Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1 Neutral

1 Follower

  1. Hi all, Bit of background ... I fell into a bit of money trouble back in 2011/12 and fell behind with a multitude of things, which manifested in 7 defaults being placed on my credit file (I know, right?). I'm glad to say that all is reformed, I'm in stable employment, my finances are doing great (aside from not being able to get reasonable credit, of course) and the defaults have started to drop off (3 down, 4 to go). Once I had gotten myself back into full time employment, I settled all of my debts outright. One in particular was a credit card with MBNA/Virgin. I settled this directly with them. On review of my credit file, I noticed that MBNA and PRA Group were reporting two entries for this same debt. I wrote to the CRAs and they removed the MBNA entry, leaving PRA, which is showing as settled. My question is, if I settled the debt with MBNA directly and they registered the default, do PRA still have the right to process my data and keep this default on my file? Surely if any default should have remained, it should be MBNA, since they are the only company I dealt with and the creditor with whom I settled the balance? Thanks for your help!
  2. So has anybody actually managed to get these clowns to go away? I signed up to Virgin in January 2008 and in November of this year froze my contract and served notice (verbally, in person) to end it upon 12 month completion as I moved and joined a local gym which cost a lot less. The re-adjusted direct debit of £7pm has not been taken from my account since and now I'm getting calls from ARC chasing up a debt (presumably they have been sending letters to my old address) Any tips?
  3. Hi all This site has given me some great information so far, so I'd like to thank you for that. Further developments have occured in my dispute with my ex-landlord. We left the property in sparkling condition (we have pictures), except for a small dent in the wood laminate flooring in the kitchen (caused by a dropped pestle & mortar) and a chip in the hand basin in the bathroom (caused by knocking a toothbrush holder into the sink from a shelf above). The basin we have agreed a fee on, but he suggests that a plumber to fit it would be £80 +VAT. The job is merely attaching & sealing a sink to a wall and screwing in the taps, no complex plumbing...does this seem fair/reasonable? Secondly the replacement flooring only comes in packs of 3x 1 square meter at a cost of £58. The damage has only been caused to one panel, can he really charge us the cost of a pack of 3? or can he only charge us the proportionate cost for one? Thanks for your help.
  4. Thanks guys. The tenancy actually begun in June 2006, so it isn't covered by the scheme. He has had 4 weeks to come up with the relevent quotes for the floor (even though we intend to dispute it) so we should have any amount not in dispute back by now, however he just seems to be drawing it out.
  5. Hi all. Our ex landlord is currently witholding our full deposit. We have admitted damage to a hand basin (which I actually temporarily repaired) but he is trying to charge us for small impressions to wood laminate flooring (consistent with fair wear & tear). I have sourced the cost of the basin myself and provided him with it, however he is continuing to draw this out & we've been very amicable. He has ignored our requests for a copy of the signed inventory. This has been going on for just over 4 weeks & he shows no sign of actually getting things moving. How long should we wait before filing a claim?
  6. The tenancy had not been renewed, no. He did call us in June 07 to see if we planned on staying in the property, we said yes - aslong as the rent stayed the same. He agreed and told us about the scheme, and needed to come up and sign some docs with us (he lives in Coventry and us in Sheffield), he never came up though, infact no inspection was ever done on the property between our moving in date and moving out date (June 06 - Jan 08). He won't have laid the floor as it's a newish apartment (2002) and the floor will be the original, so I know already that it's nearing 6 years or so, and the landlord tells me that it's been occupied since April 2003, so coming up to 5 years.
  7. Thanks for the reply TDS whouldn't apply as we signed up for the flat in June 2006. The landlord visited the flat while we were there just after we'd cleaned most of it and moved a lot of our stuff, he didn't mention the floor at all, it was only after we'd left, but yea, I'm pretty sure there was never a signed inventory. As a first step we have asked him to provide us with a summary of the charges he wishes to deduct, as well as an inventory signed by us. We will then formally request that he return the deposit minus whatever we agree to. Should he refuse and insist on the proposed payment for the floor we plan to file against him. Does this sound like a fair approach?
  8. Hi guys, first posts here, I've read a few posts about unfair deposit deductions and thought I'd make my own post for some clarity. I have recently moved out of a flat where I lived for the past 18 months with my girlfriend. We left the flat in good condition, aside from a chip in the wash basin in the bathroom, which we attempted to repair (if only to buy the landlord some time before having to replace it for new tennants) but we admitted and accept we will be charged for it. Upon emailing the landlord to tell him that we'd handed the keys back to the letting agent and completed a full clean of the property including professional carpet cleaners, I gave him our forwarding addresses and asked if there were any additional issues following his inspection the day after we left. He said that the laminate wood floors (which are present throughout the 1 bed flat apart from the bedroom) have "small impressions" (his words) all over them, from high heels. The floor in the flat is 6 years old and has been occupied for 5 years. As far as we can remember there was an inventory but we didn't sign it, and we're also sure that no mention of the state of floor in it, and we believe that the floor was beginning to show the signs of wear that 3 years walking on it can do when we signed up. There was no specification as to how strong the floor is, nor any measures taken by the landlord to prevent us from walking in the flat with shoes on (for example a protective mat at the door). Indeed such is the design of the flat, that to avoid making any marks at all would mean removing our footwear before getting in the front door, which surely isn't practical? Basically he wants to charge us 1/4 of the full price to replace 100% of the floor, which I think is totally unreasonable. Would this not be classed as fair wear and tear, such as a worn carpet?
  • Create New...