Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi   I assume this mattress was the Tenants own property?   So after moving out the Tenants provided an attachment showing a stained mattress and wanting full deposit back and threatening to claim against you for this.   1. Tenants failed to notify you of this stained mattress issue until the end of tenancy after they had vacated the property.   2. You have no evidence that this was the actual mattress used in that property nor evidence to back up there claim the staining caused this mattress damage.  (i.e. one of them could have had an accident and wet the bed or done this when they moved from the property).     3. Ask them that you wish the mattress independently inspected. (which you are fully entitled to do and if it proves this claim is false it will be added to the deposit claim by you the landlord for damages as well as the Garden if you need to get landscapers in to carry out the work that should have been carried out by Tenants as per Tenacy Agreement and raised  by yourself (Landlord) on a few occasions which Tenants failed to rectify even at end of tenancy.   4. Ask them to provide you with the contact details of there Contents Insurance Company (tenants whether Private or Social Housing should always take out and have Contents Insurance but is up to that tenant) bet they don't provide it Big question is the Deposit protected in a Tenancy Deposit Scheme (TDS) and those Tenants that have left were given a copy of the Prescribed Terms for that TDS? (Bear in mind you may need to tell TDS that you are in dispute with the Tenant about damages i.e. mattress and Garden)    
    • plenty of time to research and calm down. nothing much to do until the end of june.    
    • well ...... 1st you need to go back to post 1 and carefully read ALL this thread from the start again and pay attention to the advice and the undertones it explains about 'debt'.   2nd ...the truth is you owe no-one ANYTHING, the OC wrote off and sold the debt, and got most of it back against tax and business insurance schemes ...throw the morality card out the window...the OC did by selling the debt on for <10p=£1. and the DCa want the full balance ...id so many fools stopped paying powerless DCA's tomorrow, the whole industry would collapse overnight.   3rd the only reason this is still around your neck is because you failed to follow given advice...had you ..it would now be statute barred.      ^^^ very important research the M+S credit card debacle using our enhanced google searchbox on this page   as for the PAPLOC reply,   D.. desipte a previous CCA requests, the claimant has yet to supply any/all of the required paperwork.   i: delete [CC is attached to this reply form]"   
    • Hi again   Yes, it's been a lovely day weather wise.   Guess you've better things to do with weather like today than help with this problem, so thanks very much for your input, it's very much appreciated.   Late this afternoon I did receive a reply from the tenants, and they are asking me to go 50/50 with getting the garden sorted, not only that, as they have moved away they are expecting me to get the quotes.   Regarding you view on this issue, its so easy not to see the whole picture and my thoughts that the staining damp may be of their own doing didn't occur to me as I was so locked into the historical leak. Taking a closer look at the room in question today, I'm convinced that they are trying it on with the stained mattress- they did mail through a picture and then a receipt for supposedly the mattress. My wife and I then took both the pic and receipt to the bedding store where purchase was made to ask if the two married up, the picture does not show any emblems/manufactures logo or such to prove that this is the case, so we are none the wiser- our thoughts being that the stained mattress is from elsewhere.   A few days back I spoke to our letting agent regarding all of this, as was quite correctly mentioned there are two parts to this equation, namely the mattress and then the property.   Our agents mentioned to me that as an inventory was not carried out initially with the let, (hindsight) the pictures that were used to advertise the property could not be used as evidence to present to the TDS to be compared to the pictures now as there is no proof that the advertising pictures were in fact how the property was when the let started. I mentioned that all digital pictures have a means of finding when that pic was taken- Geo tag/Metadata- agent was quite surprised by this. The agents thoughts then went for a hide in a vacuum-   This is going off at a tangent here-many moons ago my wife studied computer science at a local University, one of her classmates who she is still in touch with is now a practising Solicitor. My wife suggested that maybe I give her a call, a bit rude I guess, but I did  phone and with the pleasantries out the way  I asked for her opinion of the best way to get this sorted. Her remit isn't landlord type stuff, however she will speak to a colleague on Monday and come back to me.   The property is due to be relet on the 21st, we will ensure that the new tenants move in to a home that is immaculate and welcoming, trouble is its getting a tadge close to get the garden issues sorted in time.   I know that all this will get closure in the end, but at the moment I've had more fun with a toothpick-   Again, many thanks.
    • The collection is currently stored at curator James Blower's home, but he has now found a space situated in an old bank premises where he hopes to exhibit them from this autumn or early next year. View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Can anyone help?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4869 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

Hi Ribeena and welcome to CAG. I'll move your post to a more appropriate area of the site. Can you supply some more information regarding your problem please.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just moved your thread to the General Forum for now until you can give us more details.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, first of all is the "freedom of speech" one, forget that. Freedom of speech doesn't apply to private forums.

