Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

t0mbop

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About t0mbop

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Just thought I'd update this thread and ask for further advice. We've done some investigations into the drainage and there is no damage to any of the drainage systems and neither does it run under the garage at any point. After more measuring and levelling we've worked out that although it cracked at the right rear corner the actual movement is on the front right corner. This ties in nicely with nextdoor's downpipe which the drainage surveys show don't go into the sewer so likely into a soakaway somewhere. The only thing I can think is that their soakway is near my garage and washing the ground away as the downpipe heads off underground in that direction. I will take a picture later to explain it better. Can anyone offer any advice on how I approach this with the neighbours and what to do? I get on OK with them but I'm guessing the last thing they want to hear is me potentially blaming them for the damage. I can't be sure it is that but have to find out somehow without digging on their property! Cheers
  2. I'm reasonably confident, having located all the manholes, that the drainage doesn't run under any of the structures on the plot, all the houses in the row (detached) are in line with each other and the sewage appears to run between the houses and the garages where there is approximately a 8ft gap between corner of house and corner of garage. There is a manhole in this space and after lifting the cover it doesn't turn or head towards the garage, just further along to the next property. That said, I'm no drainage expert but have looked at getting a local company to do a CCTV scan of the drains just to ensure there isn't a split in that run near my garage.
  3. It's only a theory and I'm not skilled enough to know whether it is or isn't. Plus, last week I asked to go into their garden to view the other side of the corner which faces into their garden and as they had some excavation and patio work done right at that point last year, I asked what they had done specifically and how far they dug and they very quickly went on the defensive. I don't think they caused the crack in that corner but I was just exploring possible reasons, but their reaction was quite obvious. To prove anything I'd need an expert, and may go down that route later on, but for now I'll just ensure it's stable. I'm doing a brick laying course at evening school later in the summer so will gauge how well I do at that and how confident I'm feeling as to whether I rebuild it myself, given it's ultimately a single skin box with a flat roof. Time will tell whether this is far too ambitious or a stroke of genius.
  4. Well that's promising, both of you tend to "agree" with my train of thought. I'll keep a vigilant eye on the house but I don't have any reason to believe the house is under threat at this stage, and I think initial shoring up and ensuring the garage doesn't cause any safety concerns like crumbling into next door's garden, with a view to rebuilding at a later date. I think, and this is an uneducated guess, that next door's guttering and down pipe is partially to blame but will keep an eye on this, just an observatory hunch at the moment. Thanks to everyone that viewed and commented, I feel slightly calmer now!
  5. Hi there, I've been in a quandary about what to do for some time. My detached single brick skin garage, currently housing what most garages do; crap, is showing signs of movement on the back corner, furthest from the actual house itself. In distance terms, the back corner of the garage is probably some 20ft away from the closest point of the house. Currently, and we've been here 4 years, the house is fine and is showing no signs of anything bad. The garage has always had cracks in it. I'm a panicky type of person and am becoming worried about what to do. I have a structural engineer in the family who has very vaguely said "The garage has been damaged due to movement, probably be cheaper to knock it down and rebuilt", whilst my Father-in-law has urged me to contact the insurance with the end game of getting a nice new garage as they'll probably demolish and rebuild also. The problem I have is that everyone - including structural engineer (although not an official report of any kind) - have told me not to worry about the house, but I am. Anyway, I digress, the problem being I think (hoping to have this confirmed) if I approach the insurance company who confirm that the garage has/is subsiding and needs remedial work this will flag up on the property forever more, meaning my insurers (although obliged to continue insuring me) have carte blanche to scale my future premiums infinitely and make future re-mortgaging and selling difficult, ultimately resulting in a hefty reduction on the asking price of the house when it comes to it just to get rid... all because of a garage. This is where another friend of mine, known for being pragmatic, has suggested fix it myself. Avoid the insurance provided it remains on just the garage and the house remains ostensibly fine. I have a good friend who's a bricklayer and builder who has had a look and suggested we dig out the foundation of the garage, check it all round and check for cracks, tree roots, poor drainage etc, shore up if necessary and rebuild the portion of the garage effected and blend in, approximately 100 bricks he tells me. Whilst it's not in my nature to bodge and patch things up, I do feel that at this stage I should give some consideration to this as it is "only" a garage, not attached to the house and, to a layman (and indeed a couple of "experts") the house appears completely unaffected. The ideal solution as far as I can see, we expose something obvious during foundation excavation, repair and no-one's any the wiser and no "black mark" on my houses record. Should the situation spiral and the house becomes affected then it's likely I'll have no choice to involve the insurance, but as the situation stands now, I'm tempted to keep them out of it. If anyone can advice or attempt to allay the fear, panic and sleepless nights I'm currently experiencing that would go a long way. For the psych's out there, I had a very poor credit history when I was younger and spent a long time being sub-prime, so whilst this isn't quite the same thing, I enjoy being "mainstream" without a stigma, and I fear a marker on the property's record for subsidence, even it is just the poxy garage, will remove this privilege and make me sub-prime once again for many years to come. That's why I'm apprehensive. Sorry for the long post!
