Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • CCA regulated debts cannot be enforced by HCEO's at all now. however even if they COULD be. no bailiff, whatever their type, on consumer debt judgements, have ANY right to force entry ...you simple IGNORE THEM.  
    • Thank you 😊  Just wanted to prepare myself mentally incase they pull out some rabbit out of a hat with these bodyshops as they will most likely be places they've used regularly in the past and over 150miles away from where I am.
    • I see the Brexit-ish are again delaying  implementing their 'grate deal' 'protecting the UKs borders' that they pressed through with the wholehearted support of MPs like smugg - who is now one of the main moaners saying this inflation raising and business destroying 'great deal'  shouldn't be implemented. Of course 3 of the benefits of NOT implementing the Brexitish grate deal as the Brexitish negotiated are:   1. Less UK businesses will collapse 2. UK inflation NOT increased by 0.6% (hence fiddling the figures to us scraping NOT being in a Brexit generated recession) 3. The problems will be dumped in labours lap after the GE   "Analysis by specialist credit insurance firm Allianz Trade said the removal of tariffs on the goods would reduce inflation by 0.6 percentage points, and cut import costs by close to 7 billion pounds ($8.8 billion) in nominal terms."   reuters.com WWW.REUTERS.COM     https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-economy-grows-by-01-february-2024-04-12/   Rees-Mogg warns post-Brexit border charges could be inflationary WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM According to reports, Britain faces a £2 billion post-Brexit bill on European food imports from the end of the month.  
    • Sorry just get worried that they will make my life harder than they already have lol   Bought the car around 12th Sept 2022 for £78,000 from clinkard cars.   Performance, Prestigious and Specialist cars in Romsey, Hampshire | Clinkard Performance Cars WWW.CLINKARDCARS.CO.UK Performance, Prestigious and Specialist cars Dealers in Romsey, Hampshire Was a 2019 Range Rover with 25k miles, £20k deposit at £750pm pcp over a 4 year period.   Finance company are alphera (bmw finance) spoke to them in October 2023 about the damage my bodyshop advised me of but they told me to deal with the dealership. Paid for the repair myself as I was told the extended warranty I paid for (recommended through dealer) wouldn't cover it as it was an existing fault and not mechanical breakdown. When I got the £40k offer from the dealership they still didn't want to get involved unless I got an independent inspection done. Used Elite Forensic inspections as they seem highly rated online (more comprehensive than your average AA inspection). I just looked online for thr best inspections for customers eho hsbe alre purchased the car. Their report was super comprehensive over like 50 pages of text and photos. Comparisons to the advert photos against what the inspector saw made in clear that the damage was before I purchase it. Got the report back 10th Jan 2024 and couldn't believe that they'd picked up the level of accident the car had been in and raised an official complaint through Alphera, they couldn't come to a decision with 8 weeks so raised with FOS. Around the 7th March 2024. Small issues started within the first week of purchasing like ambient light not working on the side the car was hit and car randomly switching off completely when I'd stop at traffic lights/junctions. Dealers eventually got this sorted which I appreciate, but doesn't change the fact that they didn't check the car as well as I'd been told it had been checked and they'd sold me an accident repaired car and initially tried to say all cars have had paint due to stone chips etc. Also turns out the car had only had 1 service before I serviced the car in mid 2023 (when the service light came on the car).   So far Clinkard have had my car for nearly a month (so my wife and I hsve had yo share cars since), they've said we've taken the far to 2x garages so far to inspect it and got 1 more garage to take it to. Currently refusing to tell me what those 2 garages have said so far with the attitude of because you've gone through FOS we have to follow the correct channels and respond to the complaint through them which is quite annoying.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Tenancy Deposit Scheme??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5760 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

This is not a problem per se, just want to see what the CAGers think of this.

 

I read the thread on this not long ago and today I re-read my tenancy agreement (just for the banter) and now I wonder, should me deposit be in this scheme?

 

We payed our deposit on May 2006 and moved in shortly after (deposit was £1125 altogether). The tenancy expired in May 2007 and shortly before that we went down to the letting agents and re-signed another 1 year contract. We never paid any deposit this time because the letting agency still had our first deposit. The new tenancy agreement is different to the first one and it is quite clearly a new contract and not a roll over from the old one but it has a few discrepancies that make me think that it is just a standard print out with our address added at the top.

 

There are paragraphs that state "upon initial entry to the property the tenants must...." and one that says "...will only be dealt with by the landlord within 14 days of initial occupation of the property", no acknowledgement that we are the same tenants who moved her last year.

 

Because our new agreement started in May 2007 should our deposit have been put into one of these Tenant Deposit Schemes? How do we find out if it has or not? There's no mention of the deposit on the new contract save the bit that says it will be returned within 6 weeks of us leaving the property.

Any posts submitted here on the Consumer Action Group under the user name GlasweJen may not necessarily be the view of the poster, CAG or indeed any normal person.

 

I've become addicted to green blobs (I have 2 now) so feel free to tip my scales if I ever make sense.;-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I already have. I'm asking because there's no documents about a change in the way the deposit was kept and because the actual monies changed hands in 2006.

