The wall is 150mm thick Bath stone ashlar Party Wall. How much plaster would need to be removed to see if the stonework is cracked....? Worried....

Thanks steampowered! Yes, the main worry is having him in our house arguing over the extent of the damage – just don't want the conflict! Part of the problem is that he is only admitting liability for the hole that was drilled through our wall, but not for the cracks and damaged plaster caused by their heavy hammering/chiselling against the single-skin wall – so there is bound to be some argument. Also, because the damage is to the wall of our stairwell (and adjoning ceiling) , this is a continuous single wall that runs through from the loft to the front door. We anticipate that he will want to just patch up the holes/cracks and paint over the patches with a close colour match – leaving us with a patchy paint finish on the wall and ceiling. The quotes we have got are to repair the damage and repaint the continuous space. Is this reasonable? Many thanks!

Thanks reallymadwoman I thought that Public Liability insurance is compulsory...? It would be so much simpler and more civilised if we could allow the insurers to do what they are paid to do... Unfortunately, we don't have legal expenses cover on our household insurance, but it does provide free legal advice.

Thanks reallymadwoman Ideally, we would like to go through their public liability insurers, but the builders are refusing this until they have inspected the damage. I suspect that either they don't want to affect their premiums or they think their negligent work would invalidate their insurance. Unfortunately, our building insurance doesn't cover damage by a 3rd party.... We have provided photographic evidence of the damage and have had professional quotes for the work (which they are claiming are inflated). We just don't want the builder in our house questioning our requests for the reinstatement of our property to its former condition. Can we legally insist that they provide their Public Liability insurers details...? We're anticipating that this may eventually become a matter for the small claims court.....any views on how to prepare for this eventuality would be very welcome. Thanks!

Hello – I hope this is the correct place to seek advice regarding a Party Wall dispute. Any help greatly appreciated! To cut a long story short, our neighbours recently employed a loft conversion company to build a dormer conversion. We expressed some concerns about the nature and timing of the work but they went ahead anyway, without a signed Party Wall Agreement (PWA) and without allowing the 2 months notice etc. Because we raised concerns, the builders decided that they would change the structure of the conversion so that there would be no need for the PWA (even though it had already been issued for us to sign). The building work began and shortly afterwards, after very heavy drilling and chiselling on the Party Wall, the builders drilled through the wall into our property. Apart from the drill hole and plaster damage, there are cracks extending from the drill hole and cracks in the wall and adjoining ceiling caused by their heavy hammering on the single skin wall. The builder has admitted liability for damaging our property but is now disputing the quotes we have provided for the repairs and repainting but he seems reluctant to go through his Public Liability insurers as we have requested. He now wants to enter our property to inspect the damage but we do not want him in our home. My question is: are we legally obliged to allow him access to our house? We would prefer to go through the insurance claim process with loss adjusters etc We don't want anything more to do with the builder himself. Many thanks!

Please help... The 12 month term of the contract with our tenants finished a few months ago and the contract became a standard 'rolling' shorthold tenancy. We decided recently that we'd like to sell the house and served 2 months notice to the tenants as required. In conversations with the tenants we informally suggested that if they hadn't found somewhere to move to before the end of the notice period, we might be able to allow them more time than the two months notice (trying to be flexible and generous). However, they have become quite awkward in allowing access to the property for tradespeople to go in and do boiler checks, repairs etc. and we are worried that this will continue with the estate agents and potential viewings. We now want them out of the property asap so that we can get on with selling the house. My first question is - how do I enforce the moving out date (after 2 months)? Secondly, if we agree to give them a couple of extra weeks, do we have to go through the process of formally serving notice again or can we give them this extension in writing with an agreed definite day for moving out? Thanks for your advice. All best wishes, Gandolfi

