Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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 5676 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

Willo - I find your posts very difficult to read. Can you use capital letters and full stops as a starting point? failing that can you at least layout the post in paragraphs?

 

- He his right, it is not a legal requirement for a landlord to produce an inventory, however how can he then subsequently prove that the property has been altered/damaged when the tenant moves out if there is nothing in writing/photographs to compare it to?

 

- I would dismiss his claims that an inventory would 'undermine' the tenant/landlord relationship, he either forgot to do it or hasnt done it with the intention of witholding the deposit.

 

- Did you uproot all the mature shrubs from the garden? - if so why?

 

- What evidence from independant sources has he supplied you with concerning the kitchen units and woodflooring? -How does this evidence show that their condition is different when you moved out than when you moved in? - have you damaged the flooring and kitchen units?

 

- You cannot be charged for damaged to the wall caused by the neighbours vehicle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They were all dead plants and dead shubs which made the front garden look untidy.

In are lease it says

3(e) At such time as may be necessary to keep garden or yard neat and drains and pipes clear.

 

He sent us all estimates

 

builders woodflooring 450.00

front wall 100.00

garden centre plants 217.08

 

The flooring was already worn by front door and back door.The flooring looked like he had laminate flooring and he had varnish it

Link to post
Share on other sites

In your post you have said the landlord has replied by saying;

 

i have provided you with all the relevant evidence from independent sources which fully support my claim that my property with specific refernce to the kichen units and wooden flooring was not returned in the condition in which it was left to you

 

Has he in fact just supplied you with quotations for the items replacement? - Quotes for work doesnt show the condition of the property at the start of the tennacy has he seems to imply. You havent answered one of my questions - Have you damaged the woodflooring and kitchen units?

 

Again if the shrubs where dead and needed removing, he has no proof to indicate otherwise. That part of the lease you have mentioned above stating keeping drains and pipes clear is the landlords responsibility not yours.

 

What you need to do is claim through the county court using a N1 claim form (of the online service). I agree with Mr Shed that you should claim on the stopped cheque, as 'in theory' there should be no defence for a stopped cheque. However, the landlord is likley to put in a counter claim for all the works he claims need doing.

 

You have a strong case. Print off an N1 claim form, fill it in, and send it along with a Letter Before Action (LBA) to the landlord stating that if you do not recieve payment in 7 days you will submitt a claim to the county court without further notification.

 

If after 7 days he hasnt coughed up, submit the claim. Remember to include interest and the court fee.

 

Found this from another post on here relating to a car accident;

 

You can now sue the driver for the full amount of the cheque, plus interest and costs under the Bills of Exchange Act 1882 and there is virtually no defence that they can use.

 

Under the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, cheques are contracts in themselves. As such, they are a promise by the drawer of the cheque that the person to whom it is addressed will be paid the money as stated on the cheque. This is the case irrespective of the purpose for which the cheque is paid and there are only very limited exceptions. If there are insufficient funds in the account to meet that promise or if the drawer of the cheque stops payment, the cheque has been dishonoured and the contract broken. You need only give notice to the bank that the cheque has been dishonoured and then you are entitled to sue them on the dishonoured cheque, get judgment and enforce it.

 

Under law, when you write a cheque to someone you effectively promise that the cheque will be honoured and if, for whatever reason, the cheque is not honoured you imply that you will compensate that person in full. So as this cheque has not been honoured you can immediately sue the driver and there is virtually no defence that the driver can raise to that claim.

Edited by Planner
Link to post
Share on other sites

Something like this?

 

Dear landlord,

 

Letter before action.

 

You issued me with a cheque for £550. When presented to my bank, it was dishonoured, and I incurred costs relating to this of £66.

 

You should be aware that a cheque is a promise to pay in its own right, and should I need to take court action to recover this action I am highly likely to be successful.

 

To avoid such court action, please send me £616 within 14 days. If you do not do so, or if you issue me with another invalid cheque I reserve the right to take court action to enforce payment of the debt without further notice. I will claim for the above amount plus interest at 8% plus court costs and my expenses which are likely to substantially increase the amount due.

 

Yours etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...