Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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 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 - 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.
    • The Barclay Card conditions is complete. There was only 3 pages. This had old address on. Full CCA. 15 pages. The only personal info is my name and address. Current Address The rest just like a generic document.  Barclays CCA 260424.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Chess Ltd and True Telecom


blueda
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2077 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

Around 18 months ago i agreed to a three year Landline and Internet contract with True Telecom,

which i soon regretted ,

 

The internet was weak and the lower prices that i was assured were not to be ( read the small print i suppose ).

 

A few months ago i saw a direct debit set up on my account from Chess Ltd ?.

I looked them up and asked who are you ?

I was told that Chess had taken over the service from True Telecom.

 

I noticed the service prices going up,

yet we hardly use the landline

and had the same weak internet router and service.

 

A couple of weeks ago i got a call from a broker who offered me a deal with one of the big providers for around a third of the cost and much better internet and i agreed.

 

A few days later i received a letter from Chess regarding the switch of service informing me of an early termination fee of over £400 pounds.

 

I contacted Chess telling their representive that i dont have any agreement with Chess

and was told that Chess purchased the account

and i would owe the amount,

 

I was then offered a deal of cheaper service though not as low as the amount on offer through the broker

and a new 18 month contract with Chess which was not on with me.

 

The new provider took over yesterday,

We now have much better broadband and the phone is ok.

 

Do i need to pay Chess at all and if so as much as over £400 pounds and if so can i pay instalments ?.

 

All advice welcome folks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

http://www.truetelecom.com/ - Read the top of the page...

Then know that Ofcom and the ICO are owed substantial amounts of money.

 

You should be allowed to exit out of your contract accordingly if the company ceases to be.

 

How much did the prices go up by?

 

Did you agree to Chess taking over your services?

 

I doubt they would even stand a chance if this went anywhere.

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

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

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Theyve sold off their customer base - Yet havent informed anyone that this is happening.

 

My understanding is that you should be allowed to exit a contract early if a company fails / administration etc

 

Do you have the original terms?

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

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

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im doing a search, One set of terms and conditions i dont have is from Chess as they never sent any, their early termination fee is £472

I will post True telecom terms and conditions when i find them.

 

Cancellation

If you wish to end your contract with us, You may do so by giving us at least 10 working days written notice before the end of any contract period, or the agreement end date.

 

The contract started in early February 2016.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am looking for the original letter which i saw a few days ago.

 

The brochure ssates that if i cancel early True Telecom can ask for the monthly fee up to the end of the contract be paid.

 

I have not found any paperwork with terms and conditions with my signature attached, and do not recall signing any, i believe it was done over the phone and i signed the direct debit form, it may be on that.

 

I have not found any paperwork with terms and conditions with my signature attached, and do not recall signing any, i believe it was done over the phone and i signed the direct debit form, it may be on that.

 

I dont remember getting a debit mandate form,

i beleive it was set up on the phone,

The new deal was set up on the phone,

So there is probably no signed T&C with True Telecom

Link to post
Share on other sites

they wont know that you weren't told over the phone that you could cancel for free where you originally took the contract out:madgrin:

and they cant prove otherwise

so pers i'd ignore them.

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

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/17/ofcom_fines_true_telecom_for_slamming/

 

can't unless its already showing

they cant just create an entry to default you where its never shown as a running account already.

 

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 have cancelled the Chess direct debit from my account,

the money has been coming out at the end of each month

 

i will wait and find out when Chess will be in touch,

I will pay them by cheque any money due for the part of the month up to the change over,

I will not be paying the so called termination fee.

I will post any information from them as soon as it comes in,

 

Thanks folks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is not the transfer of undertakings that lets you walk away from the contract but the change in the charges.

 

They have to notify you of these and unless the changes are very small then it is not compulsory to accept them

and you can walk away from the rest of the contract.

 

let it run for more than a month and you will have deemed to have accepted them.

 

From what you say it seems as though you have not kept on top of this and you may now have problems

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received an email from Chess informing me that the bank has advised them that i have cancelled the direct debit,

with a survey included asking me the reason,

I have not replied,

 

Also an email from the Ombudsman Company saying the time is nearly up that Chess has replied to me and for me to answer Chess.

 

The only correspondence i have had from Chess was several calls left on my answer phone and emails urging me to contact to try and keep me as a customer.

 

No attempt has been made by Chess to resolve the issue of the termination charge that they claim is legally due to them.

 

The charges did go up,

do you mean that after a month of Chess taking over from True telecom and that i allowed Chess to continue, then i have to Chess accepted them as supplier ?.

 

Chess did not inform me of anything other than an email which i did not find until months later in my inbox,

 

the first i heard of them was when looking online at my bank account an invoice from Chess Ltd and i called to find out who they are,

 

I never signed or verbally agreed to anything to Chess. I was not happy with True Telecom service, weak internet and the same with Chess.

 

http://www.truetelecom.com/ - Read the top of the page...

Then know that Ofcom and the ICO are owed substantial amounts of money.

 

You should be allowed to exit out of your contract accordingly if the company ceases to be. How much did the prices go up by?

Did you agree to Chess taking over your services? I doubt they would even stand a chance if this went anywhere.

 

I have looked at the True telecom link you provided and called True Telecom, their claim is that they passed contract rights to Chess who should have got in touch with me, it looks a bit shoddy to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they informed you and they dont have to do anything else.

 

That is why you have to keep on top of things by checking your bills and bank statements every month.

 

You accepted the contract when you paid the increased charges, not when they transferred the undertaking.

If you had got in touch with them inside a month after the new charges started/were announnced then you can walk away without breaking the contract.

 

They may be shoddy but they did the minimum they needed to do, one of the problems with using email and not letters.

 

Chess did not inform me of anything other than an email which i did not find until months later in my inbox, the first i heard of them was when looking online at my bank account an invoice from Chess Ltd and i called to find out who they are, I never signed or verbally agreed to anything to Chess. I was not happy with True Telecom service, weak internet and the same with Chess.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received the latest Chess bill today online, over £58.00 to be debited at end of month ( i cancelled direct debit )

 

Some things i noticed that i never agreed to have.

Care level, Fraud monitor, Line assurance ?, Voicemail, I do not have voicemail.

 

This invoice is for Landline and broadband only,

We do not have any mobile phone or TV service with them.

 

All advice as always welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...