I have number of plastering defects around the flat that i rent from Radian housing association. Im a complete failure when it comes to anything diy related so have asked if they would do it as i feel it falls under their responsibility as quoting from their online documents i would only be responsible for 'filling minor cracks in plaster'. The defects are several 'plaster pops' where the head of a nail/screw protrudes out the wall with a head of plaster on it giving a kind of roundish raised head of cracked plaster which protrudes when any weight is put on the wall. you cant just plaster over it it has to be excavated, re-screwed then plastered over. Also lot of joins in the plaster where one or both edges move independently creating an unsealable crack unless the boards are fastened properly and then re plastered. They have ofc said that this dosent fall under their responsibility which from experience they always say when they feel they will get away with it anyway Should i chase them up on this? Thanks.

Hello This is my first post here so I've tried not to witter on, but it's complicated. The situation is that I was evicted from my home last year when I couldn’t remortgage it after the interest-only mortgage expired. The circumstances don’t matter, I have no quarrel with that. My query relates to what came after. I had managed to dispose of a lot of stuff I didn’t want, but there was still a lot of stuff I did want, left in the property. I’m past retirement age, live alone, and am severely disabled: I cannot legally walk, I have severe spinal problems and a max award of DLA. Acenden have known this since the beginning of the proceedings. They refused me entry back into the house to deal with my property, despite my undertaking to comply with whatever conditions they imposed. They arranged for all my stuff to be packed up and moved into storage, and I’ve paid all the moving fees and a year’s storage costs. Because of my disabilities I was completely unable to inspect my property while it was in storage; even getting to the chosen storage facility was beyond me unless I had substantial help which wasn’t available. When I eventually unpacked everything in my new home, which has taken me the four months since I moved in, I’ve seen that the packaging was very poor, no attempt was made to protect any of my property, a box that had contained glassware and china was full of smashed and dangerous pieces of glass and porcelain; glazed pictures were simply stuffed into inadequate cardboard boxes, the frames mangled beyond recognition and the glass fronts all smashed. Other of my stuff had been so badly damaged as to be made useless and needed replacing (e.g. tumble drier), a long list of other stuff, including a valuable listed edition print and expensive camera kit, has been stolen. I’ve photographed everything that’s been damaged clearly showing the damage, and recording the very poor quality packaging and careless packing. Acenden also suggested to me that they could arrange disposal of stuff I didn’t want before the rest of my stuff was packed up, to which I agreed, provided a list, and their initiative and my agreement and identification of that property are evidenced by email exchanges. They didn’t follow through on the agreement, and I’ve spent removal and a year’s storage costs for their broken promise. Acenden took four months before they even put the house on the market. I have other complaints but my question here, is what is Acenden’s legal liability for the theft of and damage to my property that’s happened while it’s been in their custody. To say that the removers were negligent is an understatement, but I didn’t have a contract with them, Acenden did. I know I need to see a lawyer, but I’m just hoping to get a view here as the first appointment I can get is two weeks away. To say I’m very angry is putting it mildly. I’ve spoken to my insurers – fortunately I have contents insurance that will cover a claim provided I exhaust Acenden’s complaints procedures before I start that claim. Do Acenden have any liability to me for my loss, which amounts to over £10,000 on current replacement values? Thank you for any feedback. Gleneagle

I've been living in a block of four flats with a social housing provider. flat for was "privately owned". unfortunately she died and the property was "sold on". the new "owner" has made my life, and the two other tenants life a complete misery for 11 months with no end in site. Front door left wide open by builders resulting in missing post and parcels communual areas are a disgrace and are getting damaged-were paying a service charge for nowt they can start work at 6am working right through until 2am building materials dumped in basement,which I went flying on they climb on my roof and throw paint and plaster all over treess in a conservation area etc etc etc our social landlords has insisted for months "we are not the freeholder, we cant do anything" and that's that. so ive done some digging and as it transpires they ARE the freeholder, the new "owner" is a leaseholder. That means the social landlord has consistently lied to all of us on multiple occasions both verbally and in writing. the leasholder has also stated to me in writing and verbally to a neighbour "I'm the freeholder" but they are not!!! Its gotten to the point were I snapped .... the police were called and my doors smashe din to gain entry. Whos responsible here? my landlord does nothing and washes their hands of it. My neighbour has had her celing cave in twice owing to the works. She had to stay ina hotel for two weeks and was not reimbursed. the list of whats been going on goes on and on and on.

