Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • jk2054 - I haven't started a claim with OIC or MIB yet, due to being unable to obtain the name of the other driver.  BankFodder cheers for that, I'll go back to them with this info & update on here when I've had a response
    • Andy thanks for your reply. No i am now being evicted from the house i moved into after that previous post. The letting agent lied to me when they said the landlord would not be selling the house. SHe did not mention that the landlord tried to sell the house last year, i was not told this, 4 months into the tenancy i got the eviction notice. Its obvious they lied to me and used me to fill in the gap between their attempts to sell the house. I have filled in the defence form as it was easy to follow the old one from my previous post. I will post it later on in the hope someone can give it the once over. It has to be in by the end of this month may 31st.  
    • It's a GR Yaris - Finance is with Alphera, who are part of BMW I believe. I'm sure the unit is very expensive to repair, I have even told them I would be happy with a refurbished/reconditioned unit, in trying to be reasonable as well.
    • Without seeing this envelope, document and sticker it is impossible to advise properly. However, just going on what you have told us, there are two ways you can deal with this: !. The easy way. This has the lowest risk but the guarantee of a penalty for speeding.  You can respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box you can explain that you responded to the request for driver’s details but it was recently returned to you, seemingly not actioned. However, you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. You could also ask the court to consider sentencing you at the fixed penalty level (£100 and 3 points) as this prosecution seems to be the result of an administrative problem outside your control. 2. The not so easy way with higher risk. This could see you convicted of the FtP charge but has the possibility that you escape with no penalty whatsoever. You can do the same – plead not guilty to both charges. If you go down this route the speeding charge cannot succeed as they have no evidence you were driving. This comes from your response to the request for driver’s details which the police say they have not got. You can mention in the “Reasons” box that you returned the request for driver’s details as required. You will then face a trial for the FtP charge and you can produced your response together with the envelope and sticker showing it had been returned to you. The risk with this is that if your defence fails you will be fined a week and a half’s net income, pay a “Victim Surcharge” of 40% of the fine, pay prosecution costs of around £650 and have six points together with an endorsement code (MS90) which will see your insurance premiums rocket.
  • 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

Mortgage Express appoint LPA Recievers Walker Singleton to scare tenants off!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4074 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

if all of the mex and other send complaints into the select financial committee members each MP explaining your case in ful as the see HECTOR SANTS (THE CREEP) AND LORD TURNER OF ECCHINSWELL THEY RUN THE FSA make your complaints known to each individual member of the finacial committee that turner and sants are turning a blind eye to your problems due to unregulated part of this market ..treasury select committee memebers ,ask for a reveiw towards emergency regulation or consultation with each of yourselves ..

patrickq

1http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/andrew-tyrie/25231

Member Party Mr Andrew Tyrie (Chairman) Conservative John Cryer Labour Michael Fallon Conservative Mark Garnier Conservative Stewart Hosie Scottish National Party Andrea Leadsom Conservative Mr Andy Love Labour Co-Operative John Mann Labour Mr George Mudie Labour Jesse Norman Conservative David Rutley Conservative John Thurso Liberal Democrat Mr Chuka Umunna Labour

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Vince Cable can be very outspoken. I would be inclined to copy him in on letters too.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

I got no further responses from MX, have now actually stopped bothering to reply to me now.

 

ICO replied and said even though Drydens hold information on me but because Walker Singleton instructed them, they are now not taking this further that they will not provide my SAR.

 

ICO replied with MX and WS to ask them did they comply and why do they think they complied. Doesnt sound like it is going to go any further as the recivers and MX are experts in making it look like they have covered the rules book.

 

Only next option is MP, but again what can they do?

 

thanks again all, we have to keep plodding on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Drydens can hold information on you but don't have to tell you what it is? Why does it matter who instructed them? If it's about you I don't understand why they don't have to reveal what they have. They may have told them all sorts of guff about you which may or may not be accurate.

