Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • yes  look for repetitive fixed sum penalty fees  like letter/missed payment/failedDD/phonecall/arrears   they are all unlawful and reclaimable, or be used to reduce your F&F offer.  
    • No worries.   ok. I’ve tried to send messages it says I can send 0 per day? Can you PM me so I can reply to you?    thanks for the answer on the joint question 
    • you need to converse with us Drays...   i will guess you have NOT received a claimform pack from northants bulk but merely a letter of claim from BW legal.   you respond by following Post 4 here: do NOT use their reply pack. but you MUST reply. follow Exactly as post 4 i would suggest the reason as: the alleged debt concerns a dispute for failure to provide a reliable service ( put nothing else at this stage)       JCI buy these old telecom debts up because sadly so many people wet themselves thinking they are owed and JCI have magical powers...when they don't. the debt is subject to a valid dispute.   there are number threads here regarding them.. https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=partner-pub-8889411648654839:3134625398&q=JC Talk talk&oq=JC Talk talk&gs_l=partner-generic.3...801398.805115.0.805375.12.12.0.0.0.0.121.799.10j2.12.0.csems%2Cnrl%3D13...0.3728j1478984j13...1.34.partner-generic..12.0.0.zyRD3vNgDww
    • Dear PIXeL_92 It has been explained to you in previous correspondence that the roof tiles that are the subject of your complaint, at the time of inspection were heavily covered in moss. It is in your agreed terms that the surveyor will not carry out an asbestos survey and is not required to scrape away moss if the surface below is obscured. The surveyor will carry out only a visual inspection and comment on defects visible at the time of inspection. Roofs can fail at any time particularly in periods of inclement weather. As stated in your report, the surveyor confirmed that the roof was in a satisfactory condition at the time of inspection therefore would not require replacement in the immediate future. The subject building is a utility building and is not a habitable room of the main property. As previously explained, tiles on an outbuilding of this nature would not affect the property value. You state you would have factored in the cost of removal/replacement into the purchase offer however as advised at the time of inspection the tiles were in a satisfactory condition and you have not sought to replace the tiles in the three years following the date of inspection. This confirms the comments provided by the surveyor. You have previously stated that the roof became damaged due to high winds and the roofing specialist you instructed to replace the broken tiles made you aware of the possibility that the tiles may contain asbestos. However, you have not yet had the tiles tested to confirm the presence of asbestos. Our surveyor revisited your property and confirmed that you have had the damaged roof tiles replaced. A roof that contains asbestos will only become a health and safety risk if it is disturbed and it therefore seems odd that the roofing contractor was happy to replace the tiles if in fact asbestos was present. We understand that raising a complaint and progressing to legal action as you have suggested you wish to do can be a lengthy drawn-out and expensive process with no guarantee of success. If necessary, we will notify our legal team to address this matter on our behalf however, we are happy to attempt to settle this matter in advance to avoid prolonged communications and extending this matter for many more months. In an effort to conclude this matter to the satisfaction of all parties, we shall increase our goodwill offer to £500 in full and final settlement of this matter. This offer will be available until Thursday 27 August 2020. There will be no further offers made after this date. I look forward to your response. Yours sincerely, Walker Dunn MRICS   ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************   Dear Walker Dunn,   Apologies on the delayed reply unfortunately I had to attend to some personal matters that left me unable to reply to emails.   A few points I want to make regarding your previous letter.   You mention at the time of the inspection that the surface of the tiles was covered in moss and obscured the view of the tiles, we however have pictures from when we moved in showing this was not the case, whilst there is moss on the tiles it in no way obscured to the point that the material would have been assessed incorrectly and you can also see the curling of the edges to a large amount of the tiles and this is a characteristic of asbestos.   You state in the report that the roof was in satisfactory condition, however, if the roof was indeed slate that your report indicated this would have been correct however the curled edges of asbestos tiles indicate that they are fatigued and need replacing and that is not satisfactory condition, again the material was not identified correctly at the time of the report.   As for this point "You state you would have factored in the cost of removal/replacement into the purchase offer however as advised at the time of inspection the tiles were in a satisfactory condition and you have not sought to replace the tiles in the three years following the date of inspection. This confirms the comments provided by the surveyor."   We had put away money to have this done, at the time as it was deemed slate in your report we didn't prioritise this as a repair, as you know the roof of the main property was in an awful state and was leaking into the bedroom this took priority along with having all the plumbing in the bathroom replaced as we discovered it was stuffed with kitchen roll under the bath to hide a set of leaking pipes that eventually made its way into the kitchen. We then also had a passing in the family that took us away from the local area for around a month and then my partners dad became homeless due to a gas explosion that destroyed his property so we had to accommodate him for a year and half so most work we had planned got put on hold. This doesn't confirm your comments in your report, this just allows you to assume it did as it wasn't done straight away however this was not the case. We have all the paperwork and invoices to show the above work was done to the main property along with pictures along with all the details surrounding the gas explosion.   We don't agree that part of a building being a habitable room of the main property makes a difference in our case, of course any structure on a property would affect the properties overall value when offers are being made as you make your offer based on the overall property and if you wanted to use the outbuilding for a specific reason you would be more inclined to go for a property that dose have an outbuilding over one that doesn't or if you want another example one with a swimming pool selling for a higher amount as that is considered a premium.   You then say "You have previously stated that the roof became damaged due to high winds and the roofing specialist you instructed to replace the broken tiles made you aware of the possibility that the tiles may contain asbestos. However, you have not yet had the tiles tested to confirm the presence of asbestos."   