Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi. Could you post up what they've sent please so we can see what the charge is? Cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • I've looked through all our old NPE threads, and as far as we know they have never had the bottle to do court. There are no guarantees of course, but when it comes to put or shut up they definitely tend towards shut up. How about something like -   Dear Jonathan and Julie, Re: PCN no.XXXXX cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea that you actually expected me to take this tripe seriously and cough up. I'll write to you not some uninterested third party, thanks all the same, because you have are the ones trying to threaten me about this non-existent "debt". Go and look up Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd, saddos.  Oh, while you're at it, go and look up your Subject Access Request obligations - we all know how you ballsed that up way back in January to March. Dear, dear, dear - you couldn't resist adding your £70 Unicorn Food Tax, you greedy gets.  Judges don't like these made-up charges, do they? You can either drop this foolishness now or get a hell of a hammering in court.  Both are fine with me.  Summer is coming up and I would love a holiday at your expense after claiming an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). I look forward to your deafening silence.   That should show them you're not afraid of them and draw their attention to their having legal problems of their own with the SAR.  If they have any sense they'll crawl back under their stone and leave you in peace.  Over the next couple of days invest in a 2nd class stamp (all they are worth) and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
  • 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

private tenancy problems need urgent help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4439 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 , my stepson is disabled and in a wheelchair , he recently moved in with his girlfriend in london , we live in leamington spa , he wanted to attend collage to further his education but nothing was available in warwickshire so he signed up for an it course in loughton , london where his girlfriend lives in london with her mother and stepfather .

 

Now the agreed rent for him was £25 pw .

 

He was awarded housing benefit of £133 per fortnight.

 

The gilfriends parents now know this are are askin for the full award .

 

My son has since been diagnosed with 2 more tumors and wants to be with us for support and care .

 

The girlfriends parents have requested he pay over £700 in back rent because they are now out of work and have changed the verbal agreement .

 

They also have a lcd tv of his which they say will not be released untill this is settled , the tv is not paid for ,,out of my wifes catalogue .

 

No written agreement was signed for the rent .

 

Please what are his options ?

 

Do you know of any solicitors who may be able to help him ,,legal aid ..

 

thanks all ...warren

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi waz

 

The guys will be happy to advise as soon as they are available.

 

Heres some info:- http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/32/contents

1 Definition of “wrongful interference with goods”

In this Act “ wrongful interference” , or “ wrongful interference with goods” , means—

(a) conversion of goods (also called trover),

(b) trespass to goods,

© negligence so far at it results in damage to goods or to an interest in goods.

(d) subject to section 2, any other tort so far as it results in damage to goods or to an interest in goods.

 

In the meantime Google this case, Cashmere v Walsh, Downing and Veale (2009)

Basically the landlord can't hold the TV against any monies owed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly this does fall under Assured Short-hold Tenancy rules under the Housing Act as it would appear that the Landlords are resident at the property where your son was residing. Any agreement would have to have been done under a License instead. I do not know whether these can be set up verbally. Even if they can was a fixed term agreed and were any notices to quit agreed?

 

Very difficult I would have thought for either party to prove either way and therefore personally I would ignore their demands for back rent completely. How you get the TV back I hope someone else can assist.

 

Good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi all,

 

My boyfriend has to move out of his shared room because his friend who he shared with wanted to leave and return back to his own country. My boyfriend couldn't stay as the rent was too high for him to pay by himself.

 

The problem he has is that his friend decided only 1 week ago that he was going so therefore only 1 weeks notice was given to the landlord.

 

Although, the contract does state 1 months notice, the landlord is now saying that he will only return half the deposit?????

 

I personally don't think this is right. Ok, the correct notice period wasn't given but surely he can't deduct half the deposit when it clearly doesn't state that in the contract if the correct notice period isn't given.

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

My boyfriend has to move out of his shared room because his friend who he shared with wanted to leave and return back to his own country. My boyfriend couldn't stay as the rent was too high for him to pay by himself.

 

The problem he has is that his friend decided only 1 week ago that he was going so therefore only 1 weeks notice was given to the landlord.

 

Although, the contract does state 1 months notice, the landlord is now saying that he will only return half the deposit?????

 

I personally don't think this is right. Ok, the correct notice period wasn't given but surely he can't deduct half the deposit when it clearly doesn't state that in the contract if the correct notice period isn't given.

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks x

Please would you post this in a new thread.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

My comments only apply if the premises are entirely within England.

 

This posting is supplemental to the information in this forum's "sticky" threads and is NOT to be read in isolation.

 

 

You can't have a tenancy, or even a licence.

 

For a contract to be validly created, and therefore legally binding, there must be -

 

(a) an offer to reserve the property, made by the landlord;

(b) an acceptance of that offer by the tenant;

© a payment, usually of money, by the tenant;

(d) an intention to create legal relations - which is presumed to exist unless the landlord and tenant are related by blood or marriage.

 

 

In your case, you fail point (d) above. One of the potential 'tenants' - the girlfriend - is related by blood and/or marriage to the landlords, who are her parents or step-parents; in that situation there usually cannot be a valid contract in law.

 

The so-called 'debt' can't exist if the contract is invalid.

 

 

You might sue for recovery of your goods, under the 1977 Act. But you can't sue under the contract if it doesn't exist.

 

 

Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977:

 

Section 3. Form of judgment where goods are detained

 

(1) In proceedings for wrongful interference against a person who is in possession or in control of the goods relief may be given in accordance with this section, so far as appropriate.

 

(2) The relief is -

 

(a) an order for delivery of the goods, and for payment of any consequential damages, or

 

(b) an order for delivery of the goods, but giving the defendant the alternative of paying damages by reference to the value of the goods, together in either alternative with payment of any consequential damages, or

 

© damages.

 

 

Legal Aid will NOT be available for a claim worth less than £5,000.

 

 

In my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...