Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • “Not realising it was a no parking zone” doesn’t help you if the timing is correct, as (at least, on Google Maps / View) there is clear signage ('7am to midnight', parked at 15:22) What might be worth pursuing is the "ticket handed to driver" aspect : do you have any view on why they would be  stating that?
    • it's 85k of turnover (well, now £90k). However, you're digging yourself into another hole here. That ship has probably long since sailed. Is it worth pursuing this? You're not going to get anything back from it either way.
    • Hi,   A few pointers from yesterday to take note of evris cpr 27.9 failed again so we should really make issue of this also their WX fail to comply with CPR so again we should take issue with their statement of truth  you cant get tort if you get damages under subsection 7 of CRA because its double recovery  - not sure what we think of this? however its the first time i saw the judges make reference to your non automatic rights from s49 which s54 and 57 assist with. We should start stating this specifically for claims as I think its much better than just 49 and 57 as we need to make it clear where our non automatic rights come from as 54 automatic frankly dont help  I have sent the claim form and defences to the admin email because I can’t upload them for some reason as it wont let me but thought this may help as its the first time we’ve taken tort to trial. although i think the DDJ was honestly struggling to understand some parts of the law because he was asking me about them and how he should interpret them, especially for the automatic. Will apply for transcript if you want it?
    • I decided on confrontation - which I hate.  Omg the arrogance of the driver.  They refused to say who had given them the alleged permission to park on the private land - unless I proved ownership.  I couldn't believe they could be so objectionable.   They advised they couldn't take public transport to work as they lived too far away.  They couldn't rent a local garage as none were available. I simply said that's their issue not mine. It was infuriating that this person had such misplaced entitlement.  However I decided to humour them and show them the title deeds.   They couldn't respond.  Although at this point they alleged some guy in a city up north - whose name they couldn't remember - gave permission!!    They then asked if they could buy the garages and land!! Yet can't afford to park on a meter !! They seemed to back down and agree to now park elsewhere.  I hope so. 
  • 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
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5963 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 All,

Got a small problem with a house i let out , and hope i can get a bit of advice.

my old tenant moved out in feb07 and the house was empty for four months while it had a refurb ( iam a builder by trade).New tenants went in at the end of june 07,four of them,although the guy whos name the council tax was in, left after approx two weeks.during this time i had tried to claim a refund on my council tax for the period that the house was empty,registered my forms acopy of new tenancy agreement, and was told that they would be in touch.Never heard anything until yesterday when my tenant phoned to say that balliffs had posted a walking possession notice through his door with his car reg make and model on the form,although the name on the form was his brother, the lad that moved out after only a few weeks.

My tenant did not sign this form it was just posted through the door with charges for £22.50 first visit and £45 levy fee

I never had no notice from any court or the council to say that this was going to happen,and when my tenant phoned the balliffs to try to explain ,he recieved a torrant of abuse and demands for payment. Any thoughts on what to do guys ? your help is much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never heard anything until yesterday when my tenant phoned to say that balliffs had posted a walking possession notice through his door with his car reg make and model on the form,although the name on the form was his brother, the lad that moved out after only a few weeks.

My tenant did not sign this form it was just posted through the door with charges for £22.50 first visit and £45 levy fee

 

You must do everything in writing, recorded delivery, emailed etc.

 

AFAIUI the tenant is in a spot cos he's liable for the council tax from the date he moved in and the law allows the liability order to cover anyone who lives at the address who would expect to be liable for the council tax.

The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992

 

 

However the first thing to do is to check out the certificate of the bailiff whose name is on the levy/Notice of Distress. No certificate, no levy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The levy itself doesn't give the bailiff a right of entry, but if he/she has a valid certificate that authorises him/her to operate for the firm named on the Notice of Distress/Levy, then they do have a right to seize/clamp the car.

Unless it is hired/leased, subject to hire purchase or the property of a third party.

Link to post
Share on other sites

New tenants went in at the end of june 07,four of them,although the guy whos name the council tax was in, left after approx two weeks.

 

Hmm, first there were four, and then there were three.

That was June 2007, and it's now February 2008.

Did they all think they weren't liable for council tax because the person named on the bill had left? Are these tenants young students?

 

There is usually some correspondence from the council, and to be fair they seem to have waited quite a long time before doing anything about it.

 

You need to get a copy of the liability order or a print out of the account from the council

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Chris

Thanks for your thoughts,spoke to the council this afternoon and they want another copy of the registration form and dates when the new tenants tenancy started.I have already done this when i applied for the rebate,somthing does not seem right ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris,

Just checked the notice and the sig is just a scrawl across the form.

Also the girl at the council said that she would contact the baliffs to get them to hold off to give me time to get the forms back to them.What bothers me is that ive had nothing in writting from either the council or the county court

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well unfortunately although that is wrong, it doesn't make the liability order less valid - all they have to show is that there is a liabiility, and that is enough - unless you can show that there isn't.

 

The council can vary the amount on the liability order, but the bailiffs will do everything they can to get you to pay them more than you actually owe.

 

You should sent a SAR request, there's a template letter, or you can cut and paste one off a previous post, or download one off a website. there are several around.

 

Incidentally, if the car that was levied was NOT parked outside the house but was parked on the Public Highway away from the house, then it should not have been levied against. (Statute of Marlborough 1267, I think the years right).

But you'll need to prove that with witness statements, photos etc, to be able to challenge that.

 

So you see, there is quite alot you can do:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris

If i send a sar who should i send it to and would this place the account in dispute and stop any inforcement until i can sort it out,the thing is,i put the account in my name when the first guy left left,then i applied to the council for the rebate,but they are still chasing this guy,sorry mate what a mess !

Link to post
Share on other sites

i)You can send a SAR to the bailiffs, they are obliged to give you information. The owner of the car, if they are not named on the levy and the person named on the levy could challenge it, by claiming their car back.

I would use a Statutory Declaration for that cos its cheap and quick.

 

ii)I'm not sure whether you can get the enforcement actions stopped or not.

Look at it from the bailiffs point of view:

a. You have taken over the responsibility for the council tax for reasons best known to yourself - if that makes it sound strange, well thats how it looks because you appear to be taking responsibility for someone elses debt.

b. There is a liability because unless they are exempt or disregarded for some reason, the people living at the property are liable for the tax.

c. You or they would appear to have the means to pay the tax.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris ,

Good result from the council ! The guy i seen went through everything phoned the balliffs while i was there and put the action on hold,after going through my case he agreed to give me another six months exemption and said he would contact me in due course with a new figure.

I paid the guy £100 then and there to help cover any shortfall in the new figure,he gave me a reciept,and im hoping this will help keep the balliffs at bay,as i will carry on paying the council and not them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...