Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If you have not kept the original PCN you can always send an SAR to Excel and they have to send you all the info they have on you within a month. failure to do so can lead to you being able to sue them for their failure.......................................nice irony.
    • Thank you and well done  for posting up all those notices it must have have taken you ages.. The entrance sign is very helpful since the headline states                    FREE PARKING FOR CUSTOMERS ONLY in capitals with not time limit mentioned. Underneath and not in capitals they then give the actual times of parking which would not be possible to read when driving into the car park unless you actually stopped and read them. Very unlikely especially arriving at 5.30 pm with possibly other cars behind. On top of that the Notice goes on to say that the terms and conditions are inside the car park so the entrance sign cannot offer a contract it is merely an offer to treat. Inside the car park the signs are mostly too high up and the font size too small to be able to read much of their signs. DCBL have not shown a single sign that can be read on their SAR. Although as they show photographs which were taken the year after your alleged breach we do not know what the signs were when you were there. For instance the new signs showed the charge was then £100 whereas your PCN was for £85. Who knows, when you were there perhaps the time was for 3 hours. They were asked to produce  planning permission which would have been necessary for the ANPR cameras alone and didn't do so. Nor did they provide a copy of the contract-DCBL  "deeming them disproportionate or not relevant to the substantive issues in the dispute" How arrogant and untruthful is that? The contract and planning permission could be vital to having the claim thrown out. I can find no trace of planning permission for the signs nor the cameras on Tonbridge Council planning portal. and the contract of course is highly relevant since some contracts advise the parking rouges that they cannot take motorists to Court. I understand that Europarks are now running that car park which means that nexus didn't  last long before being thrown out.....................................
    • Hi,   I am not sure if I posted this already here but I don't think I did. I attach a judgement that raises very interesting points IMO. Essentially EVRi did their usual non attendance that we normally see, however the judge (for the first time I've seen in these threads) dismissed the notice and awarded me judgement by default because their notice misses the "confirmation of compliance" paragraph. in and out in 3 minutes (aside from the chat at the end with the judge about his problems with evri) Redacted - evri CPR loss.pdf
    • Just to update this. I did apply to strikeout and they did not attend the hearing. I won by defualt and the hearing lasted 5 minutes (court only allocated 15). The judge simply explained that the only matter he was really considering is if the Defendant could have any oral evidence to defend the claim. However he said he had decided that based on their defence, and their misunderstanding of law, and their non attendence he did not think they had any reasonsable chance so he awarded me SJ + Costs on the claim form + the strikeout fee. Luckily when I sent the defendant the order I woke up the next day to a wire trasnfer for the full sum of the judgement
    • Hello, I am wondering if someone can advise. I sold some goods via an online platform who essentially middelmans and authenticates luxury goods.  I have sold over 100 times with them in the past without issue but a while ago I had a sale go wrong, whereby they claim they never received the shoes in the parcel and instead received empty boxes. They wont show any photos of what they received. I considered whether to pursue them or the courier, and decided to pursue them because the UPS tracking indicates no issues at all, but also because they are the ones that contracted with UPS.  I sent them a PAPLOC which they claim was "lengthy and pre written" which is true because I simply adapted a previous one. They rejected any resolution so I issued a claim using an adapated thread from this forum from before against i believe evri. Anyway they filed a defence which essentially says that they think I shipped empty boxes and never shipped the shoes and am commiting fraud. However, I have weight records of every parcel I ship (and have done since 2019) and they have provided no evidence to support their claims. They also failed to comply with CPR request for inspection of certain documents within their defence, such as a report by their authenticator who they claim emptied the box (Although I know this is false because they have had literal job offers for "Warehouse staff" with the job description of opening and sorting incoming orders (OWTTE) so I also think here that I have a ground that they are trying to mislead the court, which once again is likely to obstruct the just disposal of proceedings. The amount is just over £1,000 I'm now wondering whether I should apply to strike out their defence / apply for SJ on the grounds that the defence is totally without merit and will obstruct the just disposal of proceedings by making me wait months for a trial that they are bound to lose and upon them having absolutely no proof to support their claims, and me having weight records, as well as the fact they failed to comply. I am aware the fee for this would be £303 but the trial fee would be £123 itself so the difference is £180. Any advice please?
  • 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 3937 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

I have stumbled across this forum and have had a read through the articles, posts and stickies but haven't stumbled across anything which explains the scenario I am in:

 

I am leaving my house share after 6 months and have come to the point where bills are to be split among house mates. I have a partner, which was made apparent to all housemates during initial discussion before we moved in with each other (none of the other house mates have partners). The LL of the house is a parent of one of my housemates.