I would like to know how much help you would expect from a bank if cash was paid into an account found to be a fraudster. I thought they made enquiries into the receiving bank account over a certain amount of money.

Person in van decides highway code does not apply to him. Decides to drive on wrong side of road around a parked car on his side, and then drives all along the side of my car....and blames me. Despite the fact that he is clearly in the wrong he will not accpet any responsibility and my new car is wrecked. What next.

My brother received a notifications of a charge from UKCPM. Going back a few months he went on holiday, during this period he parked for considerably under the time he paid for in a UKCPM car park. He wrote to them flatly denying that any "offence" has occurred. They have now written back informing him that his "appeal" has been turned down. He says this wasn't an appeal. It was a complete and utter rejection of the notion that there was ever anything to appeal about. This is the enquiry that I am making on his behalf. He, being a charitable sort, thinks he may have entered the wrong registration number in their machine. They say that it was his responsibility to ensure that he enter the correct vehicle registration number in the machine. Is this true? Or does his responsibility begin and end with paying for the amount of time he was parked? ("parking charge" legality notwithstanding) Which he did. Amply. As I was writing this it occurred to me that they will know when he entered the car park, they will know when he left the car park, as they will have photographic evidence. They will thusly know how long he was there. They will know how much money was accrued on that day, via what numbers, and it would be a simple matter for them to check if this tallies with my brother's version of events. But- did he have to put the right number in or is this BS on their part? Just so as to know on next replying.

Hi all, I bought a car on 01/04/2016 from car sales trader for £500. After a week ABS fault light came on, exhaust blowing, brakes and 2 front tyres worn. Halford Health check said head gasket leaking oil, all brakes disc and pads needs changing, clutch worn. AA breakdown patrol man confirmed that clutch is worn (high) but not slipping. I paid to get exhaust replaced due to needing a car to work and school runs desperately. I paid a garage to use diagnostic equipment to check ABS warning light on dashboard. I spent these money before I learnt of clutch and oil leak issues. I don't mind spending to get brakes, tyres, and exhaust fixed but, clutch and oil is a no no and too expensive for me for a car which I purchase less than a month ago. Trader not polite on the phone, shouting and hanging up on me because, receipt/invoice stated non refundable, no warranty given or implied. Guys, do you think I have any leg to stand on concerning this matter. Many thanks for any help or suggestions.

One for the (Scottish ) legal eagles. Man & wife divorce and £750 put into their childs savings account. When it was set up, both parents had to administer the account. One parent has just discovered the other has systematically emptied the kids account over a six month period without prior consent or knowledge of the other parent. Police say it's not theft or mis appropriation of funds. Bank says T&C's were changed and this allowed one parent to administer the kids account. Other parent swears blind they were never notified of this change by the bank or would have taken appropriate action at that time. ( I know my bank notifies me of changes but letters arrive by normal post---not rec del etc) 1. Despite this being a despicable thing to do, has any crime been committed? 2.How does kid get money back? 3. Does the bank have any responsibility for this dastardly situation??

Hi everybody, I have a van Toyota Hiace from 2004. I bought it this summer (July) and from the beginning I regularly bring it to my garage. I spent around £700 in 7 months for maintenance. Initially I did a general service, i changed some mechanical parts, tyres, and recently I did the MOT. A couple of months ago the orange light of the oil turned on, i checked the oil and it was full. I spoked with my mechanic about it and about the fact that the van was doing some smoke at the start. The mechanic cleaned the filters and told me that the light was probably caused by an electric malfunction and that there was no risk in driving the van. On the 21 of December my colleague was driving the van when it stopped in the middle of the road and started to do a weird sound. After several trial the van started and he manage to reach home. When we went to the closest garage (which is not my usual) they say that we were running without oil and the engine failed and need to be replaced. I went to my garage and they confirmed that i need to replace the engine. The cost of my van is £2200 + the work done that are around £700. Replacing the engine with a second hand one is going to be around £600 work and £500 cost of engine. I would like to understand if my garage has some responsibilities on what happened. If I bring my van regularly there, I asked about the specific issue with the oil lights and they tell me that i can run without problems and after few weeks the engine get damage so badly that I have to replace it do they have any legal responsibility? Thank you. Filippo

Could a married partner with a joint account with the other partner be held legally responsible for the debts of the other ?

