Hi, A wayleave agreement would have been made to install the original lantern and power supply on the property. If the luminaire is attached to your property then the NCC PFI Street Lighting company (who would operate and maintain the lights for the next 25 years or so would need to obtain a wayleave with yourself in order to install/reinstall anything there (because you are within your rights to ask them to remove the equipment from your property) and they would have to make good any damage caused. The proposed lantern would be possibly be an LED type and not LCD. Can a freestanding column be installed anywhere in the area - see sentence above. Kry10

Hi All, Having just discovered some paperwork relating to an oldish loan (late 90s) and I have discovered that I had a single premium PPI that ran for the duration of my 5-year loan that was neither use nor ornament. From reading various threads and ‘FAQs/tutorials/guides’ I just want to make sure that what I am doing appears correct. Initially, I have used the CIS spreadsheet to determine the actual compounded interest for the 5-year period that the loan operated for (i.e. - claim period being 1st PPI payment date till last PPI payment date 60 months later) at the banks APR for the loan. Then it is my understanding that the same monthly PPI figures are used within the 8% statutory interest spreadsheet for the claim period, which will run from the 1st PPI payment until now? So if I have got this right the claim would be for the PPI premium (X) + 5 years compounded interest at the banks APR (Y) + 8% simple interest to date (Z) Thanks Kry10

Hi, You might like to to view the following threads - especially those posts by Dougal16T (ex old bill & former crown prosecutor): http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/206470-fraud-act-2006-a.html http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgage-companies/226740-ge-money-x-2-a.html which may enlighten you. Regards Kry10

Come 8 weeks it will cost Lowell's or whatever guise they are in this month somewhere in excess of 1000% of the 'purchase price' - should be one sour lemon! Kry10

The majority of the 'major players'

The following is downloadable at BAILLI: What is a Signature? (C Reed) [2000] JILT 48 (2000) http://www.bailii.org/uk/other/journals/JILT/2000/reed_3.rtf Kry10

For anyone who is interested, attached are copies of Provident's initial letter, the response after receiving the SB letter and the comical response from Lowell including their 'complaints procedure'. Lowell's response came in plain envelope as bought from the likes of staples, etc was unfranked - it actually had a 2nd class stamp on it and took in excess of a week to arrive. K provdent lowell lemon.pdf

I've just had one of these this weekend - only thing is that for me it's now statute barred and they will be the 10th 'DCA' to try and collect.

I Had a similar situation with Lowell's but sent them and their guises the standard letters demanding proof. It got as far as the buy-back offer that Lowell like to use which was disregarded. Then Philips came on the scene - just sent them the bemused letter/in dispute with Lowell's. Will just wait & see. K

Lowell seem to have changed tactics not heard anything since receiving buy-back offer (which I duly ignored - because never had contract phone and never used the supposed provider) but now have had a letter from Philips who have been instructed to collect on this purported debt. K

I've had dealings with the various trading styles of the Lowell Group regarding a purported mobile phone account (never had a contract phone and never with the company claimed!) - I've had all the usual threatograms, postcards, etc. Thought things were going well when I received the buy-back offer (supposedly from Red but printed on Lowell paper!). But now it appears that Lowell's have changed tactics because they have 'instructed' Philips to collect this imaginary debt - so Philips have had the barrage of letters including bemused, doorstep collection, S10, etc K

Thanks for the replies - will send a short and sweet response and see what happens. As I've said previously I'm not against paying I just want things to be right. Thanks again Kry10

Thanks for the advice and links will peruse the threads and adapt the letter accordingly. Kry10

Earlier this year I CCA’d Cabot including the no doorstep collectors/in writing only/S10 DPA notice additions on behalf of t’other half in respect of a storecard. I have eventually received what they deem to be relevant T&Cs, statements, etc. Their letter and T&Cs are hopefully attached. If they think I’m just going to relent and acquiesce to their ‘request’ - well before finding CAG that might have been the case. But being made aware of the ‘practices’ of this and the multitude of other DCAs means this isn’t go happen anymore! If anybody has sent a suitable response to this no doubt generic template reply I would be grateful to know the content, which I can adapt accordingly so that they receive it before the 14 day ‘deadline’ – what next ‘scary’ threatagram correspondence from Morgan’s! In essence they state that the OC is unable to produce the documentation and have supplied barely legible 2007 T&Cs (as per top left) for a MasterCard account (as per bottom right of page 2), which they claim, pertains to the account. Moreover, Cabot claim to have purchased this in 2005! So how TF can they be relevant. Concerning OCs statements supplied and those payments made to Cabot whilst blind but now I see - they do not indicate liability from what I’ve ‘learned’ reading other threads. Cabot’s a/c statement appears to be nothing more than a screen dump! The NOA included (don’t recall ever having received one previously or anything else from the OC – will have to SAR them – no doubt charges in there) is dated last week and shows the current amount owing it doesn’t detail the ‘balance’ as allegedly assigned to Cabot – with the ‘this is a representation’, etc across the top! The ‘introductory’ letter could relate to anyone or anything with none of the fields having relevant data in them! Can their response/claims deemed to be binding as per s172 of the CCA? If so will incorporate it within my response. Thanks for taking the time to read this and I welcome any response. Kry10 Cabot Response.pdf Ts N Cs-1.pdf Ts N Cs-2.pdf