 

Reading through my contract I was aware that there was a section that referred to frequent guests and that a contribution to bills would be required. I am in the situation now where I have put in my request to leave as I am moving into another house. I have received an email from my housemates explaining that they were unhappy about the number of times my partner had stayed without receiving a contribution to bills from her. With the email I received a suggested contribution which was supposedly reached with guidance from the LL.

 

I am happy to pay a contribution towards the bills for my partner staying over however the figures suggested were extremely unreasonable and had no explanation as to how they had been reached. The breakdown of the bills suggested that my partner would pay the same as myself and other house mates for water and sewage and 50% of myself and other house mates for gas and electricity. This proportion I have still yet to understand and have not received an explanation even though I has asked for one.

 

I returned an email explaining that I was disappointed that I was not involved in this initial discussion and gave my own suggestion of a contribution based on the average time spent by my partner at the property (as an excel spreadsheet). This was also backed up with reasons that constrain the hours of when my partner can stay at the house and how my partner uses the facilities in the house.

 

I am at the point now where a number of emails have been passed backwards and forwards and no figure has been agreed and ultimately my LL has suggested that my partner does not stay round until the matter is resolved. I also feel that one housemate in particular is driving an excessive figure for the bill contributions as this is shown in the emails I receive from them and that they clearly do not have an understanding of the cost of running specific appliances within the house.

 

I would just like to ask a few question with regards to the scenario and would like for people with any experience of this to contribute as to how they feel would be best to resolve this matter.

 

Is guidance from the LL allowed when considering bills, especially when there is a possible conflict of interest?

 

The tenancy contract I signed states that a "contribution" should be made for guests staying, but does not define how much the "contribution" should be. How is this contribution determined in legal terms?

 

In a tenancy contract where the term "day/days" is used and is not explained or stated, does this mean that a day can be legally determined as either a 24 hour period of time or a time period from midnight to midnight?

 

Many thanks for your time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many days/nights did your partner stay out of the six month period you have been in the property?

 

1. How do you know the LL is not acting in his/her capacity as a parent in advising their child re how to split the bills? There is nothing wrong in the LL having an input - and certainly nothing wrong in the parent of a child explaining how to work such things out.

 

2. Contribution would almost certainly be based on the time the additional person spent in the property.

 

3.A period from midnight to midnight - a day is a 24 hour period, i.e. not a series of hours making up 24 hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both for your contribution, it is certainly helpful.

 

To answer the questions, my partner stays about 3 days a week as an average (there are obviously times when my partner doesn't stay and as a maximum up to 4 times a week). The two reasons I proposed the number of hours spent in a stay was to:

 

1. Explain in numerical terms why an expected payment by my partner of an equal share of the water and sewage bill was an over estimation in my opinion, and;

 

2. My partner only stays over at certain periods of time during the day due to work commitments and hobbies, which is early evening to early morning - which I feel is very different to a few of the threads I have read on this forum where people are basically living with their partners in a house share.

 

Another point i'd like to make is that I am extremely wary of my partner utilising energy when spending time with myself in the house - to the point where the only facility that my partner uses where it is not for my direct purpose, is the shower, and this is only used when my partner stays during the week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just checking but from your initial post it appears you have not paid any utilities for the six months, is this correct?

what is the amount of money we are talking about here and exactly in monetary terms is you counter proposal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right yes, we are all paying into a bills account each month and have just got our quarterly bills.

 

Bills are as follows:

 

Gas and Electricity - £509

Water/Sewage - £200

 

Contribution (proposed by my housemate):

Gas/ Electric (housemates) : £113

Gas/ Electric (partner): £57

Water Sewage: £40 (housemates and partner)

 

Contribution proposed by myself (based on average hours stayed):

 

Total for housemates: £167

Total for partner: £41

 

They then produced a counter offer which seems more logical and was calculated using the spreadsheet I had put together:

 

Total for housemates £158

Total for partner: £79

 

I am now in the position of coming to an agreement with them. As the first contribution they produced was not explained and does not have any logic to it then I am going to try and meet them half way, between my original offer and their new offer. Does this seem a fair approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So there are 4 housemates plus your partner.

Now my logic says that the contribution of your partner is based pro rata on the time they are there, taking into account that gas and electric would be used by you even if partner not there, hence the 50% proposed is about right.

so

G&E would be for partner 509/5 =101.8 x3/7 = 43.63 x .5 = £21.82.

water/sewerage 200/5 = 40x3/7= £17.14.

therefore partner contribution is £38.96 (about same as you came up with)

take this from the total and split between the remaining 4.

