Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
    • amusing that 'bad economic judgement on behalf of prior party ISN'T a major reason to wingers to move to deform yet immigration is, where record levels of such has been driven by the right wings terrible brexit and the later incompetent dog whistle 'proposals largely driven to whistle to the right wingnuts Just seems to confirm the are clueless numpties 'wetting their own shoes   Has farage bought a property in Clacton yet?   yet concern for the NHS is listed as a major issue even by those saying they are moving to deform  
    • Also, have you told us how much you paid for this vehicle? Are there any other expenses you have incurred – insurance, inspections et cetera? How far away from the dealership do you live?
    • In fact I see that in the document you posted above – your letter to big motoring world you refer to the diagnostics report and you say that you sent a copy to big motoring world but you haven't let us see it. Any reason for this?
  • 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

Gas / Electricity Estimate Bills - Other tenant refuses to pay!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4093 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

 

My daughter moved in to a property last September with 4 other tenants who all got on together.

 

Two of the tenants, right at the beginning of the tenancy told that they would not be in the property for 3 months in Jan, Feb and March as they would be on placement. It was agreed that they pay the rent but not put towards the gas and electricity (apart from the standing charges).

 

As they are all new to this my daughter came home for Easter not happy and unsure as to why the bill for Feb/Mar was £185 (one month) when all the others have been around £60 to £85.

 

I looked in to this and all the months apart from the first one have been Estimated readings apart from the end reading of this high bill which is an Actual reading.

 

I explained to her why and showed her all the previous months estimates and usage:

 

GAS not inc VAT

Period Previous Present Kwh Charges

19 Aug to 17 Sep 2012 9213 9219 A 67 £5.47

17 Sep to 18 Oct 2012 9219 A 9255 E 403 £24.46

18 Oct to 15 Nov 2012 9255 E 9322 E 750 £36.14

15 Nov to 18 Dec 2012 9322 E 9427 E 1175 £52.90

18 Dec to 17 Jan 2013 9427 E 9533 E 1186 £52.27

17 Jan to 14 Feb 2013 9533 E 9635 E 1142 £54.24

14 Feb to 13 Mar 2013 9635 E 9945 A 3478 £150.88

 

as you can see from above the usage in the above GAS (Electricity is separate which shows another £39 which makes it a total of £185) it is obvious that the last bill's usage should have really been split on the other bills as well if they had done the proper thing and given actual readings every month.

 

My daughter now understands and she has text the two that have been away. We know that there is no proof but common sense and it is obvious from looking at the figures. All we have asked is for them to pay £35 each towards this bill and the rest of this year they will have to do proper readings. One of the girls said OK but the other one is just been silly. Texts from her saying that the readings shows that they have to pay £150, etc. etc. etc., and it is what has been used!!. Spouting on about how her mum is a landlady so she does understand !!!!!

 

All we are asking is for a fair contribution of £35 from each of the two that have been away.

 

If she does not pay would we have any grounds to take to small claims court. I know it sounds silly but it is principle. It is just a fair, common sense request for them to contribute.

 

Thanks in advance

Lisa

----------------------------------------

2007 - RECLAIMED over £4,000

in bank charges from Halifax Bank ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lisa, who compiled the monthly bills you refer to and is the monthly cash amount for the property or divided between Ts?

Whose name is on the gas & elec bills?

I follow the reasoning for asking for a further contribution from absent Ts but a little hard to enforce. A Judge may decide that the remaining Ts just cranked up the heating for longer (Dec to Apr was pretty cold) or an actual reading should have been taken at start and end of placement period.

I don't think text demands will prove fruitful, really all Ts should meet and discuss when they are all back together.

At least the 2 absent Ts paid their share of rent whilst away!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest that it is a small enough amount of money that it is a learning experience in negotiation and persuasion for your daughter, and maybe a lesson for the future in not trusting estimated readings (which often get people into a pickle when the readings are too low for too long).

 

I think that letting people get away with bills when they're away is a bad precedent, particularly when it involves the coldest months of the year. Bills do not go down by 50% when 50% of the tenants are away. What about if someone gets an evening job so they don't need the heating when they're on shift. Too late for that discussion here, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...