Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3653 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

About 10 minutes ago, my landlord's father and a plumber just opened my front door. i'm absolutely furious and curious what i can/should do? there's been a problem mentioned to us about a minor leak in the apartment below us in a bathroom, and we've obliged with a prior request to stop using our shower for two days to test if this solved the problem. i received a text message from my landlord yesterday (wednesday) morning asking for entry 'this AM' for a plumber. i never replied, as i was a bit annoyed. now i find today, sitting at home that there's someone in my hallway. no buzzed entry, no knock on the door, nothing. just two complete strangers in my home.

 

foolishly, i let them come in after a quick tidy, just to try and get the problem sorted. i was a bit shocked to see them and realise now i should've told them to leave immediately, but what's done is done.

 

what can/should i do about this? is a strongly worded letter to the landlord about the summation of all i can do? obviously he's breached the contract and i could leave etc, but i really don't want to. have i any grounds to follow this through with any legal process? i could've been asleep in bed, in the shower they were about to try and fix or anything. i'm so angry! thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The landlord/agent/etc has to give you at least 24 hours notice to enter. I think they don't have to do that if it's an emergency. This does not sound like one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

correct,not an emergency in the slightest. i know he's broken the contract and that, but i really don't want to move out, i just wonder if there's any way of pursuing the issue away from that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from letting him know you don't appreciate anyone coming in to your house unannounced and that may be against the law, I can't think anything you can do against it. Though I don't if you want to say the last bit about breaking the law, as they may take offence to you telling them the rules.

The landlord’s rights of entry

 

Your landlord has a right to reasonable access to carry out repairs. What ‘reasonable access’ means depends on why your landlord needs to get access. For example, in an emergency, your landlord is entitled to immediate access to carry out any necessary work.

Your landlord also has a right to enter the property to inspect the state of repair or to empty a fuel slot meter, but they should always ask for your permission and should give you at least 24 hours notice.

If you are staying in lodgings where it is agreed that your landlord provides a room-cleaning service or where you share a room with other lodgers, your landlord can enter without permission.

Your landlord does not have a right to enter in any other circumstances unless they have a court order.

Source.

Edited by StevenT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i had problems like this from my landlord, i rang him and told him if he did it once more i would seel legal advice,which i did.

 

H e was sent a letter telling the do's and dont's,,whuch then 2 days later he gave me notice to leave,of which im still here 2 mths on,and the house is now being reposessed as hes not paying the mortgage on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's s shame Britain is one of the few countries where tenants have so few rights, and even the little rights you have, once you enforce them the landlord can simply give you notice. In most other countries in Europe, once a let has been agreed, the landlord can not give you notice unless there are legal reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm, the same applies in England too.

 

If you sign a 12 month lease, the landlord cannot evict you unless you breach the terms of the tenancy. Changing the locks is not a reason to evict and would not be accepted in court unless the tenant damaged the door/original lock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the house is being repossessed, talk to the lender. They may not be aware that there is a sitting tenant. They cannot just lock YOU out.

 

I had this situation a few years ago. I contacted the bank concerned and made a proposition. I said I would move out and hand them the keys if the let me stay for 3 months rent free. They agreed and that is exactly what I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But he can still give you notice isn't it? I found this site very informative. It has a nice summary of landlord/tenants laws for each country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. The landlord can only serve notice under two circumstances.

 

1. Tenancy term has lapsed

2. There is a breach of tenancy

 

If the landlord gets the hump, that is not a reason to evict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some good advice here. I was struck, though, by your original comment that

 

"i received a text message from my landlord yesterday (wednesday) morning asking for entry 'this AM' for a plumber. i never replied, as i was a bit annoyed."

Don't wish to excuse the landlord of turning up unannounced, but they needed to fix a leak and had advised in advance of their visit. They should have waited for you to reply though, of course.

 

There are many other posts on CAG of landlords who don't respond, sometimes in quite serious circumstances, so before going ballistic with this particular landlord, next time, perhaps, just tell him "sorry, can't do thursday morning, can you please call in the afternoon instead" or something?

 

Water leaks, especially in blocks of flats, can be dreadful to sort out sometimes - and can often have been going on for awhile before the leak is actually seen.

 

A reasonable landlord won't want to muck about, they will, sensibly, just want to get in and sort it before more damage is done.

 

That said, they had asked you to stop using the shower, so sounds like someone somewhere had a pretty good idea as to the cause of the problem! Arguably, less of an emergency then, as others here have suggested too. Once you've found out more about the cause of the water leak then, perhaps, that would be a good time to send a firm, but polite letter.

 

Otherwise, as JimmySpangle mentioned, a notice may follow once the original term has lapsed. Some landlords do respond, later, to tenants in that way too.


As for me, happy to help out. I am not a Landlord, but I have been in the past. I am not an Agent, but I have been in the past. I am, therefore, a has been, so always seek independent and suitably qualified advice elsewhere before relying upon whatever has been posted here :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...