partner – and they decide to enter into the contract with you based on that level of risk. You have declared a level of risk and £50 – and that's the deal.   Additionally, undervaluing an item which is an internationally has the effect also of evading customs and any VAT system which is in force in that country – and that makes the whole thing a little bit more serious
    • Perfect. Nice and brief and to the point. You don't bother to start telling your life story. Just the way it should be. Send it off. You have probably done enough reading to understand that it won't make any difference don't start drafting your particulars of claim. Open an account with the MoneyClaim County Court system and start preparing. Post your particulars of claim here before you click it off. You may have noticed that at some point you will be asked if you want to go to mediation on this. We used to advise it but now we recommend that you decline mediation and go to trial. Your chances of success are much better than 95%. Going to trial will incur an additional hearing fee but of course you will get that back. However if you go to mediation, they will simply try to penny pinch and to get you to compromise and also they will sign you up to a confidentiality agreement and probably threaten you if you breach it. Not only that, if the mediation fails because you stand your ground, it will add additional delay while they then give you a date to go to trial. The best thing to do is to decline mediation – prepare for court hearing. Pay the extra fee. The chances are that rather than get a judgement against them they will then offer you a full settlement rather than go to court. If they do offer you full settlement then you will be obliged to accept it – but that's what you want. If they don't offer you full settlement then you will go to trial and there will be a judgement against them. Just so that you understand, our first interest is that you get your money back – but a close second is that it does go to trial and there is a judgement which we will then be able to use to help other people. Anyway as you should realise, we will help you all the way.
  • 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

Simarc demanding 6yrs backdated ground rent - HELP!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4369 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 guys/gals.

 

Need some advice really...

 

I have a property I bought in 2006 - Ground rent was paid by the builder, barratts for the first year.

 

Since then It was my duty to pay the ground rent, this never happened due to it being taken over by simarc,

and them demanding that I pay the first years ground rent

 

- this dispute went on for many many years

- up until August 2011 when they admitted that the payment was made by barratts

(supposedly now it wasn't paid but they decided that they would let it go as they wouldn't get the money from barretts).

 

I have today offered to pay the outstanding balance of ground rent over a 12 month period as this is what I can afford,

the issue is that the ground rent owed (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2010) comes to £1080 in total. (yeah an extortionate amount but thats another issue).

 

What they have done is added on Interest in the region of £164.74,

plus arrears file prep at £110,

arrears letter £15,

obtaining office copy entries in relation to arrears £25

plus vat on top £30

 

so a grand total of 1432.87 (which I can't afford at the moment)

 

They are wanting to add this to my mortgage, but not something I really want to do,

I have offered to pay £1100 over a 12 month period but they will not budge and keep saying contact your mortgage lender.

 

Not sure where I stand legally, I've contacted the Leasehold Valuations Tribunal, not sure they can help but I do hope they can.

 

Any guidance at all would be great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PENALTY charges here can be reclaimed

they are unlawful

 

letters,

arrears prep file.

office copies.

 

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

I haven't paid them as of yet, how can I go about making them understand that they CAN NOT charge me for those items, what is the best course for me to take to get that figure down, and also how can I get them to agree to let me pay over a 12 month period?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant see why not

 

there is no legal presedence

and it was not YOR mistake

 

i think we need help

 

i'll ask

 

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 guys/gals.

 

Need some advice really...

 

I have a property I bought in 2006 - Ground rent was paid by the builder, barratts for the first year.

 

Since then It was my duty to pay the ground rent, this never happened due to it being taken over by simarc,

and them demanding that I pay the first years ground rent

 

- this dispute went on for many many years

- up until August 2011 when they admitted that the payment was made by barratts

(supposedly now it wasn't paid but they decided that they would let it go as they wouldn't get the money from barretts).

 

I have today offered to pay the outstanding balance of ground rent over a 12 month period as this is what I can afford,

the issue is that the ground rent owed (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2010) comes to £1080 in total. (yeah an extortionate amount but thats another issue).

