Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It you had E7 in the past but have converted to single rate then the meter will still hold the last recorded Night readings. This introduces scope for error when manually reading. If the meter has only ever been used on single rate then there's only one figure that can be taken. For example ours shows "Rate 1" reading and a "Total import" reading, but they both give the sme figure. If it has ever been on E7 the total will be higher, including the retained night reading.
    • okay, perfect and thank you so much for the help once again. so firstly i am going to initiate the breathing space, during this time it's likely ill receive a default. when i receive the default are you aware of how long it will take for me to know whether the OC have sold it off to DCAs? Once it's with the DCAs i do not need to worry as they cannot issue a CCJ only the OCs can Even if i decide to come an arrangement with the DCAs no point as the default will remain for 6 years paid or not paid I should only consider repayment if the OC still won the debt and then issue a CCJ? Just to confirm the default will not be seen after 6 years? No one can tell I had one then after 6 years ill be all good?
    • I'm not sure we were on standard tariffs - I've uploaded as many proofs as I can for the ombudsman - ovo called last night uping the compensation to 100 from 50 pounds for the slip in customer service however they won't acknowledge the the problem them not acknowledging a fault has caused nor are they willing to remedy anything as they won't accept the meter or formula was wrong.   I'd appreciate more details on the economy 7 approach and I'll update the ombudsman with any information you can share. 
    • To re-iterate and highlight my urgent question on this one: The N24 from the court did not include any instructions to submit paperwork 28 days before the date, unlike the N157 received for other smaller claims. Do I have to submit a WS for this court date? Link has!...
    • No, reading the guidance online it says to wait for a letter from the court. Should I wait or submit the directions? BTW, I assume that the directions are a longer version of the particular of claim accompanied by evidence, correct?
  • 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

Outstanding service charge - Court action threatened


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2494 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 All,

 

Today i received a letter from my local council leasehold team asking me to pay an outstanding amount within 2wks or face court action.

 

i received what seem like a bill for 2 years in March 2017

i started to query this and they told me it was what was outstanding from a previous year

- what year is this? 2015.

 

Before i got to this point it took 2 months and it felt almost like a cover up, eventually someone explained what had happened.

 

In 2015 i was sent a bill £ X, paid by 10 monthly instalments, but instead of applying my payments against the £X they applied it against £0 which meant at the end of the financial year i was in credit of £X

 

2016 next bill came - bill was less than previous years, i called the council and they told me i have been overpaying and this is why and i should reduce my future payments.

 

2017 they now want me to cough up for 2015/16 as well as 2017/18

 

My question is

they made a mistake on my account in March 2015 by not applying a debit to my account leaving it at £0, and September 2016 was the first time they wrote about outstanding charges be it they didn't admit any mistake.

 

Can they ask me to pay for something that was meant for 2015 in 2017 and also it has been 19 months after the mistake before they are ask for the payment.

 

Does this section 20B give me a leg to stand on? http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/70/section/20B

I actually don't mind paying just don't want to be harassed about it.

 

Please if any bit is unclear let me know and i will try and be clearer

 

Regards

 

fro

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong - you are referring to financial contracts this is not one of such this is a leasehold contract, and does not apply here, read link i put in the original post.

 

Are there any experts here that could shed more light on this?

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at your link and based on your opening post, they informed you in writing within 18 months (March 2015 to September 2016) that these charges were owed. As per subsection 2 from your link, it appears that the legislation in the link does not apply in this case.

 

Whilst they may not have been overly clever or helpful by waiting several months before raising it as an official bill, by the same token, you could have questioned their letter back in September 2016 informing you of the extra charge. Apologises if you did contact them at the time, not clear from your opening post whether you did or not.

 

I am not an expert by the way, just my interpretation.

Any pearls of wisdom that I give on the CAG forums is based on previous experiences and knowledge I have gained from being on these forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Good Sister - my calculation between March 2015 to Sept 2016 gives me 18 months, i didn't question the notice until they gave me a breakdown in March 2017 to say i paid £0 in 2015.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A debt can be re-claimed for 6 years.

 

With leasehold it may be 12 years BUT S20B can have effect effectively making it 18 months but it depends on various other factors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong - you are referring to financial contracts this is not one of such this is a leasehold contract, and does not apply here, read link i put in the original post.

 

Are there any experts here that could shed more light on this?

 

Regards

 

The point of S20B is so that large bills are not sprung upon a LH.

 

So If I as a FH run up 2 years worth of debts and then send you a bill 2 years later, you would only be liable for anything incured in the last 6 months...if the whole of the debt is older than 18 months then nothing is payable.

 

BUT IF you were informed of the cost within the 18 month period than the debt would ultimately be payable upon demand (at this point the standard 6 years or more likely 12 years for leasehold) statutory limits would apply.

 

NOTE that the 'informed of costs' part has no specific format (unlike actual demands), back of fag packet would comply, also note that if your lease allows advance payments or advance partial installments S20B has no relevance.

 

So the question is, were you informed of any costs incurred during the 18 month period (but not necessarily demanded) or were any payments advance payments under the lease ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy,

 

The bill they failed to apply on their system was issued in March 2015 for £600 say finished paying this off in January 2016 in March 2016 i received a new bill say £300 which i finished paying off January 2017. In Sept 2016 i got a revised bill (this is common) saying the real cost is £800 so i was expecting that they would take out the £600 i had already paid and leave me with £200 in addition to new bill in March 2017(£900).

 

Instead my bill stay £800 + £900 = £1700 effectively

 

so to answer the question the revised bill or notification cam e in September 2016 to revise the bill for March 2015.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I cant really follow this....and would need to see some sort of breakdown to see whats owned and when.

 

We need to know what your lease says about payments, does it give specific dates, etc, does it require advance payments.

 

What demands have you received ? (did they come with Service Charges - Summary of Rights attached ?)

 

Why do you call it a revised bill ?, it sounds to me that the first March was an interim or estimated advance and September was the balancing charge, unfortunately this may mean S20B has no effect.

 

In any event I suspect all the service charges may well be payable (assuming S20B doesnt apply), the only thing to worry about is if youve been hit with extra/late/admin costs ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I cant really follow this....and would need to see some sort of breakdown to see whats owned and when.

 

 

Why do you call it a revised bill ?, it sounds to me that the first March was an interim or estimated advance and September was the balancing charge, unfortunately this may mean S20B has no effect.

 

Yes it was an estimate advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aha..then Im afraid S20B has no effect except I think for the balance amount, so if you pay £100 in advance, and final balance is £110 you would need to be informed of the extra £10 spent, if a demand is sent 18 months later then the £10 wouldnt be payable.

 

It looks as if you dont have any grounds to not pay unless you want to query the service charge for reasonableness, i,.e did it really cost £1000 to paint the outside, etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...