Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Changes in the US are enticing more people to file bankruptcy to clear their student loans.View the full article
    • Servicing Stop Limited Registered Office Address: 57 London Rd, Enfield, Middlesex, England, EN2 6DU Company Type: Private Limited Company Company Status: Active Company Number: 06558606 Directors: Oliver Joseph Richmond Appointed 8th April 2008, Toby Robert Richmond Appointed 8th September 2009 Companies House Link: SERVICING STOP LIMITED overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK FIND-AND-UPDATE.COMPANY-INFORMATION.SERVICE.GOV.UK SERVICING STOP LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual...   Endole Link: Servicing Stop Limited - Company Profile - Endole SUITE.ENDOLE.CO.UK Servicing Stop Limited is an active company located in Enfield, Greater London. View Servicing Stop Limited profile, shareholders, contacts...  
    • Hi I assume the Loft Conversion with the eaves and crawl space was there when you initially purchased the property. Even in done after purchasing the property and the correct permissions were in place i.e. Local Authority, Land Registry, Freeholder which is Southern Land which would be required as a Leasehold property. The difficulty is if the Loft Conversion was there when you purchased the property and there is no evidence in your documents of the eaves and crawl space due to where the Red Lines stop in the plans or even after purchase it was added this is the reason you are having issues with selling due to those missing Red Lines in the Plans and any other Buyers competent Solicitor would flag this up. I can understand the reasons the Buyer wishes a Deed of Variation probably there Solicitor requesting this to ensure those missing red lines are covered before the Sale as they Flagged this as an issue as Red Lines missing on Plans and want buyer protected. As for the £8000 costs Together and cohort Southern Land are trying to charge have you thought of contacting a few Property Solicitors yourself to get a few quotes. (only mention this because when I research this possible costs can range from £500 - £2000 depending on the Deed of Variation work required and nothing to stop you doing this then approaching Together and cohorts with it) Also ask Together/Southern Land for a breakdown of the £8000 costs for the Deed of Variation. Yup do send both Together and Southern Land a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that data in whether it be emails, written, recorded calls etc. They then have 30 Calendar Days to respond and that time limit only starts once they acknowledge receipt of your SAR Request. When you purchased the property some 17yrs ago are the Solicitors that you went through at that time still operating? (I know probably a silly question but if they are nothing to stop you contacting them and asking them about this especially if the Loft Conversion was in place when you purchased the property) Another link that will be useful to you as Leasehold is The Leasehold Advisory Service: Home - The Leasehold Advisory Service WWW.LEASE-ADVICE.ORG Government funded, independent advice for residential leaseholders and park home residents  
    • Why struggling parents aren't choosing cheaper brands when it comes to infant formula milk.View the full article
    • Musk's profane attack on advertisers baffled experts - without adverts, how would X survive?View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • 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
    • Post in Some advice on buying a used car
    • People are still buying used cars unseen, paying by cash or by bank transfer, relying on brand-new MOT's by the dealer's favourite MOT station….
      It always leads to tears!
      used car.mp4

       

       
    • Pizza delivery insurance.mp4


       

       

       

      Parcel delivery insurance 1.mp4
        • Haha
      • 2 replies
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3541 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 am the director of my own LTD Company. The company has three Vehicles one of which

is permanently parked on my drive at my home.

 

The companies registered address is the same as my home address.

The vehicles are all Registered to and owned by the company.

 

The council tax is in my name NOT the companies.

 

I'm having an issue at present where a few years ago i paid the council tax in cash at the the local office

and they have lost the record of the payment and refused to take the receipt they gave me as evidence of me paying it.

 

In short they have got a liability order and have tried with various different bailiffs to have it enforced.

 

first Bristow and sutor had it ,

then Equita and

now it is back with Bristow and Sutor.

 

Bristow and sutor levied the company vehicle , just before xmas.

 

I wrote them a very strong letter from the company ,

explaining to them that the vehicle was registered and owned by the company

and any attempt to remove or tamper with company property would be very costly on their part.

 

They replied with the usual rubbish about "levied in good faith"

and that they would hold off on any action whilst they check with DVLA

but the company needs to supply them with proof of ownership.

 

I replied that the company is whilst not obliged to provide this information would be happy to

once in receipt of the required £50 Administration fee.

 

Nothing was heard of this matter again ,

although they kept sending me (myself) the usual drivel letters about attending the premises etc etc.

 

Last week in my abscence a bailiff (i presume the same one)

has put another Levy on the same vehicle as before for the same liability order.

 

i am in the process of making a complaint from the company about this matter to the courts

but wanted to ask in here about the validity of what they are doing?

 

The value of the car is much more than the alleged debt.

are they allowed to keep levying a vehicle that they know not to