  6. Whilst I don't agree with the premise I can understand, which is sad. Sister-in-law is off down EH this morning again armed with the above questions, but I sense this doesn't have an easy resolve. Thanks everyone.
  7. Not an appropriate defense for whom? Environmental Health have already performed an inspection and advised on necessary remedial works which the agent/LL is unwilling to carry out allegedly until this deposit scenario is resolved. As I've said the written and signed TA states nil deposit, because my sister-in-law moved from property 1 to property 2 both with the same agent, but not necessarily with the same LL, I believe a gentlemen's agreement was reached between the agent and my sister-in-law to "port" the deposit from property 1 to property 2. That would explain the "nil" deposit figure on the TA for property 2. That said, sister-in-law left property 1 in a poor state, I believe resulting in the retention of the deposit thus leaving the agent to probably pay the deposit for property 2 and "claim it back" off sister-in-law. It's for this reason we've advised her to make every attempt not to sour relations in an attempt to prevent retaliatory eviction and hopefully commence remedial works. What a mess!
  8. Hello, I'm not sure whether property 1's deposit was protected to be perfectly honest. I've just received some pictures from sister-in-law and to be honest I'm in shock. White fur is growing on the mould on the walls and ceilings in most rooms. They've just moved some wardrobes in one of the bedrooms and they've rotted through due to the moisture and begun growing fur also. There's a part of me that's gagging to start letter-writing to the agent, Landlord, Environmental Health and anyone else I can think of, formally written with photo's and the full story in an attempt to get something done as my sister-in-law tends to do things by text message and you only get her side of events. There's kids in the house that constantly have chest infections and cough's which I think is partly down to the living conditions. Due to the amount of children she has (6) it's very difficult to find alternative accommodation given the sub-prime benefits world she lives in, but I'm really beginning to think something needs to happen and quickly. This said, I'm conscious of what you said about the Section 21, the Landlord may just say sod it and get her out, leaving her effectively homeless or in emergency housing which may just exacerbate the problem. What's one to do? Any advice on what action to take would be appreciated. Bearing in mind Environmental Health have already visited and insisted remedial works are done however the agent (not the actual Landlord - we don't know him/her) is reluctant to do any works because of the alleged outstanding deposit as mentioned in the first post. I'm a bit stuck for what to do. Cheers
  9. So any previous properties let leading to unrecoverable deposits are unable to be pursued? Basically, what I "think" has happened is, a gentleman's agreement has taken place between the agent and my sister-in-law (as they're also friends apparently - or were) saying that I'll let you off the deposit on property 2 so long as I can recover the deposit from property 1, which turned out later down the line to be unrecoverable. Now the agent wants reimbursing but perhaps didn't have their business hat on when they signed the agreement on property 2. Also, I agree about the dog issue. Thanks once again, you've both been very helpful.
  10. Ok that's very helpful, thanks for the terminology - makes sense now. So this is the scenario as I understand it. Sister-in-law rents property 1 and pays a deposit. After a while she leaves property 1 and moves to property 2, with the same letting agent and as such the agent attempts to port the deposit from property 1 to property 2. As such, the AST signed and agreed by both parties for property 2 states "nil" deposit. After a while it turns out, due to damages arising from property 1, the deposit isn't "portable" and as such a figure of £1000 is reached as deposit now due on property 2, not originally set out in the AST for property 2. Should this amount be payable at all, or should arrangement be met between my sister-in-law and the agent as contractually no deposit is due but she did incur damages from the previous property, so in terms of peace-keeping? Also, does the agent have the right to withhold remedial works set out by environmental health until this "deposit" is paid in full? Cheers
  11. Hello, My sister-in-law currently rents a property from an agent, which was initially based on a 6 month tenancy. The agreement was in writing, signed by both parties and expired on September 3rd 2014. She has not received any further tenancy agreements nor signed any additional paperwork since this time. The original tenancy agreement, now expired, has it clearly written that "nil" deposit is/was required at the beginning of the tenancy. My sister-in-law has rented previous properties from this agent and I believe it was verbally agreed between the two that the deposit would be "ported" or similar from a previous property, but this certainly isn't in writing anywhere. My sister-in-law, according to the terms and conditions of her expired tenancy agreement is not aloud pets without prior consent and an additional deposit sum. She has recently bought a puppy and not informed the agent (not her finest hour) and the agent has, in my opinion, fairly asked her to fill out a pet form and pay an additional sum of £250 to cover potential damages, which I believe is fair. Now onto the crux of the problem. The house, even upon moving in, showed signs of damp. This has gradually worsened and on closer inspection looks like it's been present for some considerable time. Mould is growing on most downstairs walls and upstairs ceilings. In my non-expert opinion, it's not something you'd want to live in - and it stinks of it. After informing the agent and suffering complete inaction she approached environmental health who have conducted an inspection and deemed it in urgent requirement of remedial works, and has forwarded