Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Post #415 you said you were unable to sell it yourself. Earlier I believe you said there had been expressions of interest, but only if the buyer could acquire the freehold title. I wonder if the situation with the existing freeholders is such that the property is really unattractive, in ways possibly not obvious to someone who also has an interest in and acts for the freeholders.
    • i dont think the reason why the defendant lost the case means anything at all in that case. it was a classic judge lottery example.
    • Hello, I will try to outline everything clearly. I am a British citizen and I live in Luxembourg (I think this may be relevant for potential claims). I hired a car from Heathrow in March for a 3-day visit to family in the UK. I was "upgraded" to an EV (Polestar 2). I had a 250-mile journey to my family's address. Upon attempting to charge the vehicle, there was a red error message on the dashboard, saying "Charging error". I attempted to charge at roughly 10 different locations and got the same error message. Sometimes there was also an error message on the charging station screen. The Hertz 0800 assistance/breakdown number provided on the set of keys did not work with non-UK mobiles. I googled and found a bunch of other numbers, none of which were normal geographical ones, and none of which worked from my Luxembourg mobile. It was getting late and I was very short on charge. Also, there was no USB socket in the car, so my phone ran out of battery, so I was unable to look for further help online. It became clear that I would not reach my destination (rural Devon), so I had no choice but to find a roadside hotel in Exeter and then go to the nearest Hertz branch the following day on my remaining 10 miles of charge. Of course, as soon as the Hertz employee in Exeter plugged it into their own charger, the charging worked immediately. I have driven EVs before, I know how to charge them, and it definitely did not work at about 10 different chargers between London and Exeter. I took photos on each occasion. Luckily they had another vehicle available and transferred me onto it. It was an identical Polestar 2 to the original car. 2 minutes down the road, to test it, I went to a charger and it worked immediately. I also charged with zero issues at 2 other chargers before returning the vehicle. I think this shows that it was a charging fault with the first car and not my inability to do it properly. I wrote to Hertz, sending the hotel, dinner, breakfast and hotel parking receipt and asking for a refund of these expenses caused by the charging failure in the original car. They replied saying they "could not issue a refund" and they issued me with a voucher for 50 US dollars to use within the next year. Obviously I have no real proof that the charging didn't work. My guess is they will say that the photos don't prove that I was charging correctly, just that it shows an error message and a picture of a charger plugged into a car, without being able to see the detail. Could you advise whether I have a case to go further? I am not after a refund or compensation, I just want my £200 back that I had to spend on expenses. I think I have two possibilities (or maybe one - see below). It looks like the UK is still part of the European Consumer Centre scheme:  File a complaint with ECC Luxembourg | ECC-Net digital forms ECCWEBFORMS.EU   Would this be a good point to start from? Alternatively, the gov.uk money claims service. But the big caveat is you need a "postal address in the UK". In practice, do I have to have my primary residence in the UK, or can I use e.g. a family member's address, presumably just as an address for service, where they can forward me any relevant mail? Do they check that the claimant genuinely lives in the UK? "Postal address" is not the same as "Residence" - anyone can get a postal address in the UK without living there. But I don't want to cheat the system or have a claim denied because of it. TIA for any help!  
  • 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 4216 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 am hoping you can shed some light...

 

History - Council tax owed on previous property where my ex and myself lived. However we split up whilst living at the address and she continued to live there. They have both our names on the debt accordingly. They have tracked her down to her new address. Due to personal reasons she could not pay and was not aware of her rights, paid £100 to rundles last November and a payment plan was put in place, at no time did they gain access or levy on goods.

 

The payment plan was broken, she couldn't afford it....

 

She has a noted mental health issue on her health records and one of our sons is borderline autistic, again health records confirm this..

 

We recently wrote to rundles, after reading these forums, stating the above and her situation confirming she falls into the vunerable category and that he council have agreed to take a notary payment from her benefits, ( she is in council tax benefit/housing benefit) once the debt has been returned. The letter asked

 

To date they have still to return the debt to the council.

 

Today they have turned up, fortunately, I am there looking after kids, summer hols.. I answered door,( no access given to property at any time). i stated she had sent the letter, he denied all knowledge, i stated the council had requested the debt back, again he denied knowledge.

 

After he was getting no where he informed me he would be back in 48 hours to collect goods, with a warrant. I closed the door. He then sat outside, in his car no doubt ringing whoever...I was able to access a copy of her previous letter,which i duly gave to him whilst he was sitting in his car.

 

Where does my partner stand, she looks after our two children and is not petrified they are gonna return within 48 hours. Is there anything I can do or say that can put her mind at ease.

 

Many thanks

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailiffs lie they will not be back in 48 hours to remove goods there is no right of entry for bailiffs

 

if they come back don't let them in

 

with regard to vulnerable situation contact your local MP and formal complaint to the council

If i have helped in any way hit my star.

any advice given is based on experience and learnt from this site :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

He would be very silly if he did come back, as the council have acknowledged the vulnerability, so Formal Complaint to council about their Agent Buymbles and co, you could also do oldbill's plan and report them to OFT under credit fitness, attempting to enforce a debt that had been removed from them, and harassment of a vulnerable person

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before bailiffs can take goods, they must first have entered the property and levied on goods that belong to your ex and are not essential to the running of

the home-so they cannot levy on the oven or crockery for the family for instance. Once they have done that they have to leave and give time to either collect

the outstanding debt or make an arrangement to pay over a set time. Only if either of those scenarios cannot be agreed with the bailiff will they come back and

remove the listed items with a view to auctioning them to raise a sufficient amount to pay their fees and the outstanding debt.