My family and I have lived in our property for almost 6 years. Over that time, our letting agents have failed to do any sort of maintainence on the property. Fixed cupboard doors, broken taps, peeling ceiling paper, have, over the years, been repaired by ourselves after countless and fruitless requests to the letting agent. Things weren't so bad up until last year. Our letting agent did do yearly checkups on the property, however this year, not only has this stopped, but they have failed to even respond to emails or phone calls. My main question is: As we've been living in the propery for this long, what is the landlord required to maintain and what should we take on ourselves? We have two children and we have been "living" in the property therefore this general wear and tear which after 6 years needs upkeep. The carpeting is extremely old and we were told by our letting agent that this would be replaced after 5 years of tenancy, however they now refuse to speak to. Apart from th is, there is a good deal of repainting needed, the skirting boards have all come loose on their own valition, the cupboard doors are fallng off and many more things needing minor repair. It has gotten so that I no longer feel the property is worth the rent that I pay for it! I am considering a letter to the agent stating that if repairs are not done I will be informing our landlord. The landlord is in fact one of our neighbors. Frustrated. Thanks.

Hi all, this may be a long one. We've been in our rented property for nearly 3 years (since August 2011). We rent privately from landlords who used to live in the property and have never been landlords before renting this house. A few months since we moved in, problems with the house started - damp patches, due to the balcony mostly, which they promptly got "sorted". The house was then less than 10 years old and all of the houses on the small estate had similar problems with damp, due to shoddy building work. The damp problem was never resolved despite "builders" being sent by the insurance company to sort the problem. It was always botched. Last year we noticed rain pouring (yes, pouring) through our bedroom window, and as Winter came it became so cold that we had to have the heating on so much more! Landlords were informed of every little thing and contacted their insurance company (because the house was still under warranty). Builders came, bodged it and left, time after time. Fast forward to the beginning of this month and the landlords are sick of it all. They've decided to wash their hands of it and put the house up for sale. They issued a section 21 (and it IS valid). We've found somewhere else and are moving in on the first July, we're having the carpets cleaned at current property, gardens manicured, we've done all minor repairs (replaced broken loo seat, touched up paint on walls etc). Landlady has now asked for us to sand down and treat all the window frames and paint every room the exact colour it was when we moved in! (Peach, yellow, dark blue etc). Well, we spent over £1000 decorating this place last year in neutral colours and the damp problems completely wrecked all our hard work. We spent £150 to get someone to come and repair the shed roof even though that is not our responsibility. We also had to get a plumber to come and repair the loo which cost £40 and last year the heating packed in and we got someone to come and repair it costing us £90. We informed landlady o all of this and she did not accept responsibility. The oil fired boiler hasn't been serviced at all in the 3 years we've been here but I realise this isn't a legal requirement. However the last month or so the three of us (me, husband and son) have all been feeling really ill when we've been at home. But when we're not here we feel ok. I wonder if this is possible carbon monoxide leak?

Please delete this thread, I'm worried about getting in trouble for asking you guys for advice.