 

Sorry chillin, but if that was me I wouldn't accept that and would be taking it further. I know the ICO have no teeth, but if you've exhausted all possibilities with the ICO then I suggest you take them to court to get the information.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Caro/Diddled,

 

You are right I do need to take them to court but technically I think because WS are the data controller requesting I have to get info from WS. I think it looks like court action against WS if no action from ICO.

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

neither Cable nor Clegg or even grant shapp has replied to my requests concerning these breaches mentioned above , it is unbeleivable that they are being allowed to do this ,that is why i put the links to the treasury select commottee as they can publicly ask questions of both the fsa and ico and also ask for these companies to come forward and give evidence ,the MP who is asking for the ten minite rule ive mentioned him on here so a complaint for him to bring it to the select committee may help push things forward , also make written questions on the whatdotheyknow website as this goes through official channells ,i will do this to all the MPs of the select committee so you do not have to expose yourselves ok

patrickq1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive come across this before, and it looks like as Drydens are acting under WS instructions they are simply classed as a data processer, and it is WS who is the data controller.

 

Thanks. Not come across this before. Sounds a bit of a cop out, but if that's the way it works.....

 

Hi Caro/Diddled,

 

You are right I do need to take them to court but technically I think because WS are the data controller requesting I have to get info from WS. I think it looks like court action against WS if no action from ICO.

 

Thanks again

 

Go for it chillin. Keep the pressure up.

 

neither Cable nor Clegg or even grant shapp has replied to my requests concerning these breaches mentioned above , it is unbeleivable that they are being allowed to do this ,that is why i put the links to the treasury select commottee as they can publicly ask questions of both the fsa and ico and also ask for these companies to come forward and give evidence ,the MP who is asking for the ten minite rule ive mentioned him on here so a complaint for him to bring it to the select committee may help push things forward , also make written questions on the whatdotheyknow website as this goes through official channells ,i will do this to all the MPs of the select committee so you do not have to expose yourselves ok

patrickq1

 

Well done Patrick.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys

 

I am meeting an MP tomorrow and dont really have a clue what to take with me :).

 

Oh well, wish me luck everyone and hope we get an MP to start campaigning for us.

 

Thanks

 

 

 

Good luck...Indeed.!

We all hope it is really fruitlful and they are willing to join the side of justice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the information, I will act on what you have sugested. just found out today that M/X are braking the mortgage conditions as well. This is an ex GMAC buy to let fixed for three years, finished in April 2008 and onto SVR, however M/x are collecting LIBOR at 5.6% not the SVR of 2.25%, This is what placed the mortgage in arrears. Also they have been writing to an old address (they were notified of the change but ignored the info). I have copy letters sent to them, is this legal, I have the original mortgage offer from GMAC in 2005.

Edited by tonyhuws
Link to post
Share on other sites

write a full pracee of what has occured since it all started, one to give him and one for you to refer too.

Write a list of bullet points that you want to raise, you will forget some when u are there.

make written complaints against all the bodies you want to complain against for his info and be ready with an answer to the question "what do you want me to do to help" You will only have half an hour and it will go very quickly. also keep him updated with every letter you write and every reply you do not get or if you do get any with those as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

response from UKFI THEY ARE CONCERNED THAT YOU HAVE NOT BEEN SUPLIED WITH INFORMATION REQUESTED SO YOU ARE REQUIRED TO WRITE TO THEM IN PERSON ALSO EXPLAIN YOUR SITUATION ALL mp'S ON THE TREASURY COMMITTE HAVE PROMISED TO LOOK FURTHER INTO THIS PROBLEM

PATRICKQ1

Mandeep Dhillon

Correspondence Officer

 

UK Financial Investments Ltd

2nd Floor, Oceanic House, 1a Cockspur Street, London SW1Y 5BG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for all the offers of help etc.

 

OK Had meeting, MP is aware of it but need to co-ordinate support to flag this up with treasury. Problem is it will take some time to start doing this.

 

Back to drawing board to see what can actually be done about it.