 

What they have done is added on Interest in the region of £164.74,

plus arrears file prep at £110,

arrears letter £15,

obtaining office copy entries in relation to arrears £25

plus vat on top £30

 

so a grand total of 1432.87 (which I can't afford at the moment)

 

They are wanting to add this to my mortgage, but not something I really want to do,

I have offered to pay £1100 over a 12 month period but they will not budge and keep saying contact your mortgage lender.

 

Not sure where I stand legally, I've contacted the Leasehold Valuations Tribunal, not sure they can help but I do hope they can.

 

Any guidance at all would be great.

 

Why did you not pay for the years after the first year ?

 

Were you sent a demand each year ?. If you were sent no demand then you had the legal right not to pay, the demand sent must comply with s166 of Commonholf & Leasehold Reform Act 2002..

 

 

166 Requirement to notify long leaseholders that rent is due.

 

 

 

(1)A tenant under a long lease of a dwelling is not liable to make a payment of rent under the lease unless the landlord has given him a notice relating to the payment; and the date on which he is liable to make the payment is that specified in the notice. .

(2)The notice must specify— .

(a)the amount of the payment, .

(b)the date on which the tenant is liable to make it, and .

©if different from that date, the date on which he would have been liable to make it in accordance with the lease, .

and shall contain any such further information as may be prescribed.

(3)The date on which the tenant is liable to make the payment must not be— .

(a)either less than 30 days or more than 60 days after the day on which the notice is given, or .

(b)before that on which he would have been liable to make it in accordance with the lease. .

(4)If the date on which the tenant is liable to make the payment is after that on which he would have been liable to make it in accordance with the lease, any provisions of the lease relating to non-payment or late payment of rent have effect accordingly. .

(5)The notice— .

(a)must be in the prescribed form, and .

(b)may be sent by post. .

(6)If the notice is sent by post, it must be addressed to a tenant at the dwelling unless he has notified the landlord in writing of a different address in England and Wales at which he wishes to be given notices under this section (in which case it must be addressed to him there). .

(7)In this section “rent” does not include— .

(a)a service charge (within the meaning of section 18(1) of the 1985 Act), or .

(b)an administration charge (within the meaning of Part 1 of Schedule 11 to this Act). .

(8)In this section “long lease of a dwelling” does not include— .

(a)a tenancy to which Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (c. 56) (business tenancies) applies, .

(b)a tenancy of an agricultural holding within the meaning of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 (c. 5) in relation to which that Act applies, or .

©a farm business tenancy within the meaning of the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995 (c. 8). .

(9)In this section— .

“dwelling” has the same meaning as in the 1985 Act,

“landlord” and “tenant” have the same meanings as in Chapter 1 of this Part,

“long lease” has the meaning given by sections 76 and 77 of this Act, and

“prescribed” means prescribed by regulations made by the appropriate national authority.

 

 

If you received no demand or the demand doesnt comply with the above then you can legally withold payment BUT it is possible for Simarc to later send a single valid demand asking for 6 years worth BUT all you would owe is the ground rent, no added on admin charges or interest.

 

So lets look at the admin charges, for any admin charges to be recoverable there must be a provision in the lease, so go find yours and have a good read through, also for interest to be claimable again the lease must make provision for this, no mention of admin charges or interest and it isnt payable.

 

AND to be payable the admin charges/interest demands must be accompanied by a "Administration Charges - Summary of Rights" , see here > http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/1258/pdfs/uksi_20071258_en.pdf , many freeholders forget this !

 

Now as for the LVT, they DONT have juridstiction over ground rent BUT they do have juridstiction over admin/interest as a result of failing to pay gropund rent, an LVt can conclude whether the admin/interest is payable and if it is, is it a reasonable amount (in my case an LVT concluded charges of £75 and the £130 were too high and reduced them to £25.

 

So you must find your lease and read through and try and understand it !, also look to see if ground rent demands were received by you and complied with S166 and did the demand(s) for extra charges come with the 'admin charges - summary' AND was it the right format & size (font 10) !?

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...