Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Welcome to the real world. What year of university are you in? What university? And what are you studying? What is the name of the agent? And what is the name of the landlord? The business of holding deposits should be affected by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and that means that they should be subject to terms relating to fairness. It seems to me that if you pull out of an agreement to take the property then the agent or landlord should only be entitled to hold on to sufficient funds to cover any administrative losses which they have suffered as a result of your change of decision. In practice many agents will simply take the opportunity to cream off a bit of extra profit. I suppose you just paid the money over without any kind of written agreement or recording or any evidence. Certainly, if you paid over a holding deposit on the basis of a particular contractual promise – that there would be a break clause and then subsequently there was no break clause then it would be a simple matter to argue that it was the agent of the landlord who had gone into the breach of contract in which case you would be entitled to recover all of your money. However do you have evidence of this? Similarly, if you pay the holding deposit and were only told afterwards that it was not refundable then it is arguable – although not cut and dried – that they had introduced a new term into an existing contract and so once again, you would be entitled to recover all of your money. However, once again – do you have any evidence of this? It will be interesting to know whether the agent is acting of their own initiative here or whether they are really exercising the will of the landlord. Please address the questions which I've put above
    • The house was sold in 2015. What’s Ll/BB. Can any one just say what I need to do. Or what I can do. Are Lowell in there rights to claim and therefore I’m liable for paying back the debt. Even though they can’t prove a contract to me in my name. Many thanks 
    • Hi GrievingMum   I fully understand and sympathise with your medical conditions.   The 3 screenshots/images in post#21 I have removed as I have converted those into one PDF which is now showing in that post.   CAG prefers PDFs rather than multiple screenshots/images but as I said I appreciate your medical condition so I have converted those screenshots/images into one PDF and removed the screenshots/images and left the PDF in your post.    CAG also prefers that all our caggers remain Anonymous on CAG, could I just suggest that when your have edited your document to just leave it for a while then go back to it and recheck that you have removed all info to keep you anonymous before uploading to CAG.
    • The letter send to contact them. Maybe if they wanted people to ring them they should put telephone? I was in India at the time so not really convenient to call them (I can prove this to them if it became an issue)  
    • Hi  I genuinely have not received this BUT I am not saying that it hasnt been sent as I am sure it will have been.   As i said, my son has the same name as me and I am sure if he had seen one of these, he will have let me know as he did when he opened the second letter. 
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 909 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

evening all,

 

I apologise if this has been covered before.

 

Someone I know has had a bailiff chasing him for a magistrates fine, the bailiff hasn't levied or been into the house.

 

If he pays the fine directly to the court (i.e online) will this cancel the warrant and hence the bailiffs authority to seize goods (i.e his fees then become small claims territory?)

 

Many thanks

 

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
evening all,

 

I apologise if this has been covered before.

 

Someone I know has had a bailiff chasing him for a magistrates fine, the bailiff hasn't levied or been into the house.

 

If he pays the fine directly to the court (i.e online) will this cancel the warrant and hence the bailiffs authority to seize goods (i.e his fees then become small claims territory?)

 

Recent posts by others who have been in a similar situation suggest that the Court returns any payments made by cheque.

 

Many thanks

 

Matt

 

PT


Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry Ploddertom, maybe I'm being thick here, but did you mean that if you pay by cheque they will return it, I'm going to pay online.

 

Many thanks

 

Madmatt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi madmatt, yes I suspect that is what he meant. And I conclude that he suggests online payment may be more successful although I cannot guarantee that!

One observation I note is that in your OP it is someone you know who has a problem, in your last post it is you who is going to pay online. Freudian slip? :)

I'd be interested to know if there where any other personal circumstances that may be of interest? Such as benefits, disability, illness etc.

Either way, good luck and best wishes.

Rae.

Edited by RaeUK
type o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sorry Ploddertom, maybe I'm being thick here, but did you mean that if you pay by cheque they will return it, I'm going to pay online.

 

Many thanks

 

Madmatt

 

I meant any way you pay.

 

PT


Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening everyone,

 

Been a while since I posted on here, anyway;

 

My ex-wife has managed to get herself a speeding fine that was sent to a previous address.

 

The Bailiff, from Marstons Holdings has been handwriting the usual drivel about coming with a locksmith on the phone until I got involved,

 

She has been to the police about the threats, the bailiff has admitted that they do not hold an order to force entry and now seems to have backed off a bit.

 

My question's are;

 

a) The only bailiff I can find whose name remotely resembles the name on the paperwork is different (i.e abbreviated)......is this an item of interest

 

b) The name that appears on the register is listed as working for M^&%tons group and she claims to work for M*&stons holdings, again is this of interest

 

c) She has been discussing the case with my ex-sister in-law and my son, is this a potential breach of the DPA?

 

 

Many thanks in advance for your valued opinions

 

Madmatt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has she paid the speeding fine?


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Enforcement Agent holds a magistrates warrant, no further "warrant" to force entry is needed as the power to force entry is contained within the warrant he already holds.

 

No, the name thing is not an issue. Many people are registered for an EA certificate using full names and often enforce using a more commonly used name. But it is worth checking it is actually him and that he does hold a certificate.

 

Regarding the DPA, the EA can state who he is, the company he works for, what he is there to enforce, how he is going to enforce it and ways to stop enforcement. He shouldn't be giving balances out to 3rd parties though without the debtors permission.

 

Marston holdings and Marston's group are one and the same.

 

And if this is indeed a hmcts fine for speeding, then the bit about a locksmith.....isn't drivel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your replies, with regard to the name issue they have modified/changed their surname....with regard to the DPA, the bailiff and the office dicussed full details with third parties...

 

Marstons have now admitted they have not got a paragraph 15 (Force entry) warrant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Marstons have now admitted they have not got a paragraph 15 (Force entry) warrant

 

I am sorry but what is a Paragraph 15 Forced Entry warrant !!

 

With an unpaid court fine, there is NO provision for a separate warrant to 'force entry'. The reason for this being that the warrant of control itself permits the right to Force Entry.

 

I will repeat one more time.....if the debt being enforced in an unpaid magistrate court fine, then the is no requirement for a separate 'forced entry' warrant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for your replies, with regard to the name issue they have modified/changed their surname....with regard to the DPA, the bailiff and the office dicussed full details with third parties...

 

Marstons have now admitted they have not got a paragraph 15 (Force entry) warrant

 

Who was the third party and what is their connection to the case?

 

Yes, they will fully admit they don't have a paragraph 15 "order" as they don't need one. Just forget about needing a separate warrant, you will just waste your time.

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...