Hello everyone, I was hoping for some advice. I have read a number of threads on this forum relating to the damage of goods/packages by couriers - who universally seem to want to wriggle and writhe out of any responsibility with pretty flimsy excuses. On this occasion, my issue lies squarely with Parcelforce. Let me set the context: About 4 weeks ago I sold a pair of Bose speakers for £80 on ebay. When the buyer received the speakers, there was a big-ish dent on the corner of the box and sure enough after opening the package part of the wooden speaker housing had been cracked and broken. I refunded the buyer and lodged a damaged goods claim with Parcelforce, which they have since denied on the basis that i hadn't packaged the speakers with enough protection - this is where I feel they are looking for an easy way out. To send the speakers I wrapped them individually in 3 layers of bubble wrap and put them both into a single corrugated cardboard box. Additionally, i put in a few extra layers of corrugated cardboard along the edges. They fit really snugly and could not move around at all. I sealed the box with duck tape, and also taped up the corners and all the joins on the cardboard box for extra strength. Finally I wrote "FRAGILE" on the box in big letters with a highlighter. All in all, I was confident that the package was sturdy and well protected from the normal bumps that happen in transit. I was told by parcelforce that bubblewrap was not an adequate protection, although according to their own packaging guidelines, bubblewarp is actually recommended. They also give the following as an excuse: "Parcelforce Worldwide is a bulk carrier shipping over 1 million items per week, much of the sorting process is handled by automated machinery. As such, while ‘Fragile’, ‘Handle With Care’ or ‘This Way Up’ labels will be adhered to by drivers and manual handlers, this will not be of assistance in relation to the machinated sorting processes." Surely whatever way they choose to handle parcels is nothing to do with the customer - a fundamental requirement of the sorting process that it should not cause damage to the parcels. I guess my main question is has anyone else encountered this defence from Parcelforce, and if so - how did you respond to them? Thanks for your time.

We park on the road outside our house, as we have no driveway. The neighbour across the road has a drive, and has a recently upgraded his car to a giant 4x4 on motability. When we're both parked outside, he has been having some difficulty getting into his drive, but usually manages it after a few minutes. The other morning, we found that my OH's car's tail light has been smashed, at the right height for the bumper of the 4x4 to have hit it, but all debris had been cleared away. Another set of neighbours says that they saw him attempting to enter his drive, and thought that they saw him bump the OH's car. We've asked him if he did it, but he denies all responsibility. We cannot discount the possibility that he didn't cause the damage, but it seems likely that he did. We've had to repair the car at our cost. I'm guessing this comes down to honesty and decency, or lack thereof (i.e. hard luck), but does anyone think we have any recourse to leverage him? A CC Claim would likely be thrown out by a judge for lack of evidence. Chalk it up to experience and leave the issue?

hello, We have been in a property for a year now, when we first moved in there was no TV (we provided one) although when we were shown around the land lord confirmed there was an aerial. The aerial is not listed in our itinerary. However after we moved in we realised that the aerial cable was damaged (water travels through the inside of the aerial cable from the exterior into our living room in wet weather) When we first asked the landlady if it was possible to repair this she said ok no problem, but now ( a year after we first asked) she is refusing to take responsibility. Although she has offered for someone to arrange to rip the cable out- if we would prefer. We were wondering, as the flat was rented to us supposedly with a TV aerial connection, if we were responsible for repairing the aerial. Our tenancy agreement does say that the landlord must: keep in reasonable repair the fixtures, furniture, equipment and effects . Does this include the tv aerial cable? It feels like the landlord is just being spiteful (we are two young girls who keep the property well, always pay rent and have had very little contact with the landlord to date), if she does rip out the aerial the property will have to be leased next time without a TV point. Which does seem like cutting off her nose to spite her face. Any help would be appreciated. thanks

Hi there I rent a commercial premises and recently my boiler has stopped working so I have no heating and hot water. I reported this to the landlord who sent a handyman to come and look at it - he did and said a registered gas safe plumber would need to come and look at it as he couldn't figure out the problem. He then told me that I would have to contract and pay said plumber as whilst they maintain boilers in the residential properties they have they don't in the commercial. I have checked over my lease and there is nothing in there about me being responsible for the boiler, in fact there is nothing in there regardin me being responsible for any fixtures and fittings except that I must decorate in the last year of my lease unless it has been done in the previous 12 months. I've had a plumber who didn't charge a call out fee come and look at it and he says the fault is actually electrical so I need an electrician but his opinion is that I am not responsible for paying for this as the boiler is not mine - he also said it's the landlords responsibility to ensure the boiler is correctly working for the tennant by getting an annual landlord certificate, which they are supposed to provide to me - they haven't. I've tried googling the subject and all I can seem to find relates to domestic property which says the landlord is responsible. Does anyone have any expererience or insight into the legalities of commercial lettings? Thanks in advance Andie x

