Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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 
        • 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 Tax Summons on an empty Property***Resolved***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2191 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

Afternoon all,

 

My mum passed away 2 years ago in May 2016, she left a Will and 3 executors in charge of it. Not sure why she didn't have a lot bless her.

 

They started sending bills soon after my mum died despite me telling them the house was empty and we were waiting for probate. Probate was finally granted in October 2017. My brother and I have no intention of selling it.

 

I received a bill of £668 and paid £334 beginning of Jan, I then received a letter to my home which is not in the same city, saying the remaining amount was due by 31 March. I wrote it down and blatantly forgot. My fault. As soon as I remembered I paid it but 2 weeks too late! I set up a DD for 2018/19.

 

In the meantime I get a text from on of they executors saying they have issued a court summons.

 

They have my details on file yet wrote to someone else. The balance of £668 is clear but they want the court summons fee.

 

I'm happy (not happy as such as it's a lot on top of my own bills) to pay the council tax and have done so but why should I pay for a court summons that you sent to an address because as they said "someone in admin must have taken the executive decision to".

 

I don't understand? When the payment was late why not just write and say we are still waiting for the second payment as agreed? instead they went straight to summons and then sent it to a random person who they don't have on file?

 

Can I challenge the court fees?

Link to post
Share on other sites

instead they went straight to summons and then sent it to a random person who they don't have on file?

 

 

Who is the "random person"? Sounds like it was one of the executors. If so they aren't a "random person", they're the people with the legal responsibility to pay the bills due from the Estate.

 

Are you an Executor?

 

Are you and your brother the joint beneficiaries of the Estate? Have the Executors now transferred legal ownership of the house to you and your brother? Is it still empty?

 

Council Tax on empty houses is often waived for a period of time after someone dies. What is the local council's policy in this case (should be on their website)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I say "random person" because when I asked the council who they wrote to they couldn't tell me. They had an address on file and just wrote to it. It is one of the executors but not the one they have been corresponding with. When I asked which executor they had on file, they gave me all of their details. Surely it would have made sense to write to that person. Furthermore I have been corresponding with them and they have all of my details, I am at a loss as to why they didn't continue to write to me. All the previous bills, and the online account is registered to me.

 

No I'm not an executor I'm a beneficiary along with my brother. We are not legal owners of the house yet. It is empty.

 

Their website says "Apply for exemption on properties that have been: Empty after the death of the owner while probate is obtained or up to six months after probate is granted. The additional six months are available provided the property remains part of the estate and has not been left in its entirety to an individual(s)"

 

I'm not querying the council tax, and like I said it has been pain albeit with great difficulty. My issue is being liable for the cost of a court summons that wasn't addressed to anybody they have on file to an address that they have had no previous correspondence with.

 

My question is can I challenge the amount for the court summons?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The council have a duty to only deal with named executors...not beneficiaries ...as the court claim is not in your name...only the named person can deal with the issue costs.

 

 

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

The council have found that a charge has become due and billed the estate - the estate will remain liable until someone else becomes responsible for the council tax charge. Whilst the estate is liable then executors, not yourself are responsible for sorting the issue. You are not an executor so currently have no legal status in administering the estate, that is why they have contacted the executors.

 

The other problem you may however have is that of you being beneficiary to the property - this causes no end of problems in respect of council tax and death. For example read the decision on this case - http://info.valuation-tribunals.gov.uk/decision_document.asp?appeal=/decision_documents/documents/CT_England/1540M208374037C.htm&Decision=liability

and

http://info.valuation-tribunals.gov.uk/decision_document.asp?appeal=/decision_documents/documents/CT_England/4705M171273254C.htm&Decision=liability

Link to post
Share on other sites

All sorted. I requested a call back from a manager. It just so happens it was the same lady I spoke to two years ago when my mum died and remembered how traumatic it was.

 

Even though I am a beneficiary, they have been writing to me for the past two years as that was agreed when I spoke to her.

She explained that even though they had received the first half of the bill from me when the second half was late someone had decided to write to one of the addresses on file as they thought I might not pay the rest. Odd that they chose the one they did as one of the executors had already registered herself as named contact for the council tax. They really should have and could have written to her.

 

We discussed that when people are bereaved they have so much going and a lot is confusing it would be helpful if the council was consistent with their admin.

 

She accepted that they could have handled it better and cancelled the court fees.

 

Very happy :whoo:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though I am a beneficiary, they have been writing to me for the past two years as that was agreed when I spoke to her.

They should not be contacting or discussing the account with you without the express agreement of the executors - big breach of data protection rules if they don't have that permission.

 

Odd that they chose the one they did as one of the executors had already registered herself as named contact for the council tax. They really should have and could have written to her.

With multiple executors it's up to the council who they pursue for contact - if they don't get payment from one of them then it is entirely sensible to contact another.

 

She accepted that they could have handled it better and cancelled the court fees.

Good result .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...