Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • 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 3612 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,

 

Quite some time back now we used DHL to import products from china. The problem was that DHL quoted one price and then invoiced me another price. I raised this as a complaint and over several months this happened over and over. In the end I had several invoices that had been questioned, eventually we got a credit back for the over payments but intrest and late payment fees still applied.

 

I contacted DHL and told them that I would not make payment until they removed said fees, they wouldn't do it. Eventually I received a CCJ for the amount outstanding minus the fees and interest, so I foolishly filled the form in and sent it back. I had admitted that I owed them the amount on the form because that is what I owed them.

 

I received a letter explaining I had 30 days to pay the outstanding amount and this would stop any entry onto my credit file. After a couple of weeks I had a hand delivered letter at my office address saying I had not made payment and that a bailiff would be back to seize any good equating to the amount outstanding.

 

I got onto the phone and they explained I had 14 days to pay it and 30 days before it goes onto credit file. The lady in the office suggested I send a cheque direct to DHL and it should stop any further action. I did this.

 

Today I have another letter from the same bailiff wanting a further £900.

 

This is absolutely crazy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the exact wording on the judgment regarding payment? If it said 'forthwith' then payment should have been made immediately. If it said 14 days then clearly that is 14 days. The point at which it enters onto your credit file is irrelevant unfortunately.

 

Once you understand this point it will then be down to when the Enforcement Agent attended (was it after payment was due) and what did the Enforcement Agent levy on?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It did say forwith and then went on about 30 days, I just took it as I had 30 days to pay. Obviously not.

 

The Bailiff attended after I had receieved that letter. As soon as I was made aware I borrowed the money, banked it and sent a cheque. I hadn't heard anything since until today, I thought it had all be sorted now.

 

How someone is meant to repay something they are having trouble paying and then adding huge fees and costs too is beyond me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the HCEO is entitled to attend and levy then. The chances are that your payment to DHL has been passed the the HCEO and have paid the fees leaving £900 of judgment debt outstanding.

 

Your best bet is to get a breakdown of what has been charged. Others on here will have opinions on that I'm sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be prudent to do so. Are you in a position to pay what is being asked?

 

If he attends today it will no doubt incur you further costs. Sometimes attendances are delayed if he gets stuck on a long job elsewhere so don't be surprised if he doesn't arrive and turns up tomorrow etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking for a breakdown of fees is unlikely to prevent attendance and may indeed speed it up as the HCEO may wish to complete execution prior to any issues arising. You could ask to make an arrangement to clear the balance to bide you some time.

 

You could make an application for a Stay of enforcement to the High Court or a local District Registry but this may be rejected unless you have sufficient grounds to do so. I'm not sure have with what has been said so far. I would also say that this isn't going to happen tonight though.

 

I'm surprised others have not commented....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been on the phone to the main office and not the branch office that the HCEO has come out of, I've explained the situation and she went away and took some time to ask advice.

 

She's going to email me the breakdown of fees and I've told them I will provide any further information they may need in regards to making a payment plan.

 

I also asked could she contact him in regards to what is going on because I don't want any involvement with him after the last conversation we had.

Link to post
Share on other sites

£1,862.64 Payable to the Claimant, made up as follows: -

£1,651.30 Judgment Amount

£95.00 Judgment Costs

£111.75 Costs of Execution

£4.59 Interest @ 8.00% p.a.

£669.13 Officer Costs, inclusive of VAT, made up as follows: -

£2.40 Seizure Fee

£4.80 Enquiry Fee

£60.00 Mileage

£111.76 Valuation Fee

£21.29 Daily Seizure Fee

£250.00 Administration Fee

£160.00 Financial Management Fee

£58.88 Poundage

£2531.77 TOTAL

Less(£1746.30) Payment - Post Judge Credit

£785.47 Outstanding Balance

 

 

Now surely this could have been resolved by either a simple telephone call or a letter sent via post. It's not as if they have attempted to contact me in regards to making payment so why the need to send someone out and incur all those extra costs? Absolutely disgusting. I wouldnt mind if I had been trying to duck and dive a few letters or telephone calls but I haven't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the very nature of High Court enforcement requires an attendance to seize your goods. It is not done by letter or phone. The attendance is to seize your goods to sell at auction if payment is not made. The actual removal of goods unlikely if a sensible payment arrangement is reached and the installments stuck to.

 

Believe it or not but those fees are fairly reasonable given what some companies charge. Some could possible be argued but the costs in doing so often outweigh the gain.

 

Did the enforcement agent make a list of your goods on a Form 55?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the figures above are not the same figures as whats on the Yellow form he has posted me today.

 

Total on the form is £903.44, however if I take the fees they have just emailed me and add the £120 onto the it that he has charged me for today then I get 875.47 and not the £903.44.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the very nature of High Court enforcement requires an attendance to seize your goods. It is not done by letter or phone. The attendance is to seize your goods to sell at auction if payment is not made. The actual removal of goods unlikely if a sensible payment arrangement is reached and the installments stuck to.

 

Believe it or not but those fees are fairly reasonable given what some companies charge. Some could possible be argued but the costs in doing so often outweigh the gain.

 

Did the enforcement agent make a list of your goods on a Form 55?

 

Yes he has put my car registration number on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sole trader.

 

The writ is addressed to me trading as my company name. The was issued at my office yet the courts have my home address.

 

No dates to go with the fees.

 

I read somewhere that I should approach the courts which I have done, the courts are still not aware that this has been paid as DHL have not informed them still. The lady at the court said maybe filling out a N244 out?

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

£669.13 Officer Costs, inclusive of VAT, made up as follows: -

£2.40 seizureicon Fee

£4.80 Enquiry Fee

£60.00 Mileage

£111.76 Valuation Fee

£21.29 Daily seizureicon Fee

£250.00 Administration Fee

£160.00 Financial Management Fee

£58.88 Poundage

 

some of that sounds a bit steep to me

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sole trader. The writ is addressed to me trading as my company name.

 

In that case your own personal belongings are available for seizure also.

 

You really need to resolve something before a re-attendance by the HCEO costs you many hundreds more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've asked for dates the fees occured and I've also asked for any information in regards to submitting a payment plan.

 

Whilst we are discussing the fees and a payment method I'm not sure they would send the HCEO back out.

 

What are your views on the N244, surely I have a right to contest the fees?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not the way to challenge fees. I would be very cautious in doing so unless you have good grounds as you could end up with significant costs against you. I personally think the fees are reasonable, others may disagree.

 

The HCEO has every right to re-attend whilst money is outstanding and even though you're discussing options this could still happen.

 

It would be better for you to seek proper legal advice from a solicitor if I'm honest. Or pay what is being asked and then challenge it.

 

What are your reasons for challenging the fees?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I read somewhere that I should approach the courts which I have done, the courts are still not aware that this has been paid as DHL have not informed them still. The lady at the court said maybe filling out a N244 out?

 

Regards

 

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this but will have a stab at what it may mean. If you are saying that DHL were paid they do not have to inform the Court, it would be up to yourself to do that if you want a Certificate of Satisfaction - cost £15 I believe, but you would have to prove - usually via a letter from your Creditor that it is paid unless you ask them to contact the Court.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are going to make a submission to the Court it should be for a Variation Order whereby payment can be set at an affordable level. This is done on Form N245 - very simple to complete & costs about £45. It will not however stop any visits or enforcement by the HCEO and it may be you can arrangement payment amicably so negating the Court - the Court only puts affairs on a formal footing.

 

As has been mentioned previously you could apply for a Stay of Execution but think this should only be done if any agreement with the Enforcement Officer falls on deaf ears.

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...