Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • is the home in joint names but this is solely your debt? need far more history to be able to comment if it's paid off and was not just written of by one partly on their books and sold to anther, thus the cra file says £0. dx
    • So, Sunak has managed to get someone to 'volunteer to go to Rwanda hasn't he? .. for just £3000 payment to the person plus 5 years free board and lodging isnt it? - cost to UK taxpayer over £300M+ (300 million quid+) isnt it? - Bargain says Rwanda, especially with all the profit we made privately selling those luxury chalets Bravermann advertised for us   I wonder how many brits would jump at that offer? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Lets see, up to 5 years free board and lodging and £3k in my pocket .. I'd go - and like that person - just come back if/when I get bored. First job - off to Botswana for a week to see the elephants.   Of course the paid volunteers going to Botswana are meaningless - Rwanda have REPEATEDLY said they wont take any forcibly trafficked people in breach of international law eh? Have the poops actually got any civil servants to agree to go yet - probably end up as more massive payments to VIPal contractors to go and sit there doing nowt shortly eh?    
    • Hi Wondered if I could get a little advise please. I entered into a commercial lease (3 years) and within a few months I had to leave as the business I was trading with collapsed. I returned the keys to the landlord and explained the situation and no money, also likely to go on benefits but the landlord stuck to their guns. They have now instructed solicitors to send letter before action claiming just over £4000. The lease was mine and so the debt. I know this. I have emailed the solicitors twice to explain I am out of work and that with help from family I could offer a full and final settlement figure of £1500 or £10pw. This was countered by them with an offer to reduce the debt by £400, or pay off the amount over 12 months. I went back with an improved full and final offer of £2500 or £20pw. This has been rejected with the comment 'papers ready to go to court'. I have no hope of paying the £4000 and so it will have to go to court. Pity as I have no debts otherwise but not working is a killer. I wondered if they take me to court, could I ask for mediation? I also think that taking me to court will result in a pretty much nothing per week payment from my benefits. Are companies just pushing ahead with action even if a better offer is on the table? Thanks for your help.
    • Hi all, Many thanks for the advice! Unfortunately, the reply to the email was as expected…   Starbucks UK Customer Care <[email protected]> Hi xxxxxx, We are sorry to read you received a parking charge after using our Stansted Airport - A120 DT store. Unfortunately, the car park here is managed by MET parking. Both Starbucks and EuroGarages who own and operate this site are not able to help and have no authority to overturn any parking charges received. If you have followed the below terms then you would need to send all correspondence to [email protected], who will be able to assist you further. Several signs around the car park clarify the below terms and conditions: • Maximum stay 60 minutes, whilst the store is open. If the store is closed, pay to park applies. • The car park is for Starbucks customers only who make a purchase in our store, a charge will be issued if you left the site. • If you had made a purchase and required additional time, you must have inputted your registration number into the in store iPad which would have extended your stay up to 3 hours • To park in a disabled bay, you must have displayed a valid disabled badge. • If Starbucks was closed, you must have paid for parking as charges still apply, following signage located on site. • If you didn’t use the store, you must have paid for parking, following signage located on site Please ensure all further correspondence is directed to MET parking at the above email address, and accept our apologies that we cannot help you further on this matter.  Kind Regards,  Lora K  Customer Care Team Leader Starbucks Coffee Company, Building 4 Chiswick Park, London, W4 5YE
    • Thanks HB edited and re-uploaded. Thanks for the heads up 👍
  • 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 4336 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 there, looking for some advice hoping someone can help.

 

Quick summary

-We had moved into a property in early January this year.

 

Although we asked our estate agents specifically about the noise level in and around the property they had failed to tell us there was a nightclub directly behind the property.

 

For a whole week we had to endure extremely loud music until the early hours of the morning

(Music would start about 11pm and finish at 4, the base from the speakers could be heard throughout the property).

 

After making complaints to our Agents,

the Environmental and health department and the Police we got no answers.

 

We were then forced to make a difficult decision whether to move, as the current situation was not acceptable and we both started our new careers

and the lack of sleep was causing us great distress.

 

We decided it was best for both our health to move to a different property.

 

We took our leaving letter and keys to the estate agents and explained why we cannot stay no longer.

 

Now we are in dispute with the Agents and it will be going to court.

 

However the problem is with the council,

although we had told the council when we departed the property and explained the issue and paid the bill for the time we were there

they continue to chase us for council tax "owed" as the Estate agents claim that the tenancy had not finished.

 

After explaining and explaining that we are in dispute and we had only lived there for a week etc they still continue to chase us.

 

Would somebody be able to suggest some advice for us?