 

Court? Need a solicitor who is clued up and will take on these cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[

The Insolvency Act 1986 provides that a company enters into a transaction with a person at an undervalue if:

 

  • The company makes a gift to that person or otherwise enters into a transaction with that person on terms that the company will receive no consideration or

  • The company enters into a transaction with that person for a consideration which is significantly less than the value of the consideration provided by the company.

Transactions at an undervalue undertaken 2 years prior to the liquidation come under review as part of a liquidators duties. The detailed statute law on undervalue transactions may be found at Sections 238, 240 and 241 of the Insolvency Act 1986.

 

The liquidator may apply to the Court for a determination whether or not a particular transaction was at an undervalue. The Court then "shall make such order as it thinks fit for restoring the position to what it would have been if the company had not entered into that transaction".

 

Transactions at an undervalue are reported by a liquidator to the Department of Trade and Industry in relation to the conduct of directors for Directors Disqualification purposes.

 

In other words, if, pre-liquidation, you sell an asset for less than its true value (in other words you enter into a transaction at an undervalue) , the liquidator can take court action to recover the difference and the DTI might seek to disqualify you from acting as a director for some future period.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Law of Property Act 1925 provides that if the mortgagor (ie your company) is in liquidation then the courts permission is not required before a Law of Property Act (LPA) Receiver can be appointed.

 

By contrast If your company is in Administration, then no steps can then be taken to enforce any security over the company's property (such as the appointment of a Law of Property Act Receiver) except with the leave (permission) of the court or with the consent of the Administrator. (Source of law - Paragraph 43 of Schedule B1 of The Insolvency Act 1986)

 

Existing receivers may remain in office but may not realise security without court permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When Would a Law of Property (LPA) Act Receiver be Appointed

 

 

 

A Law of Property Act Receiver (LPA Receiver) is appointed by a lender who has a fixed charge over property under the statutory power given to that lender in section 109 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

Such an appointment of a Law of Property Act (LPA) Receiver may only take place if:-

 

1. the mortgage money has become due, and

 

2. the mortgagee has become entitled to exercise the statutory power of sale, where:-

 

2.1 there has been default in repayment of a loan for 3 months after a notice requiring it, or

 

2.2 Interest remains unpaid for 2 months after becoming due, or

 

2.3 there is another breach of the Act.

 

A Law of Property Act (LPA) Receivers powers are limited to collecting rents and income, however the Law of Property Act Receiver does have a duty to keep property in good repair and to insure the property.

 

There is an interesting case on the above which is known as Chatsworth Properties Ltd v Effiom. If you would like to read this case, please click here.

 

Obtain a copy of the Law of Property Act 1925 to fully understand when a Law of Property Act (LPA) Receiver may be appointed

Link to post
Share on other sites

The law of property act 1925 requires that the receivers appointed by the mortgage company as your agents have to act in your and the mortgage companies interests, They are supposed to consult with you and to find the best way forward to repaying the arrears and to restoring the property to you. However this is what Templetons do not do they seem to ignore you and charge below market value rent, clock up the arrears and then place the property on the market to sell at below market value without telling you. This act needs repealing. It is good advise to read the act. Go onto the internet type in Law of Property act 1925 and it will come up, lots of reading but s109 is the main one you will need to read. You will all find it enlighting (if you have not done so already).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys,

 

It is interesting how you say the act "A Law of Property Act (LPA) Receivers powers are limited to collecting rents and income, however the Law of Property Act Receiver does have a duty to keep property in good repair and to insure the property."

 

But do they have the rights to sell the property? I have seen another property went into LPA Recievership sometime ago with another lender, the property then become vacant. the lender then written to say they are removing the LPA to sell the property and if they want to keep then to contact and discuss a payment plan. Why are they removing LPA to sell the property I wonder? MX are selling through the LPA but other lenders are selling themselves. the whole point of appointing LPA is so that they can prevent any legal action from tenants but once vacant they then remove LPA is the standard practice with some lenders. Unusual this.

 

Patrick the link doesnt work to the corporate and insolvency.

 

Thanks again all

Link to post
Share on other sites

Conflict of interests maybe chillin?

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4074 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

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...