Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Council flat above flooded my kitchen - Council insurance agents deny liability


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5111 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

Background

 

3 of us inherited a property, (flat in a high rise) in Sep 2008.

Property remains empty.

 

Dec 2009 I inspected property, found substantial water damage in kitchen.

(HI-Res photographs taken).

 

Neighbours inform me council are upgrading all council tenants kitchens and installing central heating.

My flat is not the only "victim" of council workers bad work.

 

The flat is on the second top floor so no doubt as to where the leak ocurred.

 

My flat is empty, no insurance.

 

Contacted council insurance dept. played the phone merry-go-round until correct dept was informed.

 

Wrote very strong letter to council insurers.

Liability for damage was denied, shortly after on the grounds that no water leakage reports were lodged during the period stated.

 

Insurance agents refuse to send an assessor to confirm or deny claim.

 

I have not been able to quiz the tenant of the upstairs flat as I live miles away from the flat and only inspect the property monthly, due to the return journey of several hours.

 

Looking ahead, I think the council might continue to deny liability and perhaps try to lay the blame on the tenant.

 

Because I suspect that this may have to go legal;

 

Questions

 

Is there a legal instrument in Scottish law that lays the ultimate responsibility at the door of the council?

 

And if I have to go legal with this, will I be able to claim for costs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Old_andrew2018

Have you considered discussing the chances of success with a lawyer, you might have to pay a small fee, however you will be in a better position to decide if taking action is worth the effort.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input.

 

I contacted the local councillor last week.

He said that the behaviour of the insurance agents is par for the course.

I've to leave it with him as he has dealt with this situation many times, and has always got a favourable result.

 

I'm not pinning all my hopes on him,

SO

In the meantime I'm still interested in investigating the scenarios of going down the legal route.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

UPDATE

 

I moved into the flat beginning of April.

I've had to strip out the flooring, chuck the rusty white goods (cooker and microwave), scrub and disinfect the walls/floor/skirting (lots of black and green mold).

 

I received a letter from the insurance agents stating;

there was a leak in the kitchen upstairs reported by the tenant

the council sent a plumber to fix it in good time

 

BUT

 

as the council could not have forseen such an event they will not accept liability

 

SO

 

Do I have enough for a small claims case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE

 

I moved into the flat beginning of April.

I've had to strip out the flooring, chuck the rusty white goods (cooker and microwave), scrub and disinfect the walls/floor/skirting (lots of black and green mold).

 

I received a letter from the insurance agents stating;

there was a leak in the kitchen upstairs reported by the tenant

the council sent a plumber to fix it in good time

 

BUT

 

as the council could not have forseen such an event they will not accept liability

 

SO

 

Do I have enough for a small claims case.

 

 

If they could of forseen such an event, they wouldnt need insurance now would they ! jokers

 

Go with LBA :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am amazed at how often I hear this from councils it is disgusting.

 

The facts are that you have suffered damage to your property as a result of leaking water from another property, the insurance company should assess and pay all damages. This is no different if it was a private block of flats and a neighbouring flat caused damage, the buildings insurance for the whole block will pick up the tab.

 

You have a good case for small claims court, but be prepared. take photos of everything, keep good filing system, get quotes for repairs to damages. write to the council and state that you hold them responsible for all damages to your property resulting from the leak, keep copies of all letters you send.

 

If you decide to go to court, which will take about 6 months from when you send in the forms, then another good tactic is that about 8 weeks before the court date write to the council solicitor and demand lots and lots of information about how many claims the council has had in the last year, what type, how many settled, anything you can think of that means the solicitor has to undertake a lot of work, which means costs, as they may to decide to just settle as it is cheaper. dont forget to ask that they provide you with the info within 28 days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could also make a FOI request to the council.

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I took legal advice on Tuesday and apparently if I can't prove negligence then the council are not liable.

 

Guess I'll approach the local newspaper, maybe shame the council into paying.

 

 

You need to speak with ANOTHER legal advisor. A leak means negligence is self evident. Faulty plumbing is NOT an Act of God

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has an assessor been to have a look? Is the damage obviously from above? Is there any pipework / drain which is part of your flat that could have caused the problem?

 

The council's agents refuse to send out their assessor.

 

Damage is definitely from above.

There is only one flat above mine, besides I have a letter admitting that the council plumber fixed the leak.

 

I'm not letting this go.

Local newsaper was contacted recently, hopefully they will be interested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it the housing agency/authority insure ALL of the properties so no matter who's negligent they are still liable

 

Legal advisor told me the council self-insures, so rules are different.

I don't understand why, but he certainly wasn't interested in taking the case.

 

There are more lawyers I can try in Edinburgh, and I will.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Legal advisor told me the council self-insures, so rules are different.

I don't understand why, but he certainly wasn't interested in taking the case.

 

There are more lawyers I can try in Edinburgh, and I will.

 

Doesn't matter they are still liable & the rules are NOT different liability means liability

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter they are still liable & the rules are NOT different liability means liability

 

I know what you mean, but the council's agent's are like a broken record.

"not liable"

"not liable"

"not liable"

 

There's little point in entering into further corresponce with them.

I'll just get the same response.

 

You refer to a 'legal advisor' are we talking a qualified lawyer or what?

 

My solicitors in an unrelated case.

 

From their experience, they stated that I had very little chance of success if I took it to court.

 

To be clearer, I asked on a "walk and talk" after being in court with them.

They didn't dismiss it completely and I'm in the process of putting a detailed case with all correspondence for their perusal.

 

Hopefully the evidence I have will suffice and they will take the view that I do have a strong case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...