Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Oh god! How silly!   I had so many different tabs and word documents open , cutting and pasting different bits I think I’ve copied in the wrong one.   Just had to nip out. I’ll post the correct version ASAP! X
    • Thank you for your response. I've read through some of the threads, however I haven't found any in a similar situation to mine where the overall outcome of the investigation has been posted (whether it was an out of court settlement or a conviction that resulted in a criminal record).    I'm aware that what typically happens is that you're taken to court where they give you a £1000 fine and a criminal record of 12 months (or 11 years if its an enhanced DBS check). This is the information I received following contacting a the TFL legal advice team.   
    • urm.. that's a telecom defence?? why not adapt the one I pointed you too??    
    • Thank you all again.   I think the word story is quite apt as it is clear from the 29 points over 6 pages that my parents have insisted lots of frankly irrelevant and often untrue things have been included in the solicitors letter.   Here is me filling in the gaps!   There was a dispute over a will in respect of your grandfather's house but the dispute was eventually abandoned and it seems that the house was apportioned to your mother and her brother who presumably were the only two children. The will was unsigned and so we could say that the house passed to the two of them under the rules of intestacy.   Not abandoned, it went to court and the court decided it should be sold and the £ divided between my Mother and my Uncle who were the only two children. So maybe they did own it whilst on the market? You then decided to buy the house for £50,000 and presumably the money you paid was divided between your mother and your uncle – who were the owners of the house.   Correct, it went on the market, a few people viewed it, my parents were awkward towards these potential buyers and then I made the offer to the estate agent and purchased it. This was in 1999. We talking about 20 years ago here and so in respect of most legal questions I would have thought that some limitation period applied. (However the issue of the trust has been raised – and this wouldn't be affected by limitation) However, presumably the house was bought at a proper value given the market at the time and any work that it needed doing. Presumably the house was properly conveyed.   Exactly, 20 years is ridiculous, and during that time my Father could have purchased it from me, instead of purchasing their own council house, if they really wanted to it 'back' as they keep saying. Yes market value in need of work and all above board. Although a lot of things have passed – including home improvements, tenancies et cetera, from the story you have told us, neither your parents nor your uncle have been involved in this at all. My Uncle has also sadly passed away.   I obtained additional borrowing to fund the work needed in 2008 (not mentioned in letter obviously) and have found some receipts, emails and mortgage letter to back this up, but in the letter my parents claim they paid for all this and carried out the work as I ‘had little interest in the property’ also all correspondence from letting agent is to me, but in letter claims by Father did all these and ‘I merely singed the tenancy’ which is rubbish.   One weird thing, the garden shed is still full of my Grandad's tools and my parents have the only key to this, have visited it randomly and instructed a builder person we both know over the years to trim the hedges. This was always been behind my back and have asked them to let me know or I can do it. I spoke to him yesterday and they have always paid him cash, so no paper trail.   Now you have received a letter from your parents saying that the house is really theirs and that you have simply been holding it on trust for them and they now want it back. Is this a reasonable summary of what has happened?   Yes, although the ‘trust’ that is mentioned is literally something they have made up, assumed or otherwise. There is absolutely nothing to my knowledge of this kind in place.   Although you have written a fair bit about bills, tenancies, and that you have lived in your parents home for some of this 20 years, I'm not sure what relevance that has to the problem. I have to say that your explanation is very unclear. A bit rambling in fact. If you think that part of the story is relevant then maybe you'd like to express it all a little more clearly and say in what way you think it is relevant to the problem.   Reason being it is referred to in the letter and quite representative of the whole letter, rambling. My point was it is not true and I am the one who has paid for these. It’s almost like they are trying to paint me as someone collecting the rent money whilst the did all the hard work and paid for things. You are much more familiar with the story then I am but I don't see that those factors are terribly important on the brief understanding that I have. if if any money is owed to your parents because of you having lived with them et cetera then it seems to me that that is a separate matter and has nothing to do with your ownership of the property.   Agreed You say that you have received a letter from solicitors claiming first of all that there is a constructive trust or that you might be subject to a proprietary estoppel. In terms of the estoppel, that doctrine is only available in very particular circumstances and could not be used to attack you in any event. Estoppel, whether it is proprietary or promissory can only be used as a defence. So the question of estoppel in this situation is completely irrelevant, in my view, although I don't see any basis for one in any event.   Lets hope so So what remains is the possibility of a constructive trust. It seems to me to be highly unlikely that there is such a trust and I think that the first question needs to be asked is on what basis they consider that there is a constructive trust. Secondly, of course, even if there was a constructive trust, on the basis of what you have told us, it wouldn't only be your mother who was the beneficiary, it would also be your uncle. Furthermore, if you were a constructive trustee then at the very least you would be entitled to recover all of the expenses that you had laid out over 30 years – including the cost of the property plus interest – less any financial benefit that you had accrued from renting it out and so forth.   Good point about me being a trustee, if, such a thing were in place. I had a google of the meaning and I honestly don’t feel it meets any of the criteria. I'm not sure how good this analysis is. This is well out of my experience – but I would suggest that you consider it and see whether any of it rings true. I would also start making a very detailed account of all the money which you have spent over the years on the property and also a detailed account of all the benefits you have accrued from it. I wouldn't supply this to their solicitor but if you end up having to instruct your own lawyer then I'm sure that you may be asked for this if there is any suspicion that a constructive trust may exist. Frankly it sounds like a load of rubbish to me but we will be very interested if you will keep us up to date. So there you have it. No particular answers. Just a few unsupported and unqualified opinions     I do really appreciate your time and effort on this. Yes, when I read it all again, rubbish does spring to mind.   My parents have been very challenging to say the least and have no idea of the consequence of their actions. To be honest, they have almost shot themselves in the foot as there is so much detail in the letter, lots of which is untrue and I can prove this. If it ever got to court and I really hope it doesn’t, I can only think this would go against them.   I really do think the solicitor (who is the same one that rinsed them ££££ over the will) is just charging them for this letter, which may have been a good few hours with the unneeded detail, knowing fully well this wont go anywhere!   Another thing the letter requests that I confirm I wont sell, rent out or re-mortgage the property!!! I have literally just started a new mortgage and need tenants to pay the rent, I don't think this request hold any water at all?   I hope this does come to nothing and hopefully helps others along the way!
    • god no never invite pointless letter tennis   dx  
  • Our picks


RobinsonWay adding to debt owed

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2550 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts



I've a judgement issued by Northampton Bulk in favour of Robinson Way that I've been gradually clearing. I've noticed on this month's statement from them that my balance has suddenly increased by £72.25. No indication that it's increased or why, just £72.25 more than it should be.


Before I contact them is there any reason for them to do this and how do I get them to put it back to where it should be?



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the judgement. If interest is not mentioned they are trying it on. Your only liability is on the CCJ, if interest is not stated it is not allowed.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame you didn't defend this when it was going to court.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree with twofoot, If the Judgement does not state that post-judgement interest can be added then pay only what was awarded.

Make sure you are keeping a system in place where you have proof of payment.


Hopefully you are paying by Standing Order so you have complete control!!! If you are paying by Direct Debit or Debit Card then please cancel the DD and if paying by Card, report the card has been compromised and place a stop on it, that way Robinson Way cannot help themselves to your Bank Account and clean it out.


Have your circumstances changed since the Judgement was awarded? Have you lost your employment or had lower hours? If so, download form N245 for a variation in the repayments, you will also need form EX160A so you should pay either no or little court costs.



NEVER telephone a DCA

If a DCA rings you, refuse to go through the security questions & hang up!


If I have helped you, click on the star & say thank you

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...