Having perused SI .3096 2004 and associated explanatory memorandum - I would be grateful to receive a “2nd opinion” from those more erudite than myself in such property related matters. This is just to ascertain if the contents of the GR demand sent would be deemed as valid and any other ‘issues’ such as 'old' legislation contained within that appear obvious to those in the know - before I respond to the ‘Landlord’ accordingly. Have tried to scan the documents but they don’t appear to well – so I’ve typed it out. 1st page My address ‘Landlord’s’ address Ground Rent Demand Re: My property @ £ less than a fiver Year to / Due on / Amount 2004 / 2004 / £ less than a fiver 2005 / 2005 / £ less than a fiver 2006 / 2006 / £ less than a fiver 2007 / 2007 / £ less than a fiver 2008 / 2008 / £ less than a fiver 2009 / 2009 / £ less than a fiver Please pay cheque or postal order to ‘Landlord’ include SAE for receipt Bottom of page company registration details 2nd page Landlord’s details Notice to affected leaseholders By a transfer dated this year this company purchased the Head leasehold interest in all of those properties above from the Duchy of Lancaster. Our vendor became seized of the assets of the dissolved company whose last registered office was in . You hold an underlease for 800+ years from various dates during the 1900s (refer to counterpart lease for precise date applicable to your house). We are advised that the GR has not been demanded for numerous years and now enclose our GR demand for the maximum arrears permitted at Law being 6 yrs rent. Any leaseholder that has not held their lease for 6 years is bound by law to pay 6 years arrears and their solicitor’s and/or conveyancer’s when acting in their purchase will have no doubt acted correctly in requiring the seller to pay 6 yrs undemanded rent in order that when the demand came there had advance reimbursement. A copy of Page 2 of our title number as registered at HM Land Registry is enclosed. A full version may be viewed at this office or online via the Land Registry’s website. Signature of company director 3rd page Title number B. Proprietorship Register Title good leasehold Company details price paid C. Charges Register Schedule of notices of leases Property details End of Register The date of lease and term, differs from the dates on the GR demand – i.e. the GR demand states end of month but the lease date is middle of month – does this have any bearing?

andydd & aequitas thanks for the responses. Kry10

After finding my feet and still learning to walk wrt consumer debt issues. I am no longer going to roll over or bury my head – I intend to challenge and query all ‘debt’ related issues. Apologies for the length of this initial posting but I have a multitude of queries flying around my head. Presently, I am faced with the following: Firstly, I must clarify that I am not averse to paying what is owed or owing to those with a legitimate interest. However, I just want to be aware of my rights and any issues that may arise in respect of the matter and that any ‘Landlord’ does things properly. A brief synopsis - Several neighbouring households and myself have recently been contacted by a Company claiming to have sometime this year bought from the Duchy of Lancaster the head leasehold interest in our properties from a defunct company whose dissolved assets were seized by the Crown. I have tried to find details – i.e. when the ‘dissolution’ occurred of this now defunct company via Companies House, the London Gazette and Insolvency Service. But presently, I have been unable to locate anything. It’s possible that it may have been a firm of solicitors and hence a LLP. Is there anywhere else that can be searched and/or contacted? Would the Land Registry have/had any responsibilities wrt notifications? The yearly ground rent is less than a fiver per property – peppercorn rent? I cannot at present locate all of the paperwork relating to the house – especially the stuff concerning the lease wrt to payments, covenants, etc! As I understand it now, if you have a long lease (currently some 800+ years to run) there is no requirement to pay ground rent until such time as it is formally demanded? As per s166 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act, 2002. Even when ground rent is requested the demand in order to be valid should be in a required/prescribed format? Are there regs that cover this? From my perusing the demand where my name is typed on a sticky label stuck to the typed demand; I see that no time limit/due date has been stipulated for receipt of payment on their correspondence sent. This Company who only acquired the head lease this year, yet are demanding 6 years arrears of ground rent? Which statute other than s19 of the Limitation Act would enable this? Or can they only claim back as far as 2005? What I am trying to understand if this was previously property of the Crown and formerly under the auspices of the now defunct company how can this new company claim for ground rent when their ‘ownership’ only commenced this year! If the ‘leasehold’ became property of the Crown presumably this would have been as a result of Escheat or Bona Vacantia? Had it been subsequently disclaimed by the Duchy? In which case we have never received or heard anything as an ‘interested party’. Could the argument of if the freeholder does sell without letting you know, you can force the new freeholder to sell to you, at the price paid for the property? Or similar. If anyone is able to offer advice then that would be most appreciated. Thanks Kry10

Rev Ian, Thanks for your responses - that has answered my queries - have currently had other more pressing issues to deal with over the last few days but this will now be sorted - will post again if anything further develops. Thanks again Kry10

Sillygirl, Thanks for the response will check with my local Court and see what their view is. I have the relevant fee schedules so can determine relevancy to my costs. Kry10

Bump to my post #30 or do I just give this as a 'win' to BC?!?

BUMP Questions 1 & 2 anybody have the answers/suggestions? Thanks Kry10

Hi All, A couple of questions: 1. Does the N252 have to be issued via the Bulk CC/MCOL (where the claimant's claim originated) or can I use a Court that is more local? 2. Does it have to be 'stamped' before issuing? 3. Is there a standard fee for the N252 - I've think I've seen it as £45.00? I have now located this at: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex50_web_0709.pdf Many thanks - will hopefully issue sometime this week.

I have now received a response from the Court - the case has been stayed. BC has not respnded to my defence and has not filed his NoD that he previously sent. When I get time costs will be calculated and he can pay or I could possibly lift the stay and elect to go to 'trial' as it were should he refuse to pay? K

Have e-mailed the Court @ [email protected] no response as yet so as a back-up I have also written to them with a copy of BC's correspondence attached - the letter has been signed for - will have to wait & see. K

Hi, This is the tactic I used to respond to BC http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/190682-bryan-carter-et-al-2.html#post2129935 1st recorded letter 'never arrived' so addressed the 2nd envelope to Fredrickson's only but the letter contained therein was addressed to BC c/o Fredrickson's. Kry10