Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • 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.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • 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)
  • 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

My Landlord in Administration.Help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5068 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

hi,

please help please help please help please help please help please help

 

My landlord in Administration.

 

i received a letter from Leader lettings to the "Current tenants" informing me that my landlord is no longer my landlord and i should pay them the rent? the also say any money i paid before 9th of April is not a valid payment? "and may therefore affect your rent history"??

 

my contract is assured short hold tenancy agreement renewed from 15 of November 2009 with 2 months notice and option to leave after 6 months.

 

I want to know :

 

1. is may contract still valid? if so can they give me my deposit back. ?

2. i have given notice to leave the property when 6 moths are up. do they have to honor that? if not can i leave now?

3. what happens to the rent i payed before the 9th of April. ?

 

please help me am not sure what to do :(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(

 

 

Thanks

:)

Edited by halinlondon
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Ask the agents for the name and address of the landlord of the property i.e the owner - they have legal obligation to do this by law. You can also do a search to verify who the owner is by doing a serch on the land registry website I think its about £4 that will give you the name of the owner it won't give you their address though. If your landlord is in administration you should have been contacted with the company that is dealing with the landlord administration they will provide you with an official looking letter that confirms their appointment. Furthermore if your landlord is an individual private owner i.e not a company he would be going bankrupt not 'in administration' only companies go into adminstration. You will need to do some digging and if in doubt hold the rent in a seperate account and notify whoever is requesting money that you are holding the rent and don't spend it keep it ready for when they exp;ain what is going on. I would also ask about your tenancy deposit and where that is!

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I received a letter from Leader lettings to the "Current tenants" informing"

 

I take it that current tenants is how they addressed the letter. If so, I would be very suspicious of this or any letter about anything official where they have not put your name.

 

Sounds like those emails you get supposedly from banks asking you to confirm your details/log on to your internet banking through a link supplied by them that are addressed to "valued customer", etc.

 

There is a Leaders Letting Agency. They have a professional looking website and seem to be on the level. Take a look at their website to see if the details match: Leaders Letting Agents UK - Property to Let, Flats and Houses for Rent

 

Knowledgeispower is right you need to check this out further before you pay your rent to them. Ask them the questions suggested and also try to get in touch with your landlord or letting agency you have been dealing with up to now as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...