Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Other entity? Does another creditor have security on the property?
    • Hi, I sent my witness statement over. I believe I am waiting for hearing date now.    Seems to be really dragging on
    • thanks ae - yes  I understand the claims are between me and the lender.  But with regards to the order for sale the judge specifically said it is the receiver who is appointed to sell - and he hasn't/ and isn't - which is why I am asking if I can apply to the court v the receiver for an order for sale right now?   The receiver is not part of the current proceedings heading to trial.  But he is responsible for selling the property - and he has consistently rejected offers over >5y.   This is specifically why I would like to understand if I can apply to the court to enforce the sale by the receiver??? As above - The judge has said otherwise the order for sale v the lender has to be dealt with via the trial.  Which they have deliberately delayed via the adjournment. Valuation is an issue. The lender chose the valuer.  I paid but his report basically belongs to and is referred to by the lender.  He did a prof valuation without doing a site visit.  He had done a site visit 5 months earlier for different potential lender.  The 1st valuation he erroneously wrote in his report as fh.  He just did a re-write 5m later - but wrote in his report that the value was the same for lh. I had a great offer on the table from a niche buyer which would have cleared the loan and given me a lot of £s.  But the lender rushed through the repo and the buyer got spooked and ran.  The lender then slashed the price by 30%+ from their valuation (fire sale price?).  As you suggest - they fully expected potential buyers to quickly grab the property at such a discount.  But it turned out they couldn't.  The market had dropped anyway. Then covid hit.  Every potential buyer was questioning the valuation (which clearly was wrong but the lender had accepted).  The lender and receivers actions have eroded the equity.  This wouldn't make sense to any normal lender.  99.9% would have just sold to the 1st buyer willing to transact.  The lender/ receiver had such a willing buyer on day 1 of marketing.  But they spent 15months trying not to sell to them.  As I said, disclosure shows the ceo wanted (wants?) to keep it for himself - so common sense didn't (doesn't) prevail.   The lender has made a £ Claim v me.  I am disputing it because I maintain it is their actions that has caused the erosion of equity/ a debt to accrue. The lender's problem now is that they have spent so much money and added so much interest over 5y that they cannot sell the property for what they need/ want.  They are trying to blame me for this.  But it is their fault; not mine - because I am not in possession or in charge of selling it. As I also said above - if there is some legal reason why I cannot make an application to the court for an order for the receiver to sell - then can I ask the other entity which has a charging order and threatened to do so ???  I will contact this other entity only if I can't make an app to sell v the receiver    
  • 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

Item not fit for purpose but bought through eBay/paypal. Seller won't refund.


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2282 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

Hi

 

I purchased a sofa on eBay from an actual company, as opposed to a private seller.

 

I paid using a credit card, but as it was on eBay, it went through PayPal.

I entered my card number directly, rather than using it as a funding source, if that makes sense. I.e. it was a direct purchase with my card rather than PayPal being used as a staged wallet. I make this distinction because I wanted to know whether this gives me any section 75 rights.

 

So anyway the sofa broke after 3 months. The wood supporting the legs broke so the legs went up inside the base.. Although it was only £150, an item should be fit for purpose and not break so soon, especially as the item description said 'high quality materials used'.

 

I contacted the seller but they wanted nothing to do with it, insisting that I should have noticed the defect earlier. As it was over 30 days, they claim I had accepted the item and could not return it.

 

I supplied photographic evidence but they said that someone must have exerted excessive force on it. This is untrue, we have only sat on it normally and not even used it as a sofa bed which it does convert to.

 

So I opened a dispute with PayPal. They heard my side of the story and I asked if they required either the photographs or the correspondence between myself and the seller as proof, but they said not yet, they would request it if they needed it. The next thing that happened is the seller responded to the case (I didn't get to see their response) then PayPal ruled in their favour without me being able to offer any counter argument or evidence.

 

I need to know what I can do next. Should I contact my credit card company? Info on MoneySavingExpert suggests that using PayPal prevents you from claiming under section 75 but it doesn't draw any distinction between PayPal as a wallet and PayPal as a gateway service. I was hoping that using my card directly may help.

 

What other options are available? My wife was successful in using the government Money Claim service so I may do that if the credit card avenue is not viable. The eBay returns process doesn't seem to cover any scenario after 30 days.

 

The company is Furniture In Fashion if that helps or rings any bells with anyone.

 

Any advice welcome!

 

Thanks

 

Burton

Link to post
Share on other sites

What type of card was it. visa?

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also have a read of the consumer rights act. Youre entitled to a repair or replacement within 6 months of buying it, if it is faulty. 30 days just means a refund in their terms. The law still says you have up to 6 months.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

the law says upto 6yrs...!!

 

its gone faulty within 6mts

so its down to the seller to mend it FOC inc postage

see CRA.

 

else off to court you go.

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

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

Chargeback?

 

Unfortunately, Section 75 or chargeback is unlikely as PayPal has been used as a 3rd party. A crazy 'get out' from the rules, but it is what it is.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...