We ordered around 20 items (each with multiple parts) from a small online retailer. We didn't open the box to fit the parts until around 3 weeks after the order was received. It was at this time that we noticed that one of the items had a missing part to it. We called the retailer who supposedly 'remembered' checking all the items and was adamant that the part was definitely not missing upon dispatch. After much arguing, we sent the item in question back to the retailer and asked for a replacement to be sent out, this time with all parts included. Two weeks later we called up to say that we still haven't received the replacement item. We were told that there is nothing the retailer can do. We were hung up on twice (upon calling back we were told "it was a bad line"), accused of lying (not quite that directly) and that all parts were definitely included, fobbed off that the 'director' will not send out a replacement item and that their supplier refuse to send out a replacement part. Apparently our only option is to re-purchase the item again. Now, the item in question costs peanuts, a missing part was more of an inconvenience than anything. It's mind boggling that the retailer refuses to take a 'hit' on such a low cost item. However, their despicable customer service has irritated us beyond belief and on shear principle I want to go out of my way to get this sorted. So far we have only (tried) to have telephone conversations and stupidly sent the item back without proof of postage. What should we now do (other than leave poor online reviews)?

We had the building controller advise us today that "his boss" is taking a view that our application (Building Notice) for a wraparound extension now needs to be an application for a new build (which will require a SAP, EPC and pressure test). To date we have poured the footings and almost finished the walls to wall plate. All work has so far been inspected and until the planning fiasco no word has been mentioned that our BC application is incorrect. Does BC have the power to suddenly void an application and change it's description, after they accepted it in writing, were provided the PP number which contained the drawing references and have inspected the work on numerous occasions already? This is obviously another planning/enforcement tactic to achieve a new application, but does it have any legs?

They haven't stated that a re-application for a rebuild will be a problem. They keep encouraging it, together with pestering us for a CIL payment and energy calculations - both only required for new builds. Nitpicking in deed! But we can't do very much about their opinion - we all have one!

It's the local councilor who complained in the first place, so futile to ask her for backing. They are stating that my planning would have stood if we built the extension first, and then demolished the external walls (once they become internal). However, as we demolished everything first, we do not have planning for "an extension" as there is now no house to extend off...

With the absence of any enforcement notices (for now), would this flag up as an official dispute?

We were granted Full Planning Approval in writing with no conditions attached. So, where would we stand in terms of a mortgage and/or a sale when the council respond to a solicitor that we do not have planning for the property? From discussing our build with HMRC already, we have been advised that we will be able to claim back all VAT as long as we provide proof (i.e. photos) of the build, despite the front wall (and party wall) remaining. Time will tell if their advice stands when it comes to reimbursement.

We were granted planning permission for a rear and side (wrap around) extension which doubled the floor area of our very small bungalow. The approved drawings showed that all of the walls except the front facade are to be demolished and a completely new roof structure is to be constructed. All work is being carried out under Building Control supervision. However, a local busy body complained that we are undertaking more than just an extension. The council have agreed and requested that a new application for a new build/rebuild is to be submitted. The enforcement officer has been involved but (for the time being at least) has not issued any formal notices. The planning and enforcement officers view is that the planning permission notice description does not state that all of the walls and roof are being demolished and the drawings alone are not sufficient (!). Furthermore, had we built the extension first, and then demolished these walls and roof, we would have been ok (there is no condition in our Decision Notice to state the order of works). We are adamant that our PP is valid and are building to the approved drawings. We currently do not have a mortgage, but will be looking to either take out a mortgage or sell the property once complete. If we go down either route, I presume that any lender's or buyer's solicitor will undertake a Local Search, yes? If so, will they be advised of the local planners current opinion/dispute, and will this have any merit in view of the completed property looking as per the drawings in our existing PP for the wraparound extension? Via a telephone conversation, the enforcement officer stated that upon any future sale, the council would have to advise a solicitor that the property does not have PP.

That would be interesting to read, thanks Conniff .

Really? Could you give some examples where this may no longer be true?

I was changing lane from the right to the left to go in front of a bus in the left lane. As I started pulling into the left lane, the bus driver accelerated not to let me in and as a result scraped the rear-left-side of my car (next to the lights). There was no serious impact damage as such on my car. We exchanged details with the bus driver handing me a 'Metroline Travel Accident Card'. Who is likely to be at fault here from the point of view of the insurance companies? The damage is marginal (a bit of t-cut will sort the scrape out), so I'm not even sure its worth me claiming. But is Metroline likely to claim against me, in which case I may as well tell my insurance company now and be the first to kick up a fuss?

Not great news then, but thanks guys! I have written to the Agent to ask him to confirm by letter the amount that will be credited to my account with them. Should I decide to re-let with the Agent further down the line, would I be in a position to refuse another 18 month contract (i.e. pay the Agent for an additional 12 months fee) and instead request a 6 month contract? My thinking behind this is that if after 6 months my Tenants move out, the Agent no longer owes me anything, however if the Tenant remains in the property for 12 months, I will then pay the Agent's fee pro-rata for those additional 6 months. Can they refuse to commit to a 6 month contract and keep my 'credit' until I agree to another 18 month contract, basing this on any 'credit' going to future contracts of the same ilk? Would they have a foot to stand on here?

Thanks for the reply Steve_M, would appreciate any other views from people as I believe that the above clause is quite unfair and unsure how enforceable it is?

Apologies for the delay in replying, the Contract with the Letting Agent states the following: The final paragraph is interesting, for your information the Tenants requested to end their Tenancy and I agreed.

I am the Landlord at the property in question. At the start of the Tenancy, my Letting Agent (a very large organisation) took an upfront percentage fee of 18 months let for the Tenants that moved in. My Tenants are moving out after 12 months (break clause in Agreement). However, the Letting Agent refuses to refund me the fee for the remaining 6 months that the Tenants are not living there. Instead, the Letting Agent tells me that the fee will be credited to my account with them and put towards future lets or a sale. However, I am not planning on letting out the property again (for at least a couple of years), and neither am I planning on selling it. Hence, do they have the legal right to retain my money in this way!?

Manager called back (to my surprise) and said someone will be over in the next 3 days to read the meter. Hopefully it will get sorted... Please feel free to reply anyway as I am intrigued as to the legalities of this.