01 October 2013 Payday loan advertising has recently been thrown into the spotlight following the OFT’s compliance review and mounting public concerns about the sector. We’ve highlighted some of the key areas to consider when creating advertising for short term loans - make sure your ads are socially responsible. Speed and Ease It is understandable that marketers will want to highlight the advantages of their product, including the simplicity of the application process and the speed at which consumers can access funds. But speed and ease of access should be referred to responsibly and proportionally. Advertisers should avoid heavily promoting these aspects of a loan while downplaying less positive aspects and should not otherwise encourage consumers to rush a decision to borrow money. The ASA has previously upheld a complaint against an ad that emphasised the speed at which a loan could be obtained at all times of the day. Similarly the claim "I was turned down by the mainstream lenders. I wish I'd gone to Pounds to Pockets first, because their application was fast and simple" was deemed misleading and socially irresponsible, because it portrayed Pounds to Pocket as preferable to "mainstream lenders" by placing disproportionate emphasis on the loans being "fast and simple" despite their interest rates being significantly higher. Trivialisation Marketers should be careful to ensure that the tone and content of their advertising does not make light of or play down the seriousness of taking out a loan. Recently the ASA indicated that using a catchy and upbeat soundtrack was not necessarily problematic but, in another case, it noted that a combination of light-hearted background music, colourful imagery, laughter, and a character dressed in a nonsensical manner gave the general impression that the service offered was a trivial one. The ASA has also upheld against ads that used brightly coloured cartoon imagery, a fantasy character and references to magic because it gave the general impression that the service offered was one that could be approached in a light-hearted manner. Vulnerable groups Simply stating that loans are available to low income groups, for example people on benefits, is likely to be acceptable. However targeting people who could be perceived as vulnerable has the potential to be problematic. The ASA recently upheld complaints against an ad featuring Kerry Katona, a celebrity who previously had widely reportedly financial problems. It believed that the ad had the potential to encourage vulnerable viewers with financial problems or restricted credit to seek to resolve them through the payday loan service and concluded that the ad was therefore irresponsible. Purpose of loan Advertisers should avoid referring to frivolous purchases when marketing short term loans – the ASA has upheld complaints about ads that implied they were suitable for nights out, shopping or holidays. References to household expenses such as a broken boiler or car repairs are likely to be acceptable. In the past the ASA has accepted that references to Christmas spending and home decoration are reasonable. APRs While technical details such as APRS are regulated by the FCA in non-broadcast advertising, the ASA is responsible for ensuring adherence to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended) and the Consumer Credit (Advertisements) Regulations 2010 in broadcast ads. There have been a number of upheld adjudications against TV ads that have failed to state APRs sufficiently prominently. While some concerned relatively straightforward issues such as the legibility of on-screen text, others related to more complex rules related to various triggers for information. Advertisers should be aware of claims that will trigger the need for an APR, and the prominence required. For further details see the OFT website. As always, the Copy Advice team is happy to help with any questions on non-broadcast ads. You can call us on 0207 492 2100 or submit your copy online, here.

During recent weather, the fence between us and a neighbour came down, and it looked like the base of the fence posts had rotted away a little. The posts were on their side. They tore down the entire fence, not just the damaged section, and replaced, putting fence posts on our side. They're now asking us to contribute towards the costs they incurred. We did not consent to the work, nor to the style of fence. Are we obliged to contribute? Morally, should we? We have no relationship with next door. With the fence posts now on our side, does this then give us responsibility for maintaining the fence, or is responsibility outlined on the deeds?

