Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Peter McCormack says "ambition is big" and Real Bedford's attendances are increasing with promotions.View the full article
    • How does one obtain the permit? The permit team number is only open between the hours of 9am to 3pm Mon - Fri. It says on the website, To obtain an additional 2 hours, the driver must pay a tariff of £3.00 + booking fees in person at our Security Hut, is that how you get the permit also, from the security hut? What a rigmaroll that would be but maybe just another step to take to try and catch people out?
    • Anotheruser0000 bear in mind that not all Judges are equally versed in the PoFA regulations. Fortunately now most of them are but sometimes a Judge from a higher Court sits in who is well experienced  in Law but not PoFA. and so they sometimes go "offkey" because their knowledge can raise a different set of arguments and solutions. It does seem particularly unfair  when the decision is so  bad . it can also be that in some situations the motorist being a lay person is not sufficiently know ledgeable to be able to counter a Judge's decisions in a way that a barrister could.
    • The argument about the date of receipt is now dead because the PCN  does not comply with the wording  of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  First reason Section 9 [2] [e]  "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges;" Second Reason Section 9 [2][a] "specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;" All your PCN does is mark the time you entered and left the car park. It does not include all the myriad things you do in between-driving into the car park, looking for a parking space-perhaps a disabled space or  parent and Child place@ getting the children or disabled person out of the car then going shopping. Coming back; loading the car with shopping [, getting the children or disabled into the car, taking the trolley back to the store; driving to the exit perhaps stopping to let vehicles/pedestrians cross in front of you etc. so subtracting the driving times from before and after parking can make quite a difference from their time to the actual period parking time. So the upshot is now that only the driver is responsible for paying the PCN and the keeper is not liable at all even if the name of the driver is never known by Nexus so well done for not appealing. You obviously want to keep it that way to make it very difficult for them to win in Court if it ever goes that far. Although your question is now moot since  the same objective has been achieved by the non compliant PCN [ie no keeper liability] just  about the only way to dispute the timing of the PCN would be if one kept the envelope and there was a discernible date stamp on it that did not match the date on the PCN. There is a new Act coming out [and it cannot come quickly enough ] and one of the things required is that parking companies will have to prove the date of sending out their PCNs. We are not the only ones who sometimes doubt the veracity of their dates particularly as the later it is sent [unlawfully] the shorter the period motorists have to benefit [?] from the reduced payment. I haven't seen it on your posts but do you know how long you are permitted to park for free?
    • I was so annoyed and frustrated about the fact this case was lost it's been floating around my head all night. Dave962, are you sure that's what the Judge said? .... It doesn't make sense. Did the judge in fact dismiss the case on the grounds that the defendant did not make an appeal within 28 days? Effectively telling the PPC about the error entering the registration number and providing proof of payment at that time? To me, that's an important point.  
  • 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

Possible subsidence, about to change insurance - claim now? claim later? don't claim at all?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2027 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

I'm looking for some wise advice from those more experienced than I with insurance and subsidence claims.

 

Our house (circa 1890 semi-detached) is on a small slope and had some evidence of small "historical" movements when we bought it 20 years ago. Very little has changed since, and a structural engineer didn't mention subsidence in an inspection 4 years ago. However, it seems the neighbour's house has developed cracks near the party wall in the last few years, and they seem to suspect OUR house is to blame as we are further down the (small) incline. They say they have inspection reports from the last 6 months, but we haven't seen anything yet.

 

To complicate matters slightly, we are changing from our current landlord's insurance policy to a homeowner's policy in a couple weeks, as we will be moving into the house ourselves.

 

We are worried about

1) raising the issue of subsidence on our current landlord's policy, as this might make our new (already agreed and paid for) homeowner's insurance invalid.

2) waiting until we move in to raise the topic, as our new insurance might balk at a subsidence claim if we make it shortly after the policy starts.

3) being stuck in a no-man's zone between the two policies, with neither willing to cover...if indeed there is subsidence.

4)the neighbours will take some sort of legal action and find a structural engineer that will pin all blame on us.

 

Both our policies are with the same company, which will hopefully help.

 

We don't even know if there is subsidence of course, but it does seem possible. Any advice from those who know more about how insurance companies would treat such things would be most appreciated.

 

What is the best course of action?

