Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'sets'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - you need to register to access the CAG library
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 5 results

  1. i have been dealing with housing options as well. this is about my landlord misleading me from the start with fraudulent tenancies. ie 1 making me pay a bond and months total £600 for my own tenancy in a two tenancy house 2 making me sign and witness the other tenants tenancy and £600 when, in actual fact, he had not paid a bond or months rent at all. i was told this three months later by the landlord in a recorded meeting 3 the landlord did not protect my bond and as a result of this, I am in a horrendous position 4 the landlord returned my bond 2 months after i paid it and then claimed that the tenancys signed were now actually a single shared tenancy 5 making me responsible for the other tenants debts 6 the landlord is now lying to the court in claims against me which i want to defend 7 he has mislead the court about arrears (that i was not in) etc etc housing options have applied for legal aid on my behalf. legal aid said i should apply for legal help but housing options applied for more legal aid and were granted full aid they say the notice the landlord gave me is wrong but they dont seem at all interested that the landlord commited fraud in the creation of the tenancies and the way i see it is that housing options are assisitng the landlord in misleading the court because if the tenancys were fraudulent, the landlord should be being investigated and housing options should be challenging the landlord about this and disclosing this to the court in the public interest. i believe when looking at the solicitors code of conduct, that fusion housing should be looking into this and not just seemingly trying to process me into alternative accomodation i asked fusion housing for a copy of the court bundle documents and have been told that i will need to make a data subject access request that will take 40 days to process if i want to see my own court documents. this is unhelpful as i am due in court on september 5th, in a couple of weeks. i would like to withdraw my permission for them to act for me and i would like to represent myself in court i need to make a notice of acting in person letter but am unfamiliar with the correct procedure to follow i understand the court can only allow me 40 or so days extra in the house. but really i want to defend the allegations the landlord is making against me. i have a solid defence fusion housing have said that i dont need to defend the landlords POC. as far as im concerned they are his particulars of claim and if i dont defend them i am allowing them to be on the court record. i really dont feel comfortable with the way this is bieng handled and the way housing options have seemingly taken over and are proceeding with my case i am alarmed to see that the solicitor is earning between £56 to £200 + an hour. i have no idea what they are doing with my file or what is happening i have asked to see my file and am now asking for a copy of the court documents. both are not forthcoming. any help or advice would be very much appreciated. housing options have applied for legal aid on my behalf. legal aid said i should apply for legal help but housing options applied for more legal aid and were granted full aid they say the notice the landlord gave me is wrong and that they will be representing me at court but they dont seem at all interested that the landlord commited fraud in the creation of the my tenancy. i find that alarming i understand the court can only allow me 40 or so days extra in the house and am desperately looking for alternative accomodation. fusion housing have said that i dont need to defend the landlords POC. as far as im concerned they are his particulars of claim and if i dont defend them i am allowing them to be on the court record. i really dont feel comfortable with the way this is bieng handled and the way housing options have seemingly taken over and are proceeding with my case i am alarmed to see that the solicitor is earning between £56 to £200 + an hour. i have no idea what they are doing with my file or what is happening i asked fusion housing for a copy of the court bundle documents and have been told that i will need to make a data subject access request that will take 40 days to process if i want to see my own court documents. this is unhelpful as i am due in court on september 5th, in a couple of weeks. can i do an acting in person letter to the court and charity and get some control back over my file? how many sets of wet signatures should there be when signing one contract? I am asking this because my landlord says there is only one contract attached to this house. when i signed my contract, i was lead to believe that the other tenant had a contract as well as me. both contracts were signed and witnessed. the landlord took them away to copy them i would have thought that if there was only one contract then there should be only one set of signatures there is something wrong here as there are now three copies of signed tenancies. each one has a different set of signatures. the landlord has them all but I have copies. I dont remember signing 3 contracts and my signature looks very odd in contract 3 ( which the landlord has submitted to court as the main contract) the reason i think there is something wrong here is because each one shows that a bond and months rent of £600 were paid at the signing of the tenancies and each one has been signed separately. it is clear to see as the signatures are not identical, so there were different tenancies that were signed does that mean these tenancies say there was 1800 paid to the landlord at the start of the tenancies or just £600? is this one tenancy or three? when i signed my tenancy, i paid £600.