We had the roofer come and take a look instructing him that we wanted two slate tiles replacing due to us believing at the time the roof was slate based on your report, he then mentioned from a simple visual inspection that they are in fact asbestos. He said he could replace them with two slate tiles but we would have dispose of the two slipped asbestos ones safely as he wasn't licensed to do so, they were removed in a safe manor to avoid cracking them due to how brittle they were.   We have at several times offered to have them tested for you if you would cover the costs of testing if they are in fact asbestos tiles but this simple question has still remained un answered, so for this reason we have now booked a test and this will be added to the costs we will be pursing if and when we are forced to go down the legal route along with all legal cost and the cost of disposal and replacement of the roof, as mentioned before I just wanted the disposal costs covered, but our solicitor has now advised us we should be entitled to have the full costs awarded so we are left in the same place financially along with the roof material matching the report.   Our next step would be to have the test results come back, and send those tests results if they come back as positive with the invoice and three quotes for removal of asbestos to yourselves to decide if you want to cover those costs or if you wish to continue with legal proceedings and as mentioned before if we have to issue legal proceedings we will be asking for all costs to be covered and a complaint to the RICS and Ombudsman will also be issued.   Unfortunately at this point we are rejecting your £500 settlement but if you decided you wanted to settle it without facing any potential legal action or complaint we would settle for the sum of £2000 and that will be the matter resolved, we believe this to be a fair amount as the testing has now cost us £150 and the mid range quote has come in at £1900.   Regards   Robert Atkins   ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************   Dear PIXeL_92 I refer to your email sent on 7th September. I am disappointed and dismayed that you have decided to not accept our very reasonable offer. We have now notified our legal team in preparation should you decide to proceed along the legal route. You have told us you are receiving legal advice, therefore I am sure that your solicitor will have explained to you that in matters of alleged negligence, if the court finds in your favour, they can only make an award on the basis of diminution of value and not the cost of repairs.   Therefore to quantify the diminution in value you would need to obtain a report from another surveying firm that identifies the value of your property three years ago with a slate roof to the outbuilding and the value of the property three years ago with an asbestos roof to the outbuilding. To do this effectively, the surveyor would have to identify comparable properties in the area with and without such roofs to be able to justify his findings. This would be no easy task.   To further complicate matters, the guidelines set out for the court are that they only award losses based upon diminution of value that exceed 5% of the property value, which is considered a reasonable margin of error for surveyor to work within. In this instance therefore, you would be required to identify a loss in excess of £6,000. This figure does not include your legal costs. Because this is a claim for alleged negligence and not for a debt, it is not a matter that can be dealt with by the Small Claims Court, it would have to be heard by a higher court. This would mean we would then be able to claim the costs of our barrister, solicitor and any experts for however many days the hearing lasts, plus you would have your own costs, if you were unable to prove your claim. Once you submit a claim, you are unable to then back out without incurring costs. I hope you find this advice helpful and I am sure that if you present this letter to your solicitor, he will be able to verify whether the above information is correct. We will await your response on how you intend to proceed. Yours sincerely, Colin Walker MRICS
    • Sorry for the text heavy post, we are getting nowhere with them, I need some help deciding our next steps, I have a couple more emails as PDFs that I need to attach below.   Dear PIXel_92, We confirmed in our previous email that our offer would be made available until Friday 14 August 2020. This offer was presented as a gesture of goodwill based on the information you have provided in support of your claim. Thus far, we have not had sight of a Specialist Report confirming the presence of Asbestos or quotations for the required works. Since you have not furnished us with any additional information we are unable to provide any further comments on the matter at this time. If you’re able to provide the requested information we will be happy to review the matter and discuss it further with you. Kind regards, Customer Relations ************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** Dear Walker Dunn,   I have on two occasions offered to have it tested further than a visual inspection but if it comes back as asbestos you cover the costs, you asked me for the costs involved in getting it tested and you neither agreed to nor declined to cover that cost if it came back as asbestos, again I am happy to have it tested but if it comes back as asbestos to have those costs covered.   I have sent communication from a roofer on headed paper confirming they belive it to be asbestos but they aren't registered to remove it.   I am happy to get three formal quotes written on paper and provide them, I have spoken to a roofer that deals in asbestos that was here to do another job at the time and he said just going off rough size it would be approximately £2000 to remove the roof and dispose of the asbestos. I will get some quotes over the next week and get back to you with them.   Regards ************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** Dear Walker Dunn,   Could I please get confirmation regarding if you are going to cover the cost of testing if it does come back as positive before I go ahead with it.   I now have 3 quotes for removal of the asbestos too.   My solicitors has also forwarded me this to read through, https://www.rics.org/uk/upholding-professional-standards/regulation/how-we-regulate/disciplinary-process/panel-hearings/disciplinary-panel-hearings/walker-dunn-limited-and-colin-walker/.   This will be our next step going to the RICS / property ombudsman as we seem to be getting nowhere and it has been going on for some time due to you not answering the above question.   If you don't answer it we can get it tested and look at legal action to recover the money at a later date if that's how you want to do it.   Regards **************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************  
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 4 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3134 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Its probably because court time is limited & in short supply & that they would rather put the more serious cases through.