121.8 + 45.72 = £167.52

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many flatmates are there, inc yourself but not your partner?

 

Is water metered or half yearly water rate?

 

Your partner has effectively been living with you for 3.5 days/wk (rent free?) and you have had the 'comfort' of partner staying over.

 

So assuming 3 tenants and half a guest / month, divide all bills by 7 and split pro rata so each T pays 2/7 and your guest 1/7th

 

Quarterly Gas & Elec £509 Water £200 = £709 total so each T pays £202.50, your 'guest contributes £101.25

 

A 4th person staying 3.5 days/wk would have increased expected wear & tear slightly for 3 people over 6 months, so don't be tight with your final offer.

 

I bet you are fun in restaurants when it is time to divide the bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll ignore the above post as you clearly have missed the point completely, I have asked for advice in a situation I am unfamiliar with not a cross examination on what I am like with my money. Plus your calculation makes no sense and anyone can see from my proposed totals that there are in fact 4 housemates including myself.

 

Raydetinu, thanks for your post, that is where I was coming from in terms of the use of the majority of electricty/gas when my partner is over. However having been advised that a day is not counted as a cumulative number of hours totaling 24, I will probably try and meet my housemates halfway.

 

Any more advice on the matter is welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore my post if you wish. My example calculation was based on 3 Ts + 1 guest. It is easily adapted to 4+1.

If your partner spent average of 3.5 days / wk for 6 months, for similar periods as other Ts eg 4pm-8am, then I suggest their reasonable utility bill contribution would be one ninth of total bill. You can compare this amount with other alternative calculations offered. You are free to choose your preferred option.

I did not cross-examine you on what you are like with your money, merely a presumption.

Your Q is not really a LL&T query, but how to maintain good relations with your ex flat mates & partner. Your choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience is based on living in a shared house for many years (including with people who had visiting partners), and on experience as a landlord with sharing tenants. Take it as a general post rather than being specifically about your situation.

 

You mention being not involved in the initial discussion. Possibly the other tenants may feel you should have instigated the discussion in the first place.

 

While someone may think their partner was quiet as a mouse, never used any power, was perfect in all regards etc. the co-tenants may feel the partner filled the kettle too much, showered for hours, used 3 times, made noise, spoilt the atmosphere of the house...etc. etc. One of my housemates had the room with the en-suite, but his girlfriend would use the main bathroom and would get through a whole roll of loo paper per day - which annoyed me at the time!

 

They may also feel that they did not agree to share with an extra person, and may feel a contribution to rent is due. This may be particularly the case if the partner is in the house when the tenant is not there, or if they had a key (I don't think you said whether your partner had a key or not).

 

A common "standard" is that people with partners stay half the time at one place and half at the other - so evening out costs between the two houses. The co-tenants may think that a "frequent guest" is once every 2-3 weekends, whereas 3-4 times a week is "another tenant".

 

So in short, the discussion may not be just about the money for the utilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok lets throw this into the mix, This tenants partner stays on average 3.5 times a week right, between say 6pm and 8am, the partner may use the toilet 3-4 times, the partner may spend the rest of the time in the tenants room (which is already paid for) and not disrupting anyone.

The tenant may also stay at the partners address 1-2-3 times a week. I think the other housemates are just a bunch of sado singletons who need to get some action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the property registered as a HMO? It looks to me as though you are students living in a house purchased by the parents of one of your housemates and are splitting the costs of looking after their loved one in a manner that may seem equitable but really has no place in a tenancy agreement. You either have a tenancy that gives you certain rights as a tenant or nothing at all. A tenancy agreement should have a head tenancy (one would presume child of landlord) and basically they are responsible for the bills. I can see others getting upset that they have to pay extra for toilet roll and washing up liquid but the costs of the water rates are fixed for the property and asking someone who already lives elsewhere and presumably pays bill for doing so to cough up extra when there is no additional expense is a bit rich.

The alternative would be a tenancy that says only the assigned persons may stay there and that usually means that guests may only stop occasionally and certainly no more than 2 night a week (applied by councils assessing who lives in a property) and if that is the case then you should have been chucked out by now.

I would offer to pay any genuine expense brought about by your partner's staying there and that would be extra consumables for washing, showering, cooking etc and also include the cost of the extra fuel used as a direct consequence of their being there such as electric for a shower but not a share of the heating and lighting as they would be payable as a matter of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...