Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
  • 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

Buy to Let Mortgage problems.... not mine. Advice appreciated....


PriorityOne
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4938 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

Hiya folks...

 

A friend of mine has had some ongoing problems for quite a while and it's out of my comfort zone, so any advice would be appreciated.

 

Ok... her son bought a cottage some time ago and rented it out to his mum (my friend). She's been living happily in the cottage for a number of years but some time ago, a man knocked on the door and began asking questions. To cut a long story short, she later realised that she may have dropped her son in it by confirming that she was his mum and he'd let the property out to family. Apparently he wasn't meant to do this.

 

From what I can gather, he was offered a lower rate on the mortgage (or some other benefit) but it was made clear in the contract (allegedly) that he must not let the property out to family. She is mow worried that they'll come along and force the sale of the property.

 

I've tried to explain that it's not as simple as that and there are procedures to go through, etc... All mortgage payments are up-to-date by her son... so this is not the issue, but I'm assuming that the mortgage provider has decided to start action against her son for the recovery of outstanding monies under breach of contract.

 

As the son lives in London, I don't know him and even if I did, he might just see me as a nosy old bag ayway.... but I need to try and understand this one a little more and if there's any chance of her having to leave the house so that non-family tenants can move in instead.

 

This lady is a lot older than me; in her mid-late 60s, with a heart condition. She receives Attendance Allowance and is not in the best of health.

 

Any help would be appreciated... thanks... :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, did she admit she was renting the property from her son? If not, then there is nothing wrong with his mum living in it while he is in London "looking after it". I wonder what prompted the visitor asking questions?

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, did she admit she was renting the property from her son? If not, then there is nothing wrong with his mum living in it while he is in London "looking after it". I wonder what prompted the visitor asking questions?

 

Thanks for replying Ell-enn.. :-)

 

Yes I think she has admitted it.... she's too trusting for her own good and would have thought nothing of it. Her son does live and work in London actually but has his own property there with his family. I'm not sure what prompted the visitor.... but it sounds like a typical scenario where someone tips off someone but to do that, they'd have to have details of the mortgage company that he's gone through surely?.

 

Very odd...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is odd, I guess you'll just have to wait and see if anything comes of it and we can look to deal with it then.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi P1

 

The only concern of the mortgage company would be if she had a legally binding lease,this would or could cause a legal threat to their security in the property.

If she is simply paying her Son to rent it without a lease and the money is for the upkeep ie Gas Elec Water Rates etc then there is nothing really the mortgage company need worry or know about.That is an informal arrangement between Mother and Son and not legally binding or protecting her as a Tenant.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for replying everyone.... :-)

 

Like yourselves, I can't really see the big issue over this on the face of things.... as the mortgage company are getting their money. I've also questioned (to myself) being told that the mortgage company offered the son a lower rate even though it was a buy-to-let mortgage.... so I'm wondering what the son has actually told his mother and what is fact and fiction here as well.

 

He has a family home in London... and owns this other property that she lives in. As far as I'm aware, there's a mortgage on both properties... but there was no problem over the son letting it out as long as it wasn't to family (so the story goes). Is this a common thing? I would have thought that any rent would be more reliable if it was coming through family, although I know that some families are less than ideal.

 

The other factor could be if she's claiming Housing Benefit.... which would be going to her son. Would this be allowed? If it's not allowed, then surely it would be the Council noseying around and not the mortgage company? This guy was not from the council though. Also, if she's claiming HB, then I assume she'd need to have a lease of some kind.

 

Apparently, solicitors are involved and she's told me that they could take the property back!

 

Confused.com... lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
B*gger!! Thread title should say "advice"... not "advise".... Hope one of the mods can change it.... lol :!:

done

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...