housing meeting without me

[Anna67]

Hi,can anyone help? I started a complaint against my nousing association back in August 2010 regarding issues of how long i have been on the list and people leap frogging over me ect, well seems i got the poliicies changed just by taking no for an answer all by myself, but anyway the other issue i have is, i got through to a stage 3 complaint with this particular housing association,but i cancelled as i was vomiting all night and asked for another date, it turns out they had the meeting and upheld my compplaint without me being there then sent me the email of the minutes which stated id been informed and agreed to some of what was said during the meeting but i wasnt there ????? iv since been told they are sorry but the person taking the minutes had made a mistake ect ect and that the meeting could have gone ahead without me there if i had given prior permission i had not !!!!! now it seems they are trying to stop me making a further complaint about their conduct and are basically saying it will take years and all i could expect is an apology i think they are trying to save thier own necks as i feel this was grossly negligent , does anyone know how i coud proceed, they have said they will offer me a good willl gesture (money) they offered me this verbally and in a letter,( i have refused as i think its wrong what they did , just wondering if i could get a solicitor to take it on or could i get it to coury myself thanks in advance

[silverfox1961]

Hi,

Sent you a PM and post moved to a thread of its own

 

I don't think a solicitor will do much more than the Local Government Ombudsman could do and the LGO is free. All you need to do is exhaust the councils complaints procedure first.

Yes, it will take time but perseverance usually pays off (metaphorically)

[Wingus]

I have something that might help.

 

Misrepresentation

 

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misrepresentation

 

 

Misrepresentation means a false statement of fact made by one party to another party and has the effect of inducing that party into the contract. For example, under certain circumstances, false statements or promises made by a seller of goods regarding the quality or nature of the product that the seller has may constitute misrepresentation. A finding of misrepresentation allows for a remedy of rescission and sometimes damages depending on the type of misrepresentation.

There are two types of misrepresentation in contract law, fraud in the factum and fraud in inducement. Fraud in the factum focuses on whether the party in question knew they were creating a contract. If the party did not know that they were entering into a contract, there is no meeting of the minds, and the contract is void. Fraud in inducement focuses on misrepresentation attempting to get the party to enter into the contract. Misrepresentation of a material fact (if the party knew the truth, that party would not have entered into the contract) makes a contract voidable.

According to Gordon v. Selico[55] it is possible to make a misrepresentation either by words or by conduct, although not everything said or done is capable of constituting a misrepresentation. Generally, statements of opinion or intention are not statements of fact in the context of misrepresentation.

Both an order for specific performance and an injunction are discretionary remedies, originating for the most part in equity. Neither is available as of right and in most jurisdictions and most circumstances a court will not normally order specific performance. A contract for the sale of real property is a notable exception. In most jurisdictions, the sale of real property is enforceable by specific performance. Even in this case the defenses to an action in equity (such as laches, the bona fide purchaser rule, or unclean hands) may act as a bar to specific performance.

Related to orders for specific performance, an injunction may be requested when the contract prohibits a certain action. Action for injunction would prohibit the person from performing the act specified in the contract.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Misrepresentation Act 1967

 

1967 CHAPTER 7

 

Source: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/7

 

 

An Act to amend the law relating to innocent misrepresentations and to amend sections 11 and 35 of the Sale of Goods Act 1893.

 

 

[22nd March 1967]

1 Removal of certain bars to rescission for innocent misrepresentation.E+W

 

 

Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him, and—

 

 

(a)the misrepresentation has become a term of the contract; or

 

 

(b)the contract has been performed;

 

 

or both, then, if otherwise he would be entitled to rescind the contract without alleging fraud, he shall be so entitled, subject to the provisions of this Act, notwithstanding the matters mentioned in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.

2 Damages for misrepresentation.E+W

 

 

(1)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation was not made fraudulently, unless he proves that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made the facts represented were true.

 

 

(2)Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him otherwise than fraudulently, and he would be entitled, by reason of the misrepresentation, to rescind the contract, then, if it is claimed, in any proceedings arising out of the contract, that the contract ought to be or has been rescinded, the court or arbitrator may declare the contract subsisting and award damages in lieu of rescission, if of opinion that it would be equitable to do so, having regard to the nature of the misrepresentation and the loss that would be caused by it if the contract were upheld, as well as to the loss that rescission would cause to the other party.

 

 

(3)Damages may be awarded against a person under subsection (2) of this section whether or not he is liable to damages under subsection (1) thereof, but where he is so liable any award under the said subsection (2) shall be taken into account in assessing his liability under the said subsection (1).

[Wingus]

Also.

 

Implied Terms

 

Source: http://www.gillhams.com/articles/141.cfm

General Application to Contracts

 

The rule is of general application and terms may be implied into contracts of virtually any nature, involving arbitration, agency, building, technology licences, sales of goods, supply of services and real property. The implication of terms remains a matter of law for a court to decide with the guidance of established legal principle.

When Terms are Implied into a Contract

 

Terms may be implied by the facts of a particular case, which are considered to reflect the parties’ intentions. The general principles are that an implied term must:

 

1. not contradict any express term of the contract
   
2. be reasonable and equitable
   

[Wingus]

Also, contact your MP, newspapers, the full works.