Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.    Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.   The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved.  Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
    • I was referring to #415 where you wrote "I was forced to try to sell - and couldn't." . And nearer the start in #79 .. "I couldn't sell.  I had an incredibly valuable asset. Huge equity.  But the interest accrued / the property market suffered and I couldn't find a buyer even at a level just to clear the debt." In #194 you said you'd tried to sell for four years.  The reason for these points is that a lot of the claims against for example your surveyor, solicitor, broker, the lender and now the receiver are mainly founded in a belief that they should have been able to do something but did not. Things that might seem self evident to you but not necessarily to others. Pressing these claims may well need a bit more hard evidence, rather than an appeal to common sense. Can you show evidence of similar properties, with similar freehold issues, selling readily? And solid reasons why the lender should have been able to sell when you couldn't.
    • You can use a family's address.   The only caveat is for the final hearing you'd need to be there in person   HOWEVER i'd expect them to pay if its only £200 because costs of attending will be higher than that
  • 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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4880 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 all i have recieved a letter today from phillips for a unpaid court fine for no tv license for 2 weeks.

the fine originally was for £100 which i had paid £20, phillips have sent letter asking for £165 i have asked them what the costs were they have said for proccessing and other costs. i have also been advise that they will be sending someone to collect goods with a van which will cost me £200 if not paid within 7 days...they have said they have a warrant from the courts to enter my house with force if necessary is this true.....

 

the letter opens with this sentence..

 

your outstanding account has been included as part of operation crackdown,her majesty's courts service national campaign targetting fine defaulters.

 

and at the bottom it says...

 

our removal baliffs have the power to enter your premise, by force if necessary,to execute warrants as per sch4a magistartes court act 1980 as inserted by schdvcd act 2004..

 

 

i am a little worried about this as the way they word things are quiet scarry.i know abit about the cost with a normal baliff but not to sure in this case.

are they allowed to charge costs for just taking on the debt which is what the guy from phillips has said..

this is the first letter i have recieved ..however i have recieved many text message on my house phone for me to call them..

please can someone help or advise

thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an official advice on bailiffs and court fees: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex345.pdf On page 3 under Magistrates courts. It says …are not allowed to charge you more than the amount you are fined.

 

The advisory says there is an agreed scale of fees which bailiffs can charge, however that is by way of a contract between HMCS and the bailiff. There is nothing in that contract that says it can be charged to the debtor, and in any event, there is no contract (or court order) obligating the debtor to pay any fees. The HMCS contract allows the bailiff to deduct the fee from the fine collected and the balance is paid to HMCS.

 

In short, you dont need to pay the bailiffs fees. Only the fine.

Professional property investor and conveyancer

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I've found out:

 

All bailiff fees (with the exception of magistrates' court bailiffs) can be looked at by the county court to see if they are reasonable or excessive. This is known as 'detailed assessment'. If you think that the bailiff's fees are excessive you should get further advice about this.

 

How you're supposed to find out about magistrate court fines I don't kow. I'm sure someone will be along soon who can help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi thanks for the advice guys

can someone explain what a distress warrant is and how do i find out if there is one before they knock on the door.

if they do knock and they have one do i have to let them in...

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this - hope it helps:

 

“A person executing a Warrant of Distress must either show the warrant to the person against whom the distress is levied, or state where and how it can be inspected. • It is not essential that the warrant be in the possession of the person executing it at the time of execution.

 

• He must explain, in ordinary language, the sum for which distress is levied and the reason for the distress.

• He must show documentary proof of his identity.

• A civilian enforcement officer or approved enforcement agency (or employee, partner or director thereof) must provide a written statement of their and their employer’s identities and authority to a person against whom they execute a warrant”

Another very important point concerning the warrant is that for Distress Warrants and Financial Arrest Warrants, the relevant contracts provide that where the bailiff has failed to make contact with you on a first visit (which of course attracts a fee!!), he is required to put through your letterbox, a letter with the time and date of his visit. He must also make a note of this letter on the Warrant (which will be in his possession) and to include on the warrant also: “any identifying marks of the address”…such as the “specific colour of the door” as proof that he made the visit!!!! This is most important when checking the bailiff’s fees.

If the bailiff either refuses to provide you with a copy of the Warrant or to let you see the Warrant, our advice, would be to write a letter immediately to the Court Manager at the Magistrates Court to complain. Please ensure that you keep a copy of your letter and remember to send it by Registered mail.

We frequently hear from individuals that bailiffs have refused to show the distress warrant. If the warrant is in order, we cannot think of a suitable reason for withholding this vital document.

 

 

 

 

 

As I understand things, the only people who can force entry are HMRC for taxes. Not only do you not have to let them in, you shouldn't let them in. Lock the doors and windows. If unlocked they have every right to walk through the door or climb through an open window. Once they have gained peaceful entry once, they can force their way in any other time, so don't let them in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

just a quick up date i have recentley sent phillips for a breakdown on the costs and again they came back with.....

£75 for taking the case and not only that in there reply they have now added..£200 for a baliff to be put on the case however i have not seen this baliff yet this is just for being assigned to the case

is this allowed,,,,please help the bill now stands at £365 minus £10 i paid last week..i have only recieved 1 letter loads of text messages on my home phone and no visits at all......hhheeeelllllpppp

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the advice who shold i contact about this to get it sorted as phillips refuse to talk about the fees over the phone you just cant get a conversation out of them they are very abrupt and blunt..

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long has nothing has been physically removed Post 2 would seem to apply. Have a read of page 3, it's quite clear and comes direct from the court. Failing that my post says seek further advice if you think they're unfair. Either ask here or pop into CAB.

 

Hopefully post 2 is right and you can quote this to the bailiffs. Maybe worth phoning the court first to check it's correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...