Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
    • As already mentioned freely available "credit scores" are fairly useless. All lenders have their own "credit scoring" system, that for obvious reasons they don't divulge. And they're "scored" differently to the freely available ones. As soon as they could, we've always encouraged our two children to use credit cards responsibly... Pay off in full, etc, to generate good history. It's paid off. At quite young ages, they have both obtained loans for cars, mortgage and their credit card limits are through the roof. Personally, I have shifted debt around a lot on credit cards (even financed a house purchase once at 0% 😉) and I've only ever been refused a credit card once, sorry twice by the same company, over many years. They must have something very different in their lending criteria. You're a tight one, Mr Branson.
    • Hi DX - quick question, what is the bank likely to do when they get my letter of change of address ? also what is the worst they can do? thanks J1L
  • 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
      • 160 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

Letting Agency refusing to refund holding fee


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5221 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

You need to remove your personal details from the letter.

 

Why do you think they take such a fee? It is commonplace for the agency to undertake credit cheques prior to allowing a tenant into a property.

 

The letter should be written in your girlfriend's name. The letting agent would be within their rights to ignore your letter, as they see it, it is nothing to do with you.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is commonplace, but not all agencies will carry out a credit check and the point I'm trying to make is that had my Girlfriend been told that a credit check was part of the acceptance procedure she would have stopped right there and then since she has a bad credit history. shouldn't the agency have informed her of their credit checking policy, since they could make a fortune from people with poor credit histories by repeating this "pay fee, fail check, your'e screwed" procedure again and again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 points here. I beleive it is an offence to carry out a crediot check without the persons consent. Secondlyt, as the person was not aware they were duped out of their £200. That is obtaining money by deception.

 

I would not send that letter at all, but bring in the police instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was thinking that.

They did deceive her by not telling her that the application could fail upon checking her credit rating... but I'm not running down to the station just yet, I hope to just put my case across in the best way possible and get my money back without involving anyone else...

I will try the police Idea but I doubt they'll take it seriously...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've edited the letter making it in her name.

Also changed receipt picture to better quality

Thanks so far for the replies:)

Edited by CBA
Link to post
Share on other sites

It stinks of [problem] to me.

 

The critical thing is that she was not asked for consent to a credit check. With her credit history you say she would never have gone for that, so it makes perfect sense. I believe she was not asked or told about the credit check and would suggest this is just a quick buck [problem].

Link to post
Share on other sites

It stinks of [problem] to me.

 

The critical thing is that she was not asked for consent to a credit check. With her credit history you say she would never have gone for that, so it makes perfect sense. I believe she was not asked or told about the credit check and would suggest this is just a quick buck [problem].

 

So where do you think I stand, should I confront the place personally?

Should I go down the money by deception route?

Would sending the letter do any harm? should I try something else first?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Amberloz

I always make sure that the tenant fills out and signs a consent form allowing me to carry out a credit check. This is due to the data protection act.

If this tenancy was for your girlfriend then she really needs to talk to them as I dont think they would talk to you about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to get my gf to go and sort it out...

I suppose she just highlights the problems, shows what is wrong then if they don't pay it's off to trading standards for tea and crumpets?

What should she say? take note of the word doc attached and the receipt...

Are there any other agencies that might be interested in this agencies conduct?

Edited by CBA
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've edited the letter making it in her name.

 

Thanks so far for the replies:)

 

I note that is says on the receipt you added that it will not be refunded in the event of a failed application. That is your position. I do understand that is does not expressly state the money will not be refunded if you fail a credit check and it should be clearer.

 

Have a go by all means, but I think you are going to have some difficulty.

 

I would say that they have breached the DPA and that should be your angle to apply pressure.

 

If you are going after them, then write a letter saying you are going to commence legal proceedings if they do not pay in say 14 days, but only do this if you are prepared to commence.

Edited by GuidoT
  • Haha 1

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Amberloz

I think they have breached the Data Protection Act so I would get your girlfriend to say this when you see the agent or when she writes to them. I still dont understand why agents charge £200+ for credit checks as I only pay £30 quid for mine and we dont charge them for it. I work for a private landlord that has alot of properties.

 

I would go down the road of giving them 14 days to resond to the letter and then go ahead with legal proceedings but I will point out that it will cost a bit for it to go to court and you might not get your money back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks people, I've drawn up my final letter, mentioning Data protection, trading standards...

14 days to pay or to small claims court we go.

They have no signed paperwork whatsoever, so cannot produce any documents in court, the credit check was never authorised in writing, in person or by phone

so the DPA has certainly been breeched.

Also the information regarding the holding fee and credit checks was not given to my GF, and so that would be "witholding information" which is lying, which in the case of them ending up with the fee does constitute a case of obtaining money by deception... they should just pay the money back, or goto court and have fun with no paperwork:eek: and a possible criminal charge... moving out of county court and on to the magistrates if they don't play their cards right...

which looking at their skill so far they can't do to save their gentleman's vegetables.

 

Thanks to all contributors! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shops often have a 'policy' of no refunds. Sometimes companies refuse credit cards under £5. Some people have policies where they only issue credit notes and not refunds.

 

This agent has a policyb of taking £200 and keeping it. However, policy and law are different. The £200 was taken as a deposit and the client was not told it was non refundable. They were also not told about a credit check.

 

The fact that it is written on the back of a receipt is not binding as any contract has to be agreed verbally or in writing. She didn't sign, wasn't told and thus there was no agreement. they would lose in court.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they know they would lose, so I expect with a little luck they will just pay out. Thanks for all the advice, Will tell you the outcome, letter is going in post sometime today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There seem to be a few of these things around. You should get together and compare notes.

 

Agencies can take payments to cover administrative costs, but if it is not stated that the payment is for such costs it appears that it probably should be refunded if either party cannot proceed.

 

See the following, and the other thread I linked to.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/residential-commercial-lettings/237067-holding-deposit-query-250-a.html

 

I am not a lawyer. I got the information from a legal site.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter is in the post, It's pretty good, If it was addressed to you you would be "Passing" Bricks:-x

If it doesn't work I'm off to county court, but it should work, they haven't the slightest case to put across, they did not give all the facts - they broke the DPA, they withheld important information... they did plenty enough to get into trouble... fingers crossed they just return the money, and even if they do I'm still reporting them to the Information commissioner people, they're breaking the law and ripping people off, someone should put a stop to it and I'm stubborn and determined enough to do it:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...