Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • 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

Safestyle windows fitted , more noisy than old ones


calder
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2445 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

Safestyle have fitted my 3 windows . The salesman said our windows were old and that there New argon filled units would cut out the traffic noise . They have been fitted and they are more noisy than the ones they took out . The windows look nice but the reason we bought them was to cut out the traffic noise . They have been back out to take one unit out and check that enough filling had been put in . They have put it back in but it is still noisy . They say they don't know why they are noisy . We are worse off with the noise than we were with the old ones in . Any advice on what I can do . Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have evidence to confirm they are actually noisier than the old ones, eg dB measurements. It could be an illusion that you are now listening for noise rather than ignoring what was there.

 

Were the old ones double glazed too, are the old and new both PVC?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No evidence they are more noisy except that we can't sleep because we can hear the traffic and we are having to turn up the TVs in the living room to drown out the noise , which we didn't have to do before . The old windows were upvc too , obviously of a lot better quality

Link to post
Share on other sites

They sold you a lemon.

UPVC windows last forever.

A good clean with solvent makes them look new.

Hinges are usually zinc plated or stainless steel, so when they suggested you changed your old ones they ripped you off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread moved to General Retail Forum..please continue to post here to your thread.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gas filled ( argon) cavities in glass units make no difference to sound performance....its for better thermal performance and to stop /reduce condensation

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

have a good look at the windows here is a example of the fitting standards of safestyle found when the coveing was removed during redecoration of one room a year after fitting , the rest were checked and found to be the same if not worse. complaint made and still awaiting reply

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Calder,

 

If the Safestyle sales rep told you the Argon units would be better than existing air-filled ones, you were mis-sold the new windows.

 

You would have been far better off having (vertical or horizontal) sliding secondary glazing fitted to compliment the existing windows. Secondary glazing is excellent in reducing noise nuisance from outside.

 

You can reject the windows if they were only fitted 2 weeks back. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, you have 30 days to reject faulty goods so you need to complain quickly, in writing, to the supplying office and copy to their Head Office too. Get free Certificates of Posting at the PO as proof of posting.

 

Read our guide about the CRA 2015 to see what's involved - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?440-The-Consumer-Rights-Act-2015

 

I suggest the windows should be rejected because :-

 

1. They are not fit for purpose - they have no noise reducing qualities, compared to the old UPVC windows that were removed, regardless of them being Argon filled.

 

2. The are not as described - if you were told the new Argon units would improve noise reduction, this was wrong.

 

If they fail to offer a suitable solution for you, I would sue them for the cost of the new windows (as they won't be able to put the old ones back); or the cost of fitting suitable secondary glazing to stop the noise nuisance (which the sales rep said the new windows would do).

 

That's my take on the situation but others may want to offer comment.

 

:-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Calder,

 

They fitted a composite door along with the windows. There appears to be no problem with this, so shall I reject the windows but keep the door.

 

Yes, mention in the letter that you have no issue with the door and are happy to pay for this.

 

Post a draft here before you send the letter if you want.

 

:-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Calder,

 

If the Safestyle sales rep told you the Argon units would be better than existing air-filled ones, you were mis-sold the new windows.

 

You would have been far better off having (vertical or horizontal) sliding secondary glazing fitted to compliment the existing windows. Secondary glazing is excellent in reducing noise nuisance from outside.

 

You can reject the windows if they were only fitted 2 weeks back. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, you have 30 days to reject faulty goods so you need to complain quickly, in writing, to the supplying office and copy to their Head Office too. Get free Certificates of Posting at the PO as proof of posting.

 

Read our guide about the CRA 2015 to see what's involved - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?440-The-Consumer-Rights-Act-2015

 

I suggest the windows should be rejected because :-

 

1. They are not fit for purpose - they have no noise reducing qualities, compared to the old UPVC windows that were removed, regardless of them being Argon filled.

 

2. The are not as described - if you were told the new Argon units would improve noise reduction, this was wrong.

 

If they fail to offer a suitable solution for you, I would sue them for the cost of the new windows (as they won't be able to put the old ones back); or the cost of fitting suitable secondary glazing to stop the noise nuisance (which the sales rep said the new windows would do).

 

That's my take on the situation but others may want to offer comment.

 

:-)

 

I'm in the building trade (secondary occupation nowadays) and I completely agree with slick.

The windows were missold.

The only difference between the old and new ones is that the new ones are whiter but let a lot of noise in.

So as mentioned, you would have been better off with a solvent cleaner and new silicone, but that would have cost only a pony or so.

Double glazed window sellers...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...