1) Raise the issue immediately?

2) Raise it later?

3) Do our own inspection first and only then contact the company? (this will likely push us into the new policy period)

 

Thanks in advance for any information or advice!

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no current evidence of subsidence. The cracks could be caused by a number of issues.

 

First thing to do is ask neighbours for the inspection reports, to see what they say about the party wall. Are they structural engineers reports ? If they are just a basic survey, then I doubt any surveyor has stated that there is definitely a subsidence problem. If they are a standard surveyors report suggesting possible subsidence, then obtain a structural engineers report. Because Insurance has a subsidence excess of £1000 plus, you would always pay for such reports anyway.

 

Once you have more information, then you should speak to the current Insurance underwriters. They will probably be able to continue Insurance for a standard homeowners policy and deal with any subsidence claim under any new homeowners policy you arranged with them. If the neigbours had the same Insurance underwriters, then this will make it easier in regard to any work that is required to fix the problem.

 

Don't change Insurance before you find out whether this a subsidence issue or not. You will end up having problems, with new Insurers not accepting any claim and your old Insurers also not helping as the policy was cancelled. Best to resolve whether this is a subs issue or not and retain Insurance with current underwriter in the meantime.

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Uncle Bulgaria.

 

It's a bit tricky, as we will be *required* to change insurance when we move into the house in two weeks (currently it's landlord insurance, we'll need homeowner's insurance). We are using the same company, but perhaps should double check the underwriter is also the same.

 

Given that we haven't seen any reports or been officially informed of any subsidence on the neighbour's side, and we have a structural inspection report from 2014 that doesn't mention subsidence on our side, it seems like we're asking for trouble if we raise it now, no?

 

Once we move in, we would of course do a proper inspection of the house, including structural engineer if there's any suspicion of subsidence or other movement, but if we did it now and it discovered a problem, wouldn't that make our new application invalid?

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

There is no current evidence of subsidence. The cracks could be caused by a number of issues.

 

First thing to do is ask neighbours for the inspection reports, to see what they say about the party wall. Are they structural engineers reports ? If they are just a basic survey, then I doubt any surveyor has stated that there is definitely a subsidence problem. If they are a standard surveyors report suggesting possible subsidence, then obtain a structural engineers report. Because Insurance has a subsidence excess of £1000 plus, you would always pay for such reports anyway.

 

Once you have more information, then you should speak to the current Insurance underwriters. They will probably be able to continue Insurance for a standard homeowners policy and deal with any subsidence claim under any new homeowners policy you arranged with them. If the neigbours had the same Insurance underwriters, then this will make it easier in regard to any work that is required to fix the problem.

 

Don't change Insurance before you find out whether this a subsidence issue or not. You will end up having problems, with new Insurers not accepting any claim and your old Insurers also not helping as the policy was cancelled. Best to resolve whether this is a subs issue or not and retain Insurance with current underwriter in the meantime.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Needs to be the same underwriter and not just the same broker. This is about continuity of Insurance cover, with the same underwriters, so you can claim for any subsidence issue, if one exists.

 

Most landlord underwriters, will also underwrite homeowners policies. Find out the underwriter and ask them.

 

Ok lets just imagine that the cracks become a major issue, after you have moved into the house, because the neighbour is on a mission. The Insurers send out a loss assessor and the neighbour tells them you knew about the issue. You might think this is one persons word against another persons. But are you willing to take the risk ? Insurers will appoint a company if they have any concerns to question you very closely. It will be very difficult, not to admit that you had some prior knowledge. If you have changed underwriter, you face a nightmare situation. Even with the same underwriter, they might say you failed to advise them when you were first aware. But then you can argue about the 2014 report and no evidence of any subsidence issue.

 

My advice having seen claimants come a cropper in this situation, is to approach it safety first.

 

Priority

 

1) retain buildings cover with the same underwriter so you have continuity of cover.

 

2) speak to the neighbours about the reports and current condition of the party wall they spoke about.

 

3) Depending on what you find out, obtain a structural engineers report.

 

 

You really have to think about the worst case possible, where major underpinning works are required, meaning you need to also claim for alternative accommodation costs. Such claims can run into many tens of thousands. Ok, it might not be as bad as this, but this is the largest possible risk you could face.

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...