Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Primary and secondary teachers are supporting pupils with their own money, buying food and warm clothing. Eight in 10 primary teachers in England spending own money to help pupils | Education | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Increasing numbers of children hungry and lack adequate clothing, with two-thirds of secondary teachers also supporting pupils  
    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
  • 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

Landlord has rented us a house he knows was repossessed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4357 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

We moved into a rented 3 bedroomed house on 28th April 2012 and paid a deposit of £700 and one months rent in advance of £700. I came home from work last night and found a letter from Eversheds addressed to the Tenants advising that we face eviction.

 

It turns out that there was a repossession hearing in January 2012 and my landlord was meant to give back possession of the property by 22nd February 2012. I can only imagine the LL would have been aware of this? On the day we moved in I found an eviction notice and asked the LL about it he advised me that it was for his previous tenants as they hadnt paid the rent.

 

By the looks of things the Lender now owns the property, but where do I stand? Is this fraud / Deception to obtain money?

 

Shall I notify the Police?

 

I really dont know what to do please help

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to speak to Eversheds/lenders and explain the situation in the first insatnce.

Do not pay any more rent the your LL untill you know the exact situation.

If you get the confirmation that he know longer owns the property the yes inform the police and ask the LL for your money back ( contract void ).

Any monies paid should go to the legal owners.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the possession order the owner remains an owner and any tenancy he grants is, as between the landlord and tenant, valid. No fraud is involved. However, if the lender secures possession against the tenant the tenant is entitled to damages for breach of contract, though whether it is worth pursuing a landlord who has a possession order against him is another matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

LL claims he knew nothing about this despite previous tenant bring it to his attention in March. Eversheds advised that they had spoken to him before we moved in and he was well aware of the situation, cannot delay possession as they have been here before with this LL. I Have asked for my money back and proof of deposit scheme. He has until 4pm on 1st June or I will start legal proceedings.

 

Letter from eversheds and also hand delivered eviction notice arrived yesterday, eviction date is 13th June @ 10am

 

Anything else I can do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is your deposit in a protected scheme?

 

Was the "eviction notice" issued by a court and state "possession order"?

 

Also - I don't know your circumstances or finances but presume you have children.

 

It could make sense to speak to the council and inform them you are currently seeking advice on how to prevent homelessness, but have an eviction notice dated two weeks away, and the circumstances behind that "eviction" were entirely outwith your control.

 

Do you know the lender who ordered the repossession?

 

As the lender has a duty to mitigate their loss, by evicting you they may have an unrented, unsold property for quite a long period of time. By evicting you they are potentially failing to mitigate that loss.

 

This needs to be approached in three ways and you can try with both the solicitors and the lender. Initially ask nicely if you can stay and say you will be happy to leave "during the school holidays to prevent disruption to the kids, or until they have a date for a buyer to move in" etc. Also ask if they would be willing to sell to you, as this can buy more time too. If they seem unwilling with both, start pushing towards it being their failure to mitigate their loss, as if its empty for two years before a sale, its a 17K loss they created themselves (this is unlikely to work if your LL owed far more). You pretty much need to play it by ear - and pitch to a member of staff with sufficient seniority to be able to make the decision.

 

Its worth remembering they are all in business to make money, and despite eviction being their short term target, you were not their problem, and you could be the person to prevent them making a loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO Bang's option 3 is not viable. Lenders don't want to be LLs and a Ts rent is not going to mitigate their loss.

They want repo & a quick sale at auction, even if below equity owed. The mortgagee remains liable for any shortfall.

Though if OP has ability to purchase, he may win at auction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just an update guys... I got out of the accommodation and it was repossessed. LL failed to place the deposit in a scheme and even more put a false address on the tenancy agreement. I reported his to the HSE as he failed to supply a gas cert. The guy has return £700 out of the £1400 owed and he has today texted me saying he will sue me for 12 mths rent. The guy is clearly deluded, however it still sits heavily on my mind, can he do this and is he likely to win? Any thoughts please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's obviously trying to scare you into giving up on the remaining £700 - how can he sue you for 12 months rent on a property that isn't available for rent ? , he breached the contract - not you. Send him a letter before action (by recorded delivery and keep a copy) giving 7 days to pay you then issue a court claim.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...