Hello All If any of you can offer advice on how to take this forward, we would very much appreciate your help. After a pretty terrible holiday this summer, my wife and I wrote a detailed letter of complaint to Thomson asking for compensation. We sent a PDF including our complaints and images of the sub-standard accommodation. Their offer of compensation was just £160 of vouchers (to spend on one of their holidays!!!), which doesn't compensate us at all for a miserable holiday. I'll try to sum up the complaints: 1) There was a large area (more than a square metre) of damp, efflorescent mould growing out from the wall next to my bed. Smell of damp in bedroom. Asked rep for something to be done but all they did was to scrape it off and paint over it. It had grown back within a couple of days. We asked if we could move but were told this wasn't possible. 2) Large cockroaches coming from drains in bathroom and through hole in ceiling 3) Apartment was not clean - mould in bathroom, on shower curtain, dirty toilet, hole in ceiling (from where cockroach came), woodwork on doors up to knee height was damp/rotten, smell of drains 4) Had to leave key in apt door if we wanted cleaner to come in - no security 5) Booked a car through the rep which didn't turn up - wasted whole day of holiday. 6) Tried to use Thomson's 24hr customer service line because we had no way of contacting rep directly, but received no response 7) Owner came straight into our apartment unannounced while i was putting sun tan lotion on my wife's back - could have been VERY embarrassing - no respect for our privacy. We have holidayed in Greece for the last 20 years. We understand the difference between simple/basic accommodation and an apartment that is a potential health risk. The rep said that their Health & Safety inspector was coming in the following week to check the apartment - we requested a copy of the report (for our own health concerns) but were refused by customer service. As you can imagine we are pretty fed up. Our only holiday of the year completely ruined. We declined Thomson's offer of voucher compensation. They have written back saying that they think it's a fair offer. What should we do next....? All help and advice appreciated. Thanks! Gandolfi

Please could you explain what this refers to? Or is there a link to the information? Thanks! Gandolfi

Hi Supasta Wondering how you got on in court....had everything crossed for you. Let us know what happened. All best, Gandolfi

does anyone have a definitive answer....

Hi supasta1 Subbing to your thread.... Any progress this week? Gandolfi

It would be great to get any historic NatWest T&Cs if you have them.... I've tried to get them from Natwest via a CPR18 request for information, but Cobbetts just refused while the test case was on. Would it be worth me seeking an order for this when I ask to amend my Counterclaim...? I need them for every year from when the accounts were opened (20 years!) I also need to prepare my argument for amending my claim. What would be the best way? My thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/business-bank-accounts-charges/81525-gandolfi-natwest-14.html is very long and complicated and buried in the (rather quiet) Business Claims section of the forum. It's a big case with c£25,000 at stake, from both Personal and Sole Trader current accounts. Eager to get on, but not sure how.... All help much appreciated. Meanwhile, best wishes, Gandolfi

bump

Where is NatWest...?

Those would be very useful. Thanks Bankfodder! How can I get to see them? All best, Gandolfi PS - I'll get the statement examples/letter scanned in and sent asap.

Thanks Clavileno I'm wondering if there are any precedents set? When this was included in the templates, there must've been some strong arguments for it to be used. My understanding is that just because all banks charge a similar price, doesn't make any of them fair. Justice Smith implied that refusing to pay an item was NOT a service - so, it must be unfair to claim that the charge is for a service. Furthermore, the bank's claim that it is to 'cover administration costs'. This, we now know, is not true. So, that is also unfair. The level of the charges is decided upon with a view to cross-subsidy and profit, not in relation to the service performed. Also, unfair. Can these things not be brought into the argument when using this legislation? I'm fairly ignorant when it comes to finer points and legalise, but want to pursue all possibilities. As I begin to rebuild my case, I hope to use some/all of the following: 1) The fact that Justice Smith singled out Natwest's historical charges as still being open to the penalty argument. This should allow me to force them to present their 'administrative costs' in Court. 2) Misrepresentation of the true motivation for the charges regime - saying they are to cover costs, when they actually cross-subsidise free banking and create profit. 3) Unreasonable under Sales of Goods Act (early days with these arguments for me) As always, any help or advice welcome. No choice but to carry on fighting. Need to really start preparing arguments. Many thanks, Gandolfi

If anyone has any of NatWest's terms and conditions (especially pre-2003, but any year), I'd be SO grateful if I could get copies. I've been trying to get the bank/Cobbetts to send them, but (not surprisingly) without success. Any year back to 1989, Business and/or personal would be BRILLIANT! Thanks Gandolfi http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/business-bank-accounts-charges/81525-gandolfi-natwest-14.html