(bond and rent) the landlord now claims that there was one tenancy and that it is a joint tenancy when i signed my tenancy, the landlord and other tenant lead me to believe that he had paid £600 as well and i was asked to sign and witness his tenancy. i found out three months later that the other tenant had not paid anything at the start of the tenancys and i have been mislead from the start the landlord returned my bond after two months and did not protect it. when i gave it him back he tried to say he wasnt taking a bond and the £300 he took back was for the other tenants rent but later changed his mind i believe at that point the tenancys were changed and bonds altered , i became liable for the other tenants debts the other tenant had lived here for a few years before i moved in there was already a bond on the house when i moved in. the old bond was then repaid to the tenant after i moved in even though the tenant was in arrears and there were outstanding repairs when i moved in. when i signed and witnessed the new tenancys the tenant did not pay a bond or months rent but i was lead to believe he had by both of them because they had filled the tenancys to show he had paid £600. in reality, the other tenant was in debt at the start of the new tenancys and they had both lied to me now the landlord says it was just one tenancy and we are joint tenants and he wants his house back if it really was one tenancy why are there so many versions and why was i the only one who paid anything? i feel i was used from the start to get the old bond returned to the old tenant so that the landlord could get him out. the old tenant is heavily in debt and has made no attempt to pay rent or bills. the landlord has allowed this to happen and made no attempt to rectify this. i have been paying my rent and was paying the bills ( his debts!) although i cant access data about the accounts. the bills were in the other tenants name before i moved in. the landlord didnt change this. i believe there were already debts before i moved in and this is why they stayed in the old tenants name. the landlord has been free to manipulate all this and i am finding it difficult to get help or advice regarding the validity of the signed contract or contracts and i am confused as to where i stand. i realise the landlord can ask for his house back at any time but i think the way this has been done is very wrong. i would never have left my old home to be on a joint tenancy anyway and especially with someone who was already in debt i have repeatedly tried to discuss the tenancy, rent, bills and bond with the landlord. i started recording the visits. the landlord was doing monthly inspections and coming without notice. i was being bullied by them both. here is an extract of a recording of a visit without notice from the landlord where the bond was discussed. when the landlord gave me the £300 bond back in january, i gave it straight back to him. he took the money away but did not leave a reciept. I paid my rent into the bank a few days later. (AA is the landlord, AR is me.) ....... AA this is what I'm gonna do right, this is what I think should happen, yeah? So this £250, right, that you already put in and this £50 AR £300 AA is £300 right. By all rights yeah That money is next months money for you, yeah AR or my bond AA I'm not taking a bond. I cant take a bond right. You have a month or two months I think under the - that's why within two months I came to see you before the end of two months AR two months? You've 14 days to pay the bond in AA right so AR to the bond bank, but you didn't tell me for two months AA. yeah so it didn't happen. Yeah AR I could have got somewhere else AA yeah so it didn't happen, right but just hear me out here yeah? Look, I couldn't put it into the bond account because Mark, yeah ? Rightly or wrongfully, wrongfully, he didn't give me the money yeah? So that's why I said, sod it, give it back. There you go yeah? So the bond is, is, forget the bond, I'm not taking a bond off ya. like I says to ya, here, you know, foolish me or whatever, but, you know, I think that's my perogative" here is another extract regarding the bond .......... AR ...so had that tenancy ended then? AA it abso.., yes it ended, yeah. That's why you signed a new tenancy agreement with Mark AR Right, but why did only me have to pay a bond? AA right so you both had to pay a bond but unfortunately Mark was in rent arrears and he didn't have no money to, to, to kind of pay the rent or the bond money so that's when, remember when you? We, we, we took down, you gave me half of the bond money and to which later on I, I, I just gave that back to you because obviously it was quite clear Mark didn't have the money to pay the bond money so we gave that back" I feel that they have both really taken advantage of me and the whole thing about the tenancys and bonds is causing me great distress. I am trying to fully grasp what is/has happened here and how it will affect me.