 

Yes, SRPO does make a very valid and important point here

 

There is a fine line to be run in 'managing' Court time and whilst it may be desireable to prosecute all offenders, the Courts and the TOCs certainly have many more cases than there is time to hear.

 

I suggest that is very much a sad reflection of the high level of offending, but does mean those cases deemed less serious are likely to escape prosecution where an alternative disposal may be achieved.

 

Some may see that as resulting in a 'justice lottery', but I'm afraid it is a sign of our times.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • Replies 533
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 3 weeks later...

Is this a general question?

 

There are a number of different ones dependent on where a traveller is reported.

 

In general terms it may be TfL's own prosecution team or London Underground,

 

It might be one of several TOC's operating services in the LUL area such as SE Trains, FCC, NEX E Anglia, Chiltern Railways, LOROL or,

 

The DLR prosecution team etc,

 

If you have been reported, whatever you do, you must write to the specific team who have written to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this a general question?

 

There are a number of different ones dependent on where a traveller is reported.

 

In general terms it may be TfL's own prosecution team or London Underground,

 

It might be one of several TOC's operating services in the LUL area such as SE Trains, FCC, NEX E Anglia, Chiltern Railways, LOROL or,

 

The DLR prosecution team etc,

 

If you have been reported, whatever you do, you must write to the specific team who have written to you.

 

Sorry, I mean London Underground prosecution team. However, I can't find it out on tfl's website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would really appreciate someone's help.

 

My circumstances are that I accidently used my fathers freedom pass whilst on my way to work. It was a genuine mistake as my father had worn my overcoat a few days prior and had left his pass in my pocket (it was in a little blue LU wallet-just like mine). When I pulled it out of my pocket and used it on the machine an inspector stopped me and starting questioning me as to used oyester card it was, inevitably I said it was mine. He responded to me "no its not" and asked me my employee number. At this point I was feeling very intimidated and confused as to what was going on. I replied that i didnt know what he was talking about, he then took the card out of the wallet and I realised by the colour that it was not my card.