 

Secondly, if you choose to post something on the Internet which makes you or what you are speaking of identifiable, then you are taking chances, not least of all one of libel, which could affect you and the site in which you chose to post, but also that your private life will get exposed to any prying eyes that wishes to see it.

 

My advice is to speak to the moderator/owner of the site if you can't edit it yourself and 1) change your ID to something non-recognisable, b) edit the posts so that the school/people can not be identified.

 

As for your embarassment, that is something you will have to deal with for yourself. If the school is good enough that you wouldn't want to move your child, then hold you head high and ignore it, it is doubtful that you will be more than a 5 mns wonder anyway. If the school isn't worth it, then change schools.

 

Remove the personal comments, advise the HM that they have been removed, and next time, be a bit more careful. If the school/people can not be identified by name or by working out the connection with who you are, there can be no libel, so it's easy enough to sort out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

good advice

"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education." Albert Einstein

 

"No-one can make you feel inferior without your consent" - E. Roosevelt

 

 

Don't lie, thieve, cheat or steal. The Government do not like the competition.

 

 

All advice is offered without prejudice.

We are being sued for Libel. Please help us by donating

 

Please support the pettition to remove Gordon Brown as he was not elected primeinister. He was elected Party Leader something completely different.

 

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/gordan-brown/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the country elected the Tories for 18 years.

"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education." Albert Einstein

 

"No-one can make you feel inferior without your consent" - E. Roosevelt

 

 

Don't lie, thieve, cheat or steal. The Government do not like the competition.

 

 

All advice is offered without prejudice.

We are being sued for Libel. Please help us by donating

 

Please support the pettition to remove Gordon Brown as he was not elected primeinister. He was elected Party Leader something completely different.

 

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/gordan-brown/

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can I ask why that is?
You certainly can.

 

When you post on "private" forums, you agree to abide by their rules and most of them will have incorporated in them something to do with libel etc...

 

Whilst the right to freedom of speech is guaranteed under international law through human rights instruments like Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, it is subject to restrictions and exceptions. A well-known example is typified by the statement that free speech does not allow falsely "shouting fire in a crowded theatre" (Schenck v United States). Other limiting doctrines, including those of libel and obscenity, can also restrict freedom of speech.

 

Since recent cases have shown (Gina Ford v Mumsnet springs to mind), a website can be held jointly responsible of libel if they don't take due care of removing potentially libellous comments and therefore have a duty to protect themselves if one or more of their posters write libellous comments, even if that person then feels that their "freedom of speech" has been thwarted or that they're being censored.

 

It may well be that at some point, UK libel laws will need to be revised to account for the very specific tool a website or forum represents, but in the meantime, this is how it stands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a website can be held jointly responsible of libel if they don't take due care of removing potentially libellous comments

 

Thank you, very interesting.

 

There was a shocking case recently in which a forum based website, not dissimilar to this one, was forced to remove moderator-generated defamatory content from nearly 10000 posts that had been there for some 8 months!

 

It really makes you wonder just how bright some people are...

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have the right to harass or insult any one unfortunately thats something were working on within reason. Gladly most political insults are over looked.:)

"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education." Albert Einstein

 

"No-one can make you feel inferior without your consent" - E. Roosevelt

 

 

Don't lie, thieve, cheat or steal. The Government do not like the competition.

 

 

All advice is offered without prejudice.

We are being sued for Libel. Please help us by donating

 

Please support the pettition to remove Gordon Brown as he was not elected primeinister. He was elected Party Leader something completely different.

 

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/gordan-brown/

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you, very interesting.

 

There was a shocking case recently in which a forum based website, not dissimilar to this one, was forced to remove moderator-generated defamatory content from nearly 10000 posts that had been there for some 8 months!

 

It really makes you wonder just how bright some people are...

Hmmm... Of course, there'll always some bullies with more money than sense who will try to build their sense of self-importance by making issues where there's none, and try to create problems out of resentment, or maybe out of sheer ignorance. In cases like these, the only sensible thing to do is to remove the comments and let them have their pyrrhic victory. One feels that people like that are more to be pitied than condemned anyway, if they have nothing better to do than look for imagined slights. :-)

 

In the case here, OP has nothing to gain by leaving the comments, if the HM complains, the website owners will probably remove the comments anyway to protect themselves, so she might as well remove them and the problem (if problem there really is, we only have the little info OP has given to go by) will go away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:bookies on the case people...

"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education." Albert Einstein

 

"No-one can make you feel inferior without your consent" - E. Roosevelt

 

 

Don't lie, thieve, cheat or steal. The Government do not like the competition.

 

 

All advice is offered without prejudice.

We are being sued for Libel. Please help us by donating

 

Please support the pettition to remove Gordon Brown as he was not elected primeinister. He was elected Party Leader something completely different.

 

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/gordan-brown/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...