Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • 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.
  • 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

Council Tenancy - Succession


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4450 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

Asking on behalf of a friend who by no fault of their own has been left to deal with a difficult situation.

 

In a nutshell, he has live in the same council house for over 40 years, his mother is the current tenant.

 

His mother is terminally ill and won't be around for more than a couple of months, she is deteriorating fast. She is in her 80's

 

In the mid 80's his father was the tenant and he passed it over to his wife (the terminally ill mother) via a divorce settlement.

 

When my friend contacted the council they were adamant that it was a succession from his Dad to his Ma and therefore no further successions could take place...as in my friend succeeding the tenancy from his mother.

 

Having no succession rights means that on the death of his mother my friend will be at the mercy of the council, they don't have any obligation to help him single man, no other family and no real priorty for housing. The council over the phone stated 'don't worry, we wont chuck you on the street' yeah right....

 

Armed with my new found confidence due to Cag I saddled up alongside my mate and requested a meeting with the council...

 

Meeting was arranged with the head honcho and during the conversation I requested that he pull the actual file up on my friends property (rather than just quoting from it) and check if it was a succession in the 80's or as I thought and it was actually an assignment......and lo and behold and beneath his furrowed brow he accepted that it was actually an assigment and not a succession...... which roughly translated means that my friend can now succeed the tenancy.....result so far.......the council accept he has full succession rights.....

 

But there is a catch, there is always a catch....succession is one thing, it means my friend has a home with the local authority, however what it doesn't mean is that he has the home he has lived in all his life as his home, the council can and does have the discretion to offer him another small home..something more fitting with his single person status....which ordinarily wouldn't be a problem...but he wants to stay in his own home and the likelihood of him being offered a small flat in a block of flats mainly propgated by younger generation...well it frightens the life out of him...he simply isn't equipped to live in such surrounds....and given he's lived with his mum all his life and she will soon be gone...well you can uinderstand how he must be feeling.....

 

In any case, the head honcho in a further and off the record conversation

told me that it may be better while his mother is alive to get the tenancy assigned to him..and then in the event of he death he will natually keep the property on...no further intervention from the council...he qualifies for the assignment having live in the house 12months prior to the assignment and is related to the current tenant etc etc....

 

This sounds too easy...., does anyone have any knowledge of this situation...and if by accepting an assignment from his mother to him whilse she is still alive gives him automatic right to his property he lives in as opposed to a succession by way of his mothers death and still giving him a home but not neccersarily the one he's living in (and which is what he wants?)

 

I'm not sure if the head honcho was trying to give help (off the record) or was actually in a round about way jeapoardising my friends tenancy even more....

 

Housing Act 1985 is what he is covered by and his mothers tenancy is classed as secured....I've read the literature on it but it's not overly clear where the above situation is concerned. He has sought a solcitors help but as usual they're slow in coming forward.

I reside in Dawlish Warren but am not a rabbit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You probably know this, but it is all I could find:

 

Succeeding to a council tenancy

 

If you live in a council property, the rules are broadly the same for all types of tenancy but there are some differences.

 

If you have a joint tenancy, the surviving tenant will automatically take over the whole tenancy. If you are not a joint tenant, you may be able to take over the tenancy by succession if you are:

  • the tenant's spouse or registered civil partner, as long as you were living together at the time of their death (or, if the tenancy is a demoted tenancy, for at least a year beforehand), or
  • another family member (this includes cohabiting partners, children, parents, siblings and most other close relatives) as long as there is no surviving spouse or civil partner and you were living with the deceased for at least a year before their death.

If you succeed to a council tenancy, you would have the same type of tenancy as the person who died had. So if they had an introductory tenancy or a demoted tenancy, it will remain introductory or demoted until the full trial/demotion period has passed. Remember to stick to the conditions of the tenancy agreement to avoid the risk of eviction.

If you succeed to any type of council tenancy, you also need to be aware that there is a chance that the council may try to evict you on the grounds that the home is now larger than you need. The council cannot do this if you are the spouse or registered civil partner of the person who died, but they can do so if you are related in any other way, including if you were cohabiting. If it does happen, the council must provide a suitable alternative home for you. Get in touch with an adviser immediately to find out whether you can challenge the eviction.

If you are living in temporary accommodation that was provided after you made a homelessness application, you do not have a council tenancy and therefore do not have succession rights. However, it may be possible to ask the council to grant a new agreement in your own name. Contact the council or a local advice centre urgently to discuss your situation.

 

It might be worth you having a look at this site and contacting them if you require more information or help.

 

Shelter England - The housing and homelessness charity

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 1 year later...

Hi mika99

 

Its best to start your own thread to get the best advice to help you

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...