Hello All, I wonder if you smart people can give me a bit of advice. My mother in law recently purchased an LG TV from Ebuyer. It arrived fine and worked for a few days. However within less than 10 days of arrival the item fizzed and smoked, which is obviously an electric fault/issue, it failed and had no picture. She turned it off and unplugged it because it was a fire risk. She called Ebuyer the next day to explain her issue and was told to contact LG for a reference number and then to contact them back to get an RMA number to return the item, and they would arrange to collect the item from her through their couriers. She told Ebuyer that she did not have the original box, obviously she didn't anticipate this issue ( she's old ) and therefore she didn't have original box. She was told that as long as she 'sufficiently' packaged the tv for returned that they would arrange a new one, fix it or refund it. Both she and my husband 'sufficiently' packaged the item with newspapers, bin bags, cardboard to protect it, and then placed all that in a tight fitting box and ensured that all angles were covered. The couriers came to collect the item and promptly throw it into the back of the van and started to throw other things on top. Then a couple of days later she gets an email to say that the item was damaged during transit and therefore invalidates the warranty and that they will not be looking into any other issues and sending her back the tv. As you can imagine, she paid £300 for a telly, which had an electrical fault, but Ebuyer are using the excuse that even though their own contacted couriers damaged the item, that she is responsible and therefore will not be covered by any warranty. Surely this cannot be right? 'Sufficient' packaging is subjective for a start. My mother in law did not send the item back through her own means but their the contract courier of Ebuyer. No where in the terms and conditions, returns policy nor on any emails does it state that any items not returns as per their 'returns guide' will invalidate the warranty. Surely any cosmetic damages made by their courier cannot be the responsibility of my mother in law? And lastly, the so called 'cosmetic' damage by the courier does not negate the fact that the item was faulty in the first place. My mother in law has made a claim through paypal whom she paid through. We want to fight this all the way. Surely the law assumes that the item must be of satisfactory quality and fit for purpose and of course it could not have been at the time of purchase when an electrical fault happened within days of purchase.Also the item was of course a safety hazard as it started to smoke. That is not normal for any television. this is their returns policy: http://www.ebuyer.com/help/returns it has their guidelines and returns policy. I see nothing about invalidation of warranty or that the buyer is responsible for the safe return of faulty goods. And surely guidelines are just that... guidelines. No where does it say you MUST return items in a specific way.It's all full of should's, we recommend etc....surely they cannot contact someone to something that is not in their terms and conditions? Any help or information you can give us we would be grateful.

Hi, I'm trying to resolve this issue with a PCN that has gone to Bailiffs for parking without a Blue Badge issue, (because the BB fell from the dashboard) on behalf of my partner and i would like to know if anyone is able to clarify 1- Who has the actual responsibility over this PCN under the law... Is it the Owner, Keeper or Driver? and 2- point me towards the legislation and/or case law that supports this? I am asking this because 3- i was wondering if it is still possible to submit a late TE9 appeal to the court on the basis that the notice to owner and/or PCN was never actually served to the owner? 4- And has anyone tried this before? Thanks in advance for the help.

Hello I have a car on finance and in the weeks before Christmas it went wrong and cost us £650 then less than a week later it needed two further tyres (another £230). I called the finance co to see if they would be willing to help with costs / reduce payments as obviously this was a big expense and they advised that there was nothing that they could do but that if it went wrong again, they could possibly give us a loan to help. Sure enough a week later, I was advised that the front alloy had two cracks in and shouldn't be driven on.. the cost for a replacement.. £350 I phoned finance co about a loan and they kept fobbing me off, eventually someone helped and put me through to the underwriters to submit the loan request. To cut a long story short, they never phoned back and when i eventually spoke to the right man, he advised that he wouldn't give us a loan as we probably hit the wheel going too fast over a pot hole!!! I said that regardless of how it happened i needed help and that he really should have phoned and told me this when i first left a message as Id been driving on my spare wheel waiting to hear from him! He was so unbelievably rude and, it turned out that the loan request that was put through was for a new car and not for a small loan so that probably wont look good on my credit report!!!!!!!!! My question is: Do finance companies have any responsibility to help with the repair costs of (their!) cars? We have had cars on finance before with other companies and they have helped us. We will be exercising our right to VT the car in August when we are half way through the agreement and I certainly wont be using them again! Id rather buy a £200 car and suffer than give them my interest! Thanks for reading

