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
      • 162 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

Tenancy renewal problem - advice appreciated

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5549 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Hi - my daughter rented a studio flat for herself and baby son a year ago through a letting agent with my partner acting as guarantor (he signed up for one year only). The tenancy is due for renewal on 01 June but in early April my daughter advised the agent that my partner is no longer able to act as guarantor and she can't find anyone else. They recently asked her to put this in writing giving a month's notice which she did and they replied with a letter confirming the date she needs to vacate.

When she went to Housing Dept today, with copies of this correspondence, they said she must get a Section 21 from the agent with 2 months notice. I emailed the agent who replied that they can't issue the Section 21 because the landlord is willing to re-let and is not looking to repossess the property. They also said my daughter needs to sign the new agreement but that she must have a guarantor.

Seems to be a Catch 22 as she can't get a new agreement without a guarantor yet they won't issue the Section 21 because the landlord is willing to renew. What should I advise her to do? incidentally, the agent is showing a prospective new tenant round the flat tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You say your daughter gave 1 month's notice. Was this one month's notice of the fact that the partner was no longer acting as guarantor? Or one month's notice to quit.


If your daughter thinks she can cover the rent payments, then I suggest she writes a letter saying she intends to stay on, and that she has shown she is capable and willing to cover the rental payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 times out of 10 the council will not act unless the landlord evicts the tenant, is she leaves then she is making herself intentionally homeless, she needs him to evict her.



Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve, I wrote a month ago to advise my partner would no longer be guarantor and I also spoke to them to advise that my daughter wouldn't be able to find anyone else. When my daughter spoke to the agent again the other day they asked her to put a months notice in writing which she did, along with the explanation that this was necessary because they are not willing to renew the tenancy without a guarantor.

Lula, yes it seems she is caught between a rock and hard place - it looks as though she will have to stay put until they evict her. It's a shame because being new to the world of tenancy, she didn't want to gain a reputation as a difficult tenant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, if your daughter thinks she can cover the rent payments, then I suggest she writes a letter saying she intends to stay on, and that she has shown she is capable and willing to cover the rental payments.


They are unlikely to issue a Section 21 and start eviction proceedings if she is continuing to pay rent. Sounds like the agents are just being jobsworths.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...