 

As the bailiff has not been inside the house and levied on anything, he is a long way from taking any goods. He is lying to put pressure on you to pay the debt prior

to returning it to the Council. you will appreciate that once the debt goes back to the Council, the bailiff will be unable to charge more fees-most of which are usually

invented by the bailiffs to increase their income.

 

But as I hate bailiffs said in an earlier post, please complain to your MP because of your exs' vulnerability as the debt should have been returned to the Council already.

It is unfair to her that she is still being under pressure to these guys. It was good that you were there when the bailiff came as it is difficult to imagine what might have

happened otherwise when there are young children in the house.

Link to post
Share on other sites

and send for a breakdown of fees because bailiff fees are deducted first from any payment made to them

 

find out from the council how much has been passed over to them from payments made to rundles

 

ask the council if they have requested the the return of the account from rundles

Link to post
Share on other sites

THe bully boy tactics seem to be working on my ex

 

She is petrified about coming back to the property and wants to take the kids to her mums,

 

I've shown her these posts (she has access to them via phone) but she is convinced they will return.

 

is there anything I can do put her mind at ease ?

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

In your original post you say about possible vulnerability issues but I cannot see anywhere that says she has provided proof of these. I'm not doubting what is said just trying to establish what has actually happened as many times people claim vulnerability but fail to back it up with proof.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They only get paid for two visits and as they still have been unable to levy on any goods [or a car] it is unlikely they will be back especially if you put pressure on the Council

via MPs and your local councillors to spped up the return of the warrant from Rundles.

 

You could also write to Rundles advising them that your ex is classed as vulnerable and the Council have said that they have asked for the account to be returned to them.

So Rundles should not be pursuing the warrant and as their bailiff says he knows nothing of the Councils action, then it does call into question the fitness of Rundles management

to retain their OFT licence. Should any bailiff call again, the Police will be called and the bailiff will be liable to charges of trespass and harassment.

 

That does not mean they won't be back as bailiff companies and their henchmen appear singularly lacking in brain capacity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Council are aware, recently due to her issues they had to send out a care worker to complete all her benefit forms, so her and our sons issues are with the council . she has never given written confirmation to Rundles, only stating in her recent letter to them

 

Thanks again

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Council are aware, recently due to her issues they had to send out a care worker to complete all her benefit forms, so her and our sons issues are with the council . she has never given written confirmation to Rundles, only stating in her recent letter to them

 

Thanks again

 

 

This may explain Rundles actions. I would suggest asking the Council to contact them about this, in order to move things along it would also be in order to contact the local Councillor(s) asking them to intervene, this is best done initially by phone & in my view Councillors are available 7 days per week up until 9pm. If you can direct the Councillor to this website so they can see at first hand what goes on. If you can I would suggest do this now.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update....

 

My ex has spoken to rundles direct, head ofice, they informed her they had received the letter, but it wasnt anything to do with them....so iit would appear this baliff is acting alone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rundles have some questions to answer as the bailiff cannot call unless the case has been allocatedto them, so Formal Complaints to bigwigs as a matter of urgency informing them that their Agent Rundle & Co ifor which they are wholly liable are acting as a loose cannon.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Worth checking that Rundles haven't added a spurious "breach of agreement" fee too. I had an account passed back to my LA from your friends and they did this to me. If so, raise it with the council who will only be too please to remove it from the account as it is "not in line with current CT regulations" as they put it (Fraud is what I called it). Had I not checked, however, it would have remained in place!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just a quick update to my original posting...

 

First thank you all for your help and advice..

 

 

It would appear today whilst my ex-partner was out, that Rundles have passed another letter through the door!! (Im at work atm and have therefore received this info from her)

 

She of course rang their office, in view of the previous dealings and the letter they had been given and had sent. ( advising them of her personal issues and my sons, which equates them falling into the vulnerable category)

 

The woman apparently checked the file and confirmed they have a record of both these, and allegedly commented 'we shouldn't be at your door' !!! The Rundles clerk also commented, she doesn't know why the bailiff has taken it upon himself to pay another visit!! Tee person concerned no doubt would deny making these comments if asked again....

 

Apparently he's also written down someones else car registration, she lives in a terraced house with roadside parking, not hers, as I believe as a threat....

 

The debt should of gone back to the council, but it hasn't....

 

Now this is where me and/or my ex are at fault, for not following this though the last time, however she has been in contact with council asking if they had had the debt returned previously, this was done on two separate occasions since the last Rundles visit. .

 

I really have had enough, what should I do next please, to stop this harassment... (please and copies of letters I could use would be extremely helpful, the last letter I wrote for her, didn't obviously carry enough weight.

 

Heres hoping someone can help..

 

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Formal complaint with precis of what the bailiff is doing, transcript of conversation that said that they shouldn't be at the door, vulnerability and proof, also mention the bailioff has attempted to defraud her with an alleged levy on a third party random motor, quoting things from this thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?262730-Has-a-bailiff-quot-levied-quot-upon-a-car-that-is-NOT-owned-by-you-...-LOCAL-GOVERNMENT-OMBUDSMAN-S-Report-!!!!

 

to Head of Revenues, CEO, elected leader councillor and MP., threaten going to BBC Watchdog also, as Rundles are a nasty bunch.

Edited by brassnecked

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contact the local Coucillor(s) tomorrow, in my view best done by phone and should be available 7 days per week up until 9pm. Details can be had via Council website or ringing and asking - you do not have to explain why you need the info.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...