Dear all. Great to have found this forum. Im really hoping I can find some sort of direction. My problem has been on going for about 4 months now, almost from day one of purchasing the car. Its a Toyota Celica 2006 model. To cut a very long story short here ..... the car was purchased, knowingly by me, with non standard alloys. However, from day one I noticed issues with handling. This was reported several times to the garage. After the first recall I was told that there was nothing wrong but also that a 4 wheel alignment check had been done. This turned out to be untrue. I did not receive any paperwork clarifying this. On the second recall I was told the car was ok still, but a (another) 4 wheel alignment check had been done and found some adjustment was needed, proven with the steering wheel now pointing straight. I can only assume that the first time it was not done as they indicated. Problem still there . .. basically the car feels unstable when at speeds above 50mph and tends to wander and jump depending on road conditions. Having done my own investigations, Ive since learned that the tyres are over stretched on the wheels which are in turn not the correct size for the car. The tyres are the original and true size stretched over wheels 30mm wider than standard. When I reported this to the garage they told me that the car was safe and that "their" tyre centre said the tyres fitted (205s) would be what they would fit on these wheels (8J). This must be untrue as I have since been to this tyre centre and they have told me that they would not fit this size tyre to that wheel and put this in writing. I have since learned that should the correct tyre size be fitted to this wheel (235s) then it would clash with the bodywork in certain conditions. Therefore I take it this makes the car unsafe. The garage concerned are not accepting responsibility for this whatsoever, even though clearly they have been lying and avoiding communication from both myself and the finance company who "own" the car. What I could do with knowing is am I in the right here. Yes, I accept I knew the wheels were non standard, but is it my responsibility to check they are correct for the car? Surely this is the garage's responsibility to ensure that the wheels (and car are fit for the purpose it was sold for and therefore if the wheels are too big than the manufacturer recommend would that not be their call? Or is this my call simply because I new the wheels where non standard. The tyres are too narrow for the wheel so there is not enough grip on the road, therefore making it unstable. Any advice would be very much appreciated. Im about to go to Trading Standards on this, but if anyone here knows anything then please do advise. Thank you Martin (Oxford)

Hi, My mother in law past away yesterday. After her death my wife came to know that her mother was in debt. some thing she never discussed with my wife. Now we are concerned about her debt and the effect it will have on my father in law. As my mother in law always dealt with all money related issues, my father in law is not sure exactly how much debt she was in and with whom. Our biggest concern at this moment his there house. Both my parents in law were pensioners. I wonder if some one could guide me where should i start first, will my father in law will be liable for his wife's debt? Will he lose his house if he is unable to pay back? Does he have any rights as he is a retired pensioner. I do know that they were refused IVA or IVF (not sure which is correct) due to there age. Much appreciate any ones help. Thanks

My parents recently had their Council house renovated by the Council. They made a complete mess of their home which they have spent years and lots of their own hard earned money improving. They are Pensioners and have retired. Basically, during the renovations, their fridge had to be moved several times by workmen, which, in doing so caused damage to it. They were left without a Fridge for the best part of two weeks and had to fork out £300 for a new one. Albeit their old Fridge was some years old, but it was in excellent working order and was clearly damaged by the workmen moving it. Have submitted a complaint but the Council point out that they will not be paying up as they sent a letter out prior to work being carried out saying that they would not be held responsible for any damage. This I think is a complete farce and insult. They are clearly liable for the damage. Anyway, just wondering what is the best steps to take to reclaim cost for a new Fridge and the inconvenience caused by my parents not having a Fridge for 2 weeks. Personally I think the Council are complete and utter **** for doing this and my Parents are willing to take this all the way through to small claims court and the local media as this is totally unacceptable. The bit that got me was the fact they say they are not liable as they said so in the letter they couldn't be held liable for any damage. Next we are going to have burglars write letters to their prospective victims saying that they won't be held responsible for breaking in and damaging their homes. See where I am coming from, just aint right!