Hi all, I'm looking for a little advice. My girlfriend and I recently extended our tenancy agreement, we came to the end of a 12 month contract and decided to move onto a Statutory Periodic Contract (month-by-month with 1 months notice). Then a couple of weeks later we got an invoice through the post from our letting agent asking for £60 (£50 + £10 VAT). Neither of us remember reading about this fee when we re-signed and frankly it seems like a bit of a con. Does anyone know what the legal position is regarding these? I've never paid a renewal fee before. Admin fees and credit checks at the start of a new tenancy sure, though those are obscenely expensive as well... But do you think we have to pay this or not? I'm of a mind to write and tell them where to go. £60 for nothing, they didn't even have to draw up a new contract as we're now on a monthly rolling contract!

We were both right. The police can't tow on private land at the moment, but they will be able to when the bill is passed. Sorry, I read all this a few months ago so had to re-read things to get it straight. The police will have their powers extended to cover private land, so that land owners can still have vehicles removed when necessary. However, in reality the police will probably only use these powers in extreme circumstances (such as the example you gave of a car blocking A&E). Home office fact sheet on the matter: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/about-us/legislation/freedom-bill/fact-sheet-part3?view=Binary On page three it says: "Extension of police power to remove vehicles to include private land The Bill will extend the power to make regulations which enable the police and others to remove vehicles which are illegally, obstructively or dangerously parked on public land. In future, it will be possible for such regulation also to cover private land."

Blocking entry to an A&E department? Of course they have that power!

The Bill only bans the clamping or removal of vehicles where the intention is to prevent the owner from using the vehicle. It makes allowance for vehicles to be moved a short distance where they are in a dangerous or obstructive location. It's all in the discussion and amendments to the bill. In any case, the police's ability to tow / move vehicles will not be affected - they would be able to move the dangerous car in your example.

Of course not. The other post made it sound like the majority of the money was going to the PPC which obviously won't be true. They will be making a profit, but most of the money will be going back into the hospital. But really the point I was trying to say is that hospital budgets are being cut, and I would rather these budgets being spent on healthcare instead of providing free parking.

You're assuming that the NHS are naive, they're not. They can't afford to be with their tightened budgets. You can bet that the majority of revenue goes straight back to the hospital where they use it to pay for more important things than giving free parking. Like saving lives for example.

I understand where you're coming from, but people out of work (both jobseekeers AND ESA) automatically qualify for NHS travel costs scheme anyway, so their parking costs will be refunded. This change will only affect disabled people who CAN afford to pay, and why shouldn't they like everyone else who can afford to pay? To those complaining about hidden costs, try moving to the US and paying hundreds or thousands for your healthcare instead of a few quid for your parking ticket!

This is just horrendous. I had a sick feeling in my stomach reading this article. If there is any justice he will be refunded the £250,000 AND given considerable compensation. It makes me very sad to think that the likelihood of this happening is another matter entirely unrelated to justice.

Looks like you were trying to be sneaky and got caught out! If the part about yellow lines "applying from the building line to the centre of the road" is true (I don't know if it is or not), but if it is true then yes the front of your car is on the double yellows. To be fair it did make me laugh when I saw your picture, that's pretty clever right in the space between the lines and the bays! But I think if you tried to appeal it the Judge/Adjudicator would see it for what it is (wilful bending of the rules). Good luck either way.

Hey Ooj, it's actually very common for people to run up debts on a pre-payment meter. You know the emergency credit? Going into that incurs debt. Think of it like overdraft charges. Also it's illegal for an energy company to 'cut you off' so they have to keep supplying whether you pay or not. So the debt builds rather than cutting you off. However there's no way you would have built up a £274 debt without knowing about it. It would have told you every time you topped up the key, and the debt would have been displayed clearly on your meter. Sounds like a con to me! But give E.on a ring just to be safe, their customer service is actually good (surprising for a large company) and no I don't work for them!

@ Avonia - Virgin Media are completely incompetent, I wouldn't waste your time trying to get through to them. As for Moorcroft they are the lowest of the low. I think you might have made a mistake by phoning them at all, as now they will think they have you on the hook. Personally I haven't responded to a single one of their letters, and the latest one I got is showing them getting a bit desperate. Basically it says I've been passed on to their 'home collections' department. However the previous letter said that failure to pay will result in immediate legal action so the fact that they have now added another step to the process is just proof that they're bluffing. Although I was worried by the first couple of letters, I'm now 99% sure that they're nothing more than hot air. Let's face it they would never take legal action for £30 (which I don't even owe them) because as a small claim they would have to cover their own legal costs. Your debt of £150 is obviously higher than mine and it sounds like because you left a contract they might actually have grounds to prove the debt in court. But I highly doubt that they would take it further than threatening letters because of the fact that their legal costs would be higher than the £150 they would get from you if they won. My advice would be to completely ignore Moorcroft, it's working out OK for me so far. If you want to contact Virgin then keep trying but send all mail recorded delivery or they will ignore it. Also if you send mail recorded delivery you will have proof in case of the very tiny chance they take you to court, then your recorded letters will guarantee you win the case. Remember they're not allowed to chase a debt which is in dispute!

Thanks for the advice. There's nothing on my credit report, and I will write a complaint to VM when I get home. I'm loath to write to Moorcroft as they don't know my address (they don't even spell my name properly) and I would like to keep it that way. I'm wondering if it ever went any further I could just deny all knowledge of their threats since it's all going to my mother's address and there's no way they can prove she forwarded anything to me...

Because I didn't want to bump a dead thread. And also a letter from legal services is pretty scary to someone like me, I'm not yet an experienced CAGGER! I really want some help on this matter as I'm fairly intimidated to be honest.

As a follow up to my thread: "Receiving threats from Moorcroft on behalf of Virgin Media" (New member - I can't post links yet!) I have just received a letter from Midas Legal Services which reads as follows: Dear XXXX Re: VIRGIN MEDIA Balance £34.30 LITIGATION WARNING We are part of the Moorcroft Group and are aware that you have failed to reach a repayment agreement with Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd concerning the above account. We are now reviewing the account prior to the possible recommending of legal action by external solicitors acting on behalf of our clients. To prevent possible further action you must contact Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited at the following address. Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited P.O. Box 17 Moorcroft House 2 Spring Gardens Stockport SK1 4AJ Telephone Number: 0161 475 2810 Fax Number: 0161 477 3864 Failure to contact Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited by the 25/02/11 may result in the issue of legal proceedings without further notice. Yours sincerely Mr. X XXXX Litigation Manager Any words of advice / encouragement? I know the letter looks about as flimsy as a wet paper bag but do you think these clowns will actually man up and issue proceedings? I've already missed the payment date anyway since they send all the letters to the wrong address and it takes time for them to be forwarded..... So I guess I'll find out one way or the other in the not too distant future.

I decided to go down the "ignore" route, not out of laziness but out of principle. Why should I have to spend time and money sending recorded delivery letters to Virgin and Moorcroft in response to a debt which I do not recognise as valid, and about which Virgin have never themselves contacted me, or offered any kind of explanation. I'm not expecting this last letter to be the end of it, as I've read through some of the threads about Moorcroft and their endless desperate threats. However am I right in thinking that Virgin and Moorcroft have never actually gone past the threat of legal action and actually taken someone to court? Despite the fact that I would win the case, I don't have the time or patience for that!