  2. The FSA has set out how the Financial Conduct Authority will decide whether it is fair to publish an early warning notice about a firm or individual who is subject to an ongoing enforcement investigation. The FSA has today published a consultation paper on the FCA’s policy for publishing warning notices. The publication stage of possible regulatory action was brought forward in 2010 from when an enforcement case was concluded to the decision notice stage, after the firm or individual has had an opportunity to respond to the warning notice. Under the new regulatory structure, the FCA will have powers to publish at the earlier warning notice stage. The power will only apply to disciplinary procedures such as proposals to fine, suspend or censure a firm or individual, and will not apply to plans to ban an individual or withdraw or cancel permissions. Decisions to publish a warning notice will be taken by the Regulatory Decisions Committee, which acts as an independent body and as the first part of the regulator’s appeals process. The consultation sets out the FCA will not publish a warning notice if it would be unfair to the person whom the regulator is looking to take action against; prejudicial to the interests of consumers; or detrimental to the stability of the financial system. The FSA proposes the FCA will publish that it is taking action, but will not specify the level of any proposed fine. Those who want to argue against publication on the grounds of unfairness would have to prove publication could materially affect their health, result in a disproportionate loss of income or livelihood, prejudice criminal proceedings to which they are a party or give rise to some other equal degree of harm. The FSA says: “The principal purpose of the power is to promote early transparency of enforcement proceedings. Its introduction marks a real departure from the previous regulatory regime and is a bold move towards more transparent and open regulation. “Both the financial services industry and consumers will be able to understand the types of behaviour the FCA considers acceptable at an earlier stage, which in turn will strengthen the FCA’s continuing enforcement strategy of credible deterrence.” Link: http://www.mortgagestrategy.co.uk/latest-news/fsa-sets-out-when-early-warning-notices-will-be-published/1067947.article
  3. HSBC has reported a £13.7bn pre-tax profit for 2012 as the bank was hit by further misselling provisions of £1.5bn and its £1.2bn fine from US regulators last year The bank saw profits fall 5.5 per cent last year, down from £14.4bn in 2011. The bank has set aside an extra £1.5bn in 2012 to cover compensation payments for the misselling of financial products, including £1.1bn to cover costs related to the misselling of payment protection insurance and £397m to cover costs relating to the misselling of interest-rate swaps. In total, HSBC has set aside £1.6bn to settle PPI-related claims. HSBC also had to pay a £1.2bn fine from US regulators last year to settle a money-laundering inquiry. Total group revenue fell 5.6 per cent from £72.8bn to £68.3bn. The group’s core tier 1 capital ratio increased from 10.1 per cent in 2011 to 12.3 per cent in 2012. HSBC’s European division made a £2.3bn loss in 2012, due to a £2.7bn write down in its own debt. The previous year it made a £3bn profit. In the UK, the bank lent £16.4bn to mortgage customers in 2012, up 24 per cent on the £13.2bn lent in 2011 and £4bn more than its original commitment of £15bn of new mortgage lending in 2012. The bank approved £19bn in total in 2012. The bank had a 12 per cent share of the UK mortgage market as at the end of 2012, up from 10 per cent a year earlier. Group chief executive Stuart Gulliver says: “Although reported pre-tax profit fell by 6 per cent to US$20.6bn [£13.7bn] in 2012, underlying profit, which includes the impact of fines and penalties and UK customer redress provisions totalling US$4.3bn, grew by 18 per cent. This was primarily due to revenue growth, notably in global banking and markets and commercial banking, and lower loan impairment charges in North America. We regard this as a good performance.” Link: http://www.mortgagestrategy.co.uk/latest-news/hsbc-posts-137bn-profit-but-sets-aside-extra-15bn-for-misselling/1067038.article
  4. Europe's largest bank has also reserved a further £500m for PPI claims http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20202586
×
×
  • Create New...