Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • 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

PC WORLD...Data recovery charge. ***Resolved***


conchy_joe
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3480 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

Last July I had a hard drive replaced in my son's laptop,

 

two months later I had a "north bridge chip" replaced in the same laptop, and

 

just three days ago the computer crashed again,

 

after a half hour conversation with one of the KNOWHOW people he said that the hard drive had crashed again

but that they would replace it free of charge,

 

when I asked him about the data on it he said it would be no problem for them to put the data on a flash drive and save it.

 

When I went to PC WORLD I was told that I would have to pay £80 for the data recovery.

When I queried this with them I was told that if I wanted the data I had no option but to pay.

I asked to be shown this policy and he printed the relevant page and it states..

 

."if you accidently delete important files, photos or home videos we can help.

our state of the art technology can recover your lost or deleted files etc, etc,"

 

My point is that "I" have not lost or deleted any files, the files are still on the three month old hard drive that they put in

and are only under threat because it is faulty and must be replaced.

 

I phoned trading standards and was told that I should use "Supply of goods and services act"..

 

Can anyone advise me on this please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi conchy _ joe

 

What T/S are saying is that when you initially spoke to KnowHow, they hadn't mentioned the £80 charge.

 

So under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, which implies into all contracts of work or services that the work will be carried out:

  • with reasonable care and skill
  • in a reasonable time (if there is no specific time agreed); and
  • for a reasonable charge (if no fixed price was set in advance)

There is a tempate (scroll down) you can amend and send Recorded Delivery.

 

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/supply-of-goods-and-services-act-1982

 

When did you buy the laptop and how did you pay for it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi rebel11, The laptop is a Toshiba and is approx. 5yrs old. When I was speaking to the KNOWHOW tech' at no time did he mention a charge, however when the man in PC WORLD checked the notes that had been left by the "tech" there was no record of what he had said, it seems that they only record certain calls at the direction of a manager.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi conchy_joe

 

Write a Formal Letter of Complaint, mark it as such. Explain what's happened (second hardrive fault, third fault with laptop within 15 months), how they have let you down (when you spoke to KnowHow team, Tech said 'no problem we can replace hardrive, we can recover data, no mention whatsoever of £80 charge, not until you went into the store, you feel misled, the KnowHow tech should have told you at the time, the tech had a good half hour to tell you about the charge but failed to do so) and what you want them to do (waive the £80 charge).

 

Send it to:-

 

Mr Sebastian James

Chief Executive

Dixons Carphone

[email protected]

 

Let us know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can e-mail it to him, that's why I posted the details.

 

Thanks rebel11, I'll send off a recorded delivery letter. I'm guessing that Sebastian James would be at the Dixons Carphone head office is that correct.
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The suggestions made so far are fine – except through it will all lead to what you might find to be an unacceptable delay in getting your computer back.

 

It seems to me to be quite reasonable to say that the hard disk should be covered under your statutory protection. It is only 15 months old. I don't think that modern day describes pack up in this way.

 

However, if you stand your ground now, you will find the whole thing been delayed and delayed with an uncertain outcome.

 

My advice would be to pay in order to get the matter sorted out and then to go back for it when you have the computer returned to you. At least then you would have the use of the machine. I would not get into protracted correspondence. I would do no more than write one or two letters and then go to legal action. I think the chances of you getting your money back in a County Court action a very high – and I expect that they would bottle out anyway.

 

By the way, I have to say why aren't you securing your data correctly? You shouldn't be in this position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BankFodder, I still have the machine as the only way that I could have a new hard drive

and retain the data would be to pay the£80 and I baulked at this.

 

 

As to backing up and making sure that data is stored safely

my son usually transfers his work from the laptop to our PC

but unless you do this every single day there will always be a chance you could get caught out.

 

 

Being without the laptop for a while is no problem as he can do his work on the PC.

 

 

As I explained to rebel11

 

 

I have sent an email to Mr James, not terse,

simply giving him all the facts and finally saying that I think the charge should be waived,

and yes I think County Court action would be a success as the policy is quite ambiguous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

go down maplin or pcword [haha]

 

 

and get a USB cradle for the Hard drive.

 

 

then pop it out the laptop

 

 

into the cradle

 

 

and treat it just like a USB stick in your laptop.

 

 

I bet your files are OK

 

 

and you can transfer them off ok yourself.

 

 

can I ask what is not happening on the lappy?

 

 

blue screen, not starting?

 

 

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 dx100uk,

 

 

The screen starts with the usual, Toshiba innovations and at the bottom there is what looks like a task bar,

it gives you the option to click F2 which takes you into Bios, Set Up and Utilities etc.

 

 

The other option is F12 can't remember what that offers.

 

 

Regardless of what you do you end up with a black screen,

 

 

then it starts to print a message which rolls up endlessly repeating itself, part of the message says..."media cable missing" or something like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SUCCESS...I received a phone call yesterday afternoon from a man who said that Sebastian James had received my email and whilst the company do charge for data recovery there would be no charge in this instance.

 

 

Thank you all for your help and advice....VBR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...