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

how long was your tenancy supposed to be for?

 

if a property has no residents, the liability for council tax falls upon the owner

 

however where a tenant has a tenancy which has a period of 6 months or more, they are treated as an owner for council tax liability purposes

 

so if your tenancy was supposed to be for less than 6 months, you are not liable

however if it was supposed to be for 6 months or more, then you would be liable up until the point that tenancy ended

Edited by id6052

If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As stated above if you singed a tenancy agreement for a fixed period of six months (or more) then the law considers you to have a material inters in the property and you would be responsible to pay the council tax to the end of the tenant.

 

6 Persons liable to pay council tax.

 

(1)The person who is liable to pay council tax in respect of any chargeable dwelling and any day is the person who falls within the first paragraph of subsection (2) below to apply, taking paragraph (a) of that subsection first, paragraph (b) next, and so on.

(2)A person falls within this subsection in relation to any chargeable dwelling and any day if, on that day—

(a)he is a resident of the dwelling and has a freehold interest in the whole or any part of it;

(b)he is such a resident and has a leasehold interest in the whole or any part of the dwelling which is not inferior to another such interest held by another such resident;

©he is both such a resident and a statutory [F1, secure or introductory tenant]of the whole or any part of the dwelling;

(d)he is such a resident and has a contractual licence to occupy the whole or any part of the dwelling;

(e)he is such a resident; or

(f)he is the owner of the dwelling.

(3)Where, in relation to any chargeable dwelling and any day, two or more persons fall within the first paragraph of subsection (2) above to apply, they shall each be jointly and severally liable to pay the council tax in respect of the dwelling and that day.

(4)Subsection (3) above shall not apply as respects any day on which one or more of the persons there mentioned fall to be disregarded for the purposes of discount by virtue of [F2paragraph 2 (severely mentally impaired) or 4 (students etc.) of Schedule 1 to this Act] and one or more of them do not; and liability to pay the council tax in respect of the dwelling and that day shall be determined as follows—

(a)if only one of those persons does not fall to be so disregarded, he shall be solely liable;

(b)if two or more of those persons do not fall to be so disregarded, they shall each be jointly and severally liable.

(5)In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires—

“owner”, in relation to any dwelling, means the person as regards whom the following conditions are fulfilled—

(a)he has a material interest in the whole or any part of the dwelling; and

(b)at least part of the dwelling or, as the case may be, of the part concerned is not subject to a material interest inferior to his interest;

“resident”, in relation to any dwelling, means an individual who has attained the age of 18 years and has his sole or main residence in the dwelling.

(6)In this section—[F3“introductory tenant" means a tenant under an introductory tenancy within the meaning of Chapter I of Part V of the Housing Act 1996;]

“material interest” means a freehold interest or a leasehold interest which was granted for a term of six months or more;

“secure tenant” means a tenant under a secure tenancy within the meaning of Part IV of the M1Housing Act 1985;

“statutory tenant” means a statutory tenant within the meaning of the M2Rent Act 1977 or the M3Rent (Agriculture) Act 1976.

 

You may however benefit from a second home discount if the property is furnished, or an exemption if its unfurnished.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for the replies guys.

 

So the tenancy was for 6 Months, but the tenancy had finished after 2months as the Agents found new tenants.

 

What our stance has been since we moved out and we have tried to explain time after time is the property was misrepresented (and that is what we are challenging the Agents for). We are not happy to pay considering it was the misrepresentation from the Agents part that caused this problem in the first place.

 

 

@revshelp - can you explain further "You may however benefit from a second home discount if the property is furnished, or an exemption if its unfurnished.", any documentation to read from?

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the new tenants move in as soon as you had moved out? If they did then you are only liable for council tax up until the new tenants moved in.

 

No there was a gap of two months.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

The main piece of law regarding Council Tax is the Local Government Finance Act 1992, you can read it in its entirety here http://www.legislation.gov.uk. Section 11 and 11A deal with discounts. The so called 'Second Home Discount" varies from 10% to 50% depending on which council area your in.

 

Certain properties are exempt if they fall into a certain 'Class'.

Class C: a dwelling which is unoccupied and has been so for a period of less than 6 months since the last occupation day and which is substantially unfurnished and has been so throughout that period;

 

(2) For the purpose of determining the last occupation day, any period of less than 6 weeks within which the dwelling concerned was occupied shall be disregarded.

 

The Council are obliged to bill the persons who the regulations say are liable and don't have the authority to override this, so they won't give much weight to your dispute withe the Letting Agents. If your taking the letting agents to court, could you reclaim any Council Tax from them as damages?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...