this to the agent. Following further inaction from the agent a subsequent visit from the environmental health man took place and additional letter(s) to the agent were sent. The agent has since been in touch stating before any remedial works take place they require the agreed (apparently verbally) deposit of £1000 paid on a plan of £200 per month starting January 2015. This isn't in writing anywhere (I'm assured) and the original tenancy does indeed state "nil" deposit. My sister-in-law tells me that the agent told her they were unable to port the deposit from her previous property due to damages left making it unrecoverable, therefore a deposit falls due on this property as a result - again none of this in writing. All that said, my sister-in-law is certainly no saint and doesn't tend to look after her properties. She has 6 children and lives off benefits so usually finding a house remotely suitable is problem, hence why this house was accepted - it was bigger than her previous. What I'd like to know, is in people's opinions, is she owing of any deposit and does the agent have a "right" to demand it and indeed hold back any remedial works advised by environmental health. That said, I believe she's on a sticky wicket as she has no active tenancy agreement and I assume the agent isn't obliged to give her one, so perhaps rocking the boat could end up causing more trouble than good? That said she is family and I don't particularly want to see her in emergency housing or B&B's as a result of being evicted. If anyone has some facts or advice that would be great. Cheers
  12. Because I bought the wrong car, I feel this is an opportunity to get out of it. I also have lost confidence in the car. That's to be honest quite irrelevant, the fact remains that I've been treated appallingly by a franchised dealer who even under the instruction of the Renault UK network seem to be failing to contact me to resolve it.
  13. Oh.. well I haven't got the car today so I'll do it later when I get home (details are in the glovebox). Any thoughts in general about my position and what stance I should take? They're meant to be contacting me today and I want to state my case for returning the vehicle due to it being in an unsatisfactory condition when sold. Thanks
  14. That's only for the MOT Certificate itself, not the Advisory. I've tried already several times in the last month on separate advice. Cheers.
  15. Hi guys, Got a strange one here. I purchased a car on a 4yr Hire Purchase (I think that's what you call it, same monthly payment with no balloon payment at the end - whereby the car is then my property) last July 18th. The car was a Renault from a main Renault Dealer where I'd been a customer for the past 5 years, this being my 3rd vehicle. It's a used vehicle with a full 12month warranty supplied by the dealer but not warranted by them. On the 10th October the car was returned to the dealer after I complained about noises and an odd feeling from the steering. They noticed no problem with it and returned it to me with no explanation. On the 4th December I sent the car back, again with similar symptoms as before although slightly worse than last time. Lo and behold, no faults found and the car returned to me. Into this year now, and January 15th. The car goes in for further investigative work on the steering as I'm still not happy. Once again, no faults can be found, each time they say this the noises disappear for a matter of days before returning, I'm guessing some sort of lubrication? March 12th, and the final time the car goes back for... steering problems again! Same noises and a worse pulling in either direction this time round. And guess what... A PROBLEM FOUND! As of that afternoon the car was no longer fit to drive and was classed as "Dangerous" by the dealer and I was warned that it would cost me £565.03 per side to fix. Both front stub axles were worn excessively and wheel bearings. Something that apparently wasn't obvious 2 months previous, nevermind the previous visits from the year before. After launching a strongly worded complaint with Renault UK, who have been relatively helpful, it turns out also when I collected the car it had a valid MOT, as it was tested the day before by the dealer, however an "Advisory" certificate was issued which highlights potential problems to be remedied before the next MOT. This was not given to me, I know this becase all the details were enclosed in a wallet by the dealer stapled together and it's not there. Coincidence? So, I'm left nearly £1k out of pocket (got it done elsewhere in the end) and with a car that was potentially sold to me with this or at least some other defects (hence the advisory notice!). Where do I stand on handing the car back and terminating the agreement. I'm furious with the dealer who are apparently now negotiating my refund for this issue, however I am also waiting for them to send me my Advisory certificate, so I'm a little dubious what that will say when I get it. The way I see it, they sold the car knowing it had issues, failed to highlight or notice them on 3 subsequent occasions until the final occasion where they told me because either they had to or they just felt enough was enough. Negligence or incompetence. I'm waiting the response from them but I want to end the agreement as I think they've done enough to make that happen, but I need advice on how to go about it. What's everyones thoughts. Obviously Renault won't discuss termination, I've tried. There more interested in resolving this issue somehow, I think. But I want out, and I think I've got grounds to command a bit. It got me thinking, why if you MOT'd a car at 14:41 on a Friday, would you not provide details of the advisory at 8:30am on the Saturday when I sign for the car? What possible reason would you have for "witholding" that information... I wonder? If I can prove it had issues that were not disclosed, no matter how small/large can I terminate? They're meant to be ringing me today (well Friday, but it's Renault - I've given up with their punctuality) to discuss further, but I want rid of the car. Thoughts?
×
×
  • Create New...