Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Hello Friends. I cannot believe it but im being evicted again, i was given a section 48 notice 4 months into my tenancy. I already went through this process last year, i overstayed in my last place by a few months and left on 6th Oct 2023. I knew to check all the documentation that they sent to see if the notice is legal, it looks like it is. I took this place out of desperation as i had to vacate that last place. I hate this place so im not bothered about leaving it.    These cowboys lied to me when i viewed the house. I told the agent that i was evicted from my last house and naturally i dont want this to happen again. She said  the landlord has no plans to sell the house. What she did not tell me was that the landlord had tried to sell the house last year and failed. So it looks like they have used me to fill in the short period of time until its time to sell again. I did see it advertised online.   I told them im not in a strong enough financial position to find another property, cost of a deposit, 1 months rent and moving costs.   They have told me they are starting legal proceedings. They have sent me an invoice for £395 but i have not even received the court paperwork.    I dont like the job im in so i have decided to relocate to a better job and hopefully find cheaper rentals.   I can post a copy of the notice if needed.  
    • yes a judgement sorry I used the wrong word before
  • 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

No Electric/Gas Bills for 2 years...until now!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5178 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

I don't think there is a law behind the billing code as such, just an agreement between ofgem & the suppliers. I disagree with a couple of you comments pelham. Suppliers do not invariably say the code does not apply. After all, the code in practice, is applied by the people who do the bills. By & large, they have no vested interest in refusing or allowing the code. There are many cases where they cannot apply the code because an account just doesn't qualify when they actually feel it should & others where it is applied through gritted teeth when the person doing the bill knows the supplier has been "had".

Sometimes, especially ombudsman cases, suppliers are asked to amend an account in the "spirit" of the billing code, even though it doesn't actually apply.

The rules are actually quite clear. Sometimes they work in favour of people who don't deserve it & sometimes against those who do.

I also disagree with your comments about occupiers contacting the supplier. I believe there is an onus on people who move onto a property letting the supplier know. We all have to pay for the gas & electricity we use, we know that & I don't think inertia is an excuse. Of coure, sometimes there will be mistakes, but you seem to see something sinister behind them all & that just isn't the case.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...