 

The inspector proceeded to take down my details and caution me and confiscated the card. Despite my profuse aplogies that there had been a huge mistake. I was late for work and I had to go but i later went back on my lunch break to try and explain what had happened but the guy said that it was already in the system and i would be recieving a letter in the post.

 

I like everyone else work in an industry where I believe a criminal conviction would be detrimental to my future. I have a clean record and I think I only used it once or twice (I believe this happened on a tuesday so there is a chance i had the card on the monday too).

 

I have received a letter from LU stating the same as MikeS1000 above.

 

What can I do or say?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, I mean London Underground prosecution team. However, I can't find it out on tfl's website.

 

I'm in work tomorrow, I'll find out for you.

 

Someone may come along before that though!

 

Regards

UNDERGROUND :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for not being around lately, had some on-going computing problems, and been busy!

 

Anyway.......

 

 

locotoro

 

A few questions:

 

- Was your journey entirely on London Underground?

 

- Do you have proof that you held another valid ticket or Oyster card

for the journey you made? Is so, what was it?

 

- Did your father not realise his Pass was missing for two days?

 

UNDERGROUND :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Thanks for the responses

 

- The inspector asked me what my employee number? (I had no idea at the time) but I now understand that by saying that the oyster card was mine he must have assumed that I worked for London Transport. My father later taold me that all London Transport personnel have a employee number that they memorise. Obviously I didnt have a clue what he was talking about?

 

I was travelling from Seven Sisters to Harrow. But I did have my own oyster card.

 

My dad works on the buses and drives to his garage so I guess he doesnt use it unless someone can shed some more information as to whether he would need it to use it to sign in?? He made no mention of his card being missing to me.

 

I have just drafted a very apologetic letter to the prosecutions department and told them i would be willing to pay any charge or fine. I am so worried that i may get a criminal record over this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One other thing is that the incident happened in mid March. and I have only recieved the first letter from London transport. Is there a chance that this could drag on beyond a six month window which would be in approximately one months time??

 

or am i clutching at straws :S

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, you are talking about a Bus Operators pass, the purple coloured card?

 

I must say that it is quite possible your father will have his Pass withdrawn permanently. LT Staff Travel take the misuse of TfL employee passes very seriously.

 

What ticket or Oyster card did you hold that was valid on the day of travel?

 

UNDERGROUND :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry, thats what I meant. Employee pass. It is the purple one thats how i realised it wasnt mine when the inspector took it out of the plastic wallet.

 

The issue of the pass being permanently withdrawn isnt really an issue as my father has since left.

 

I have my own normal payg oyster card but i dont think i had it that day. i thought i had my own but i obviously had my dads

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be honest here, I don't think you've got a leg to stand on should this come to prosecution.

 

It is your responsibility to ensure that you have a valid ticket or Oyster card for your journey, and the excuse that you managed to use your fathers pass by mistake is unlikely to wash when it comes to the 'balance of probabilities' in a courtroom. Especially the story that you and your father share a coat.

 

I realise that this is not what you want to hear.

 

All I can suggest is that you write to the LU prosecutions manager and plead your case.

 

UNDERGROUND :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your honesty underground.

 

I have written to the prosecutions manager and explained to him (in a very apologetic way) that this was a completely innocent mistake.

 

For the record we dont share a coat, my dad just uses my coat on the odd occassion. Still Not sure it makes much of a difference.

 

I will await a response from them with fingers crossed

Link to post
Share on other sites
Civil law uses the balance of probabilities, criminal law is proof beyond reasonable doubt which is a higher standard of proof.

 

If you are prosecuted under Sec 5(3) of the Regulation Of Railways Act they will have to prove it was your intent to avoid payment.

If they prosecute under the byelaws they only need to prove you were there & you didnt have a valid ticket.

 

Quite, SRPO - Thank you ;)

 

UNDERGROUND :D

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also in similar position to locotoro. I've written a letter to settle out of court. However, I hadn't decided on my plea yet and only have a couple of days to send it off. I haven't received a reply from london underground. Is it worth ringing up the magistrates court to ask for an adjournment given that there's been a postal strike?

 

B

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can ask.

 

It's always worth trying to settle out of Court although the rail company is not obliged to agree to any offer and it may just delay the resuilt that would have been arrived at in any case.

 

On the other hand, you may get the opportunity to pay an administrative penalty and save the likelihood of being ordered to pay a fine & costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3134 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...