Hi All Is there a thread with examples/evidence of misrepresented charges? Hopefully, here are a couple of possible examples. Almost a year ago, I went through some of my old, original statements (NatWest) and found a couple of things that might be useful....? The first example is from 1992. There is a section titled 'Charges for other account services - to cover our administration costs'. Underneath it lists things like Bankers Drafts, Copy statements etc. It also lists: 1) A letter saying you have an unauthorised overdraft = £20 2) If an increase in Unauthorised overdraft is caused by by taking money out using a sevicecard, cashcard or chequecard = £20 3) If a cheque, standing order or direct debit on your account is not paid because you don't have enough money = £27.50 It then says 'All charges for account services are taken from your account when we provide the service' Given that Justice Smith ruled that these are NOT services, doesn't this provide strong evidence against NatWest's position and supports the idea that they misrepresented their cross-subsidy of free banking even at this early stage? Also, the fact that they say the charge is 'to cover our administration costs' should entitle us to know what those costs are...? Secondly, I have a letter that came with more up-to-date charges info from the bank (following my complaint) that clearly states that the charges are for providing the 'service' of refusing payments. The letter goes on to say, "We do not agree with the basis for your complaint. We believe that the charges we levy are for providing services and that they are not penalties or charges for default. Furthermore we believe that these charges are fair, reasonable and transparent" I realise these are only small examples, but are these the sort things you are looking for to build the evidence? Thanks Gandolfi PS - (apologies for long post) I'm still looking for Natwest's historic T&Cs from any year back to 1989. The bank have failed to provide them despite numerous requests. If anybody can has them, I'd be SO grateful. My case http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/business-bank-accounts-charges/81525-gandolfi-natwest-14.html depends on getting them.

Does anyone know when and how we can amend our POCs for cases that are currently stayed? It would be great to take the initiative before the banks apply to strike out claims... Gandolfi

This is fantastic news and proof that the fight goes on! Well done to all involved Gandolfi

Hi Everyone I didn't know if this is the best place to ask this question...I posted it on my own thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/business-claims-bank-charges/81525-gandolfi-natwest-14.html but haven't had any responses yet. I've just looked back over my own defence/counterclaim and noticed the following clause that I included in my argument: In the event that the court finds that the charges are not a penalty they are unreasonable within the meaning of section 15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. Can anyone shed any light on this already existing alternative to the penalty argument within my claim...? Does this still apply? What does it mean exactly? Many thanks, Gandolfi

Hi Everyone I've just looked back over my own defence/counterclaim and noticed the following clause that I included in my argument: In the event that the court finds that the charges are not a penalty they are unreasonable within the meaning of section 15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. Can anyone shed any light on this already existing alternative to the penalty argument within my claim...? Does this still apply? What does it mean exactly? Many thanks, Gandolfi

Hi Majjd It's dispicable the way Natwest have treated you. Forcing a Direct Debit on you that they know you can't pay and enriching themselves by charging you for the privelege I'm no expert on this at all, but I had some success in getting a loan claim struck out at an earlier stage of my defence/counterclaim against Natwest - see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/business-claims-bank-charges/81525-gandolfi-natwest-8.html. If Natwest are unable or unwilling to provide the original paperwork for this debt, surely the Court cannot enforce it....? Was your request for the agreement a formal CCA request with the necessary payment? If they fail to produce this, then how can the loan be enforced? Somehow the Court needs to be told that the case is in dispute and that you will submit a fully particularised defence once Natwest have provided the necessary documentation that you have requested. I'm not sure, but in cases over £5,000 I think you make a formal request for information to support your case using CPR18. Hopefully, someone with more expert knowledge will offer support and help with your defence (I am just an ordinary victim of similar circumstances, but don't have any legal expertise). Wish I could help more - it makes me so angry! Best of luck! Gandolfi

Hi ASKL Wondering how it went on friday...? Had everything crossed for you! Hope all is OK. Gandolfi

Hi AKSL Thanks for posting the new info on your case. It looks like you've done a huge amount of work and I wish you all the best for the 15th. If you can get the Judge to recognise the fact that Natwest have failed to comply with previous requests and court orders for information that will allow you to fully particularise your defence, you will hopefully get their case struck out. I'm very interested in your comparisons between the business and personal T&Cs - I still haven't been able to get copies of them despite numerous requests to Natwest. Do you have copies that I could see, or could you let me know how you got them? I'd really appreciate it. My case includes charges going back to 1995, so I need to pick out the contractual breaches that are connected to the charges from before they 'softened' their terms. The relevance (or irrelevance) of the test case is difficult to manage within these arguments. I'm sure you have a grip on it, but it confuses me. On the one hand, Smith's lack of clarity allows us to argue for charges as penalties, but on the other hand, we (and now they) are saying that the test case was irrelevant to business accounts. I'm following your thread with great interest and have everything crossed for you! All best, Gandolfi