Any posts submitted here on the Consumer Action Group under the user name GlasweJen may not necessarily be the view of the poster, CAG or indeed any normal person.

 

I've become addicted to green blobs (I have 2 now) so feel free to tip my scales if I ever make sense.;-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have recently had this confirmed by senior housing law practicioner; new contract equals deposit protection, irrelevant on when the money changed hands. Additionally, there is no requirement to put the information about how the deposit is held in a tenancy agreement.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I already have. I'm asking because there's no documents about a change in the way the deposit was kept and because the actual monies changed hands in 2006.

 

Then you will see from the TDS sticky that the agents/LL are in breach of TDS requirements.

 

Lets get some facts;

 

- Who did you pay the deposit to in 2006 - the landlord or an agent?

- Is the Landlord/Agent the same Landlord/Agent that you paid the deposit to in 2006?

- Do you have a recipt showing that you actually paid the deposit? (useful but not essential!.

- Are you 100% sure that you dont have the required details of the TDS as set out in the sticky?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read this thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/tenants/117280-tenancy-deposit-scheme.html

 

Joa advises me that a deposit paid before 6 April 2007 is protected by the Housing Act 2004 (the Tenancy Deposit Scheme) if the tenancy is formally renewed on or after that date, by the signing of a new tenancy agreement.

 

To find out whether your landlord has complied, consult your doormat! If no letter complying (containing the prescribed notice in other words) fell onto it through the post within the 14 days, then the landlord is in breach of the Act.

 

If your landlord failed to comply with the Act within the 14 day limit, the consequences for him will be quite severe, as outlined in that thread.

 

Warning: if you sue the landlord for the penalty of £3,375.00 imposed by the Act, expect trouble! It is a course of action to take AFTER you have moved out, not while you are still in the landlord's clutches.

 

 

 

Advice & opinions on this forum are offered informally, without any assumption of liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting

- Who did you pay the deposit to in 2006 - the landlord or an agent? Letting agent

- Is the Landlord/Agent the same Landlord/Agent that you paid the deposit to in 2006?

Yes

- Do you have a recipt showing that you actually paid the deposit? (useful but not essential!. Yes we have a reciept from 2006

- Are you 100% sure that you dont have the required details of the TDS as set out in the sticky? Absolutely, we have all the documents in a folder and there is nothing mentioning the deposit except the reciept and that one paragraph in the agreement.

We have only ever had mail from the letting agents once and that was to advise of our HMO inspection from the council.

Is all this going to cause problems when we move out next year?

Any posts submitted here on the Consumer Action Group under the user name GlasweJen may not necessarily be the view of the poster, CAG or indeed any normal person.

 

I've become addicted to green blobs (I have 2 now) so feel free to tip my scales if I ever make sense.;-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its going to cause problems for someone!!!

 

From what you have posted, a new AST has been signed after the start of TDS, therefore 100% sure it should have been placed in a scheme. Not only should it have been placed in a scheme, you should have been provided with certain details of said scheme within 14 days of handing your deposit over.

 

When you leave you will have the oppurtunity to sue who ever was responsible for putting the deposit in the TDS (could be LL or Agent depending on whats written in your AST - looks to be the LL from your first post).

 

The AST cant overide whats clearly written in statute by claiming as the depsoit was given pre-april 2007 it doesnt have to be put in a TDS. Thats why the act talks about a new ATS rather than a new deposit, to avoid just such get out clauses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks planner, all this was done through the letting agency, from what we know the landlord is an elderly woman who currently lives in Ireland and doesn't want her flat left empty.

Any posts submitted here on the Consumer Action Group under the user name GlasweJen may not necessarily be the view of the poster, CAG or indeed any normal person.

 

I've become addicted to green blobs (I have 2 now) so feel free to tip my scales if I ever make sense.;-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

a new AST has been signed after the start of TDS, therefore 100% sure it should have been placed in a scheme. Not only should it have been placed in a scheme, you should have been provided with certain details of said scheme within 14 days of handing your deposit over.

beautifully put :) and absolutely correctimondo

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Hi,

 

I have just discovered this '14 day' clause in the TDS. We have not received anything from our LA way past 14 days from handing over the money. I know this may be a silly question, but would it void things if you did contact them and request these details, if you then still planned to take them to the small claims court.

 

I only ask this because i;d like to know our deposit was safe but also have had so much trouble with our LA that Id definately like to take them to court for all the other trouble they have caused.

 

Would really appreciate any help on this

 

thanks

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lee - in future please create your own thread.

 

It doesnt void it, but it forewarns them - they will then have opportunity to put the deposit in a scheme, and given by existing cases there is no certainty that a judge will see the 14 day limit as absolute - there is evidence to think that judges will be on the "well, its protected now thats the important thing" side of the fence.

 

That said, you HAVE to tell them you are taking them to court anyway, and it will look very unfavourably on you if you do not give them the opportunity to resolve out of court. So no it doesnt void it, and in my opinion you have little choicve but to do as you have said.

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...