Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
  • 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

Friend in a mess, HELP?


coffeesupper
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5881 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

I recently joined and with help from here have started the process of dealing with my finances, debts etc......anyway.......

 

Mentioned to my friend about this site & she has given me these details hasn't told any1, she was embarressed. She has ignored letters but realises in her stressfull condition she must do something (she is expecting, in May) about to become a single parent.

 

I hope some of u good folk can guide her (via me) through the mess she is in with Lloydtsb, i have all her letters now, she knows things can't get any worse and a problem shared is a problem halved.

 

She got a phone contract, had a Direct Debit set up from her Lloydtsb account to pay it, whilest she was working it got paid regular, monthly, she didn't realise that with the contract she got 3 months free phone insurance at £5.99, turns out you had to cancel it, she called to cancel after she noticed it, and was told it would be cancelled. She lost her job and inclusive accomodation, still had the contract, but no way of paying, so eventually the contract got cancelled. The bank account was then not used.

 

Trouble is the £5.99 insurance a month was still an active Direct debit, her post still went to old work accomodation and she didn't get her post for a few months. The active DD was still being requested, and L-tsb paid it upon each request. They'd sent her a letter, saying they had made the payments so the account had now gone overdrawn, she had no money at all going into the account. Because the bank paid out the £5.99 and made her overdrawn they of course were now going to charge her.

 

So this went on for a while, without her seeing the statements/letters, the insurance had not been cancelled.

 

When she did get her post she didn't contact the bank, and still didn't realise the insurance was causing all the charges to mount up. She didn't ring the bank. So i have now looked through her paperwork. the letters from the bank now tell her the charges and as it stands (last statement) they say she owes the bank £637.51, the Jan statement said £468.15, and the new amount is dated begining of March, so you can see how this is mounting up. She is on benefits, no permenant fixed abode (yet) and in a mess. Last letter is from Sechiari,Clark & Mitchell solicitors, giving her 7 days to pay, or court issues may be issued against her.

 

As you can see she desperately needs some help, would appriciate any advice, thankyou.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, thanks for replying, her account is still open (she thinks) although not been used since Aug 2007 when she lost her job and stopped getting wages paid in. The letter from SC&M is dated 4th March 2008

 

I have debts of my own but she really needs to get something done, i know how it 'eats' away at you and she has enough on her plate, she's only 20 and got her-self into a mess!

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Try and go to the local CAB, as she is clearly 'in a vulnerable position' they may be able to do a great deal - including helping her find more permanent accommodation.

 

If she is receiving benefits there is a 'right of approbation' that can be used to stop the bank clocking up their charges first and leave her with some money to live on. The CAB should be able to help out here.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for replying, i agree it would help her to go and sit and talk to someone, who she can authorise to act on her behalf as she feels unable to communicate direct with the bank herself (an old school friend works thier & she is embarresed about her whole situation). I don't live in the same town so am limited as to what i can do, she is about to be rehoused with a housing place in the next few weeks, at the mo she has a room in a friends house. her benefit is paid by giro, so nothing since she stopped working is getting paid into the account.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When she did get her post she didn't contact the bank, and still didn't realise the insurance was causing all the charges to mount up. She didn't ring the bank. So i have now looked through her paperwork. the letters from the bank now tell her the charges and as it stands (last statement) they say she owes the bank £637.51, the Jan statement said £468.15, and the new amount is dated begining of March, so you can see how this is mounting up. She is on benefits, no permenant fixed abode (yet) and in a mess. Last letter is from Sechiari,Clark & Mitchell solicitors, giving her 7 days to pay, or court issues may be issued against her.

 

 

Has the insurance been cancelled now ?

 

Does she have details of all the charges that have been levied over the months ? If so, add them up and deduct them from the balance they say is outstanding. Then post back on here with the remaining amount.

 

If not, then she needs to send a SAR by rec. delivery to the bank and a letter to the sols. advising them of this. We can direct you to the template letter for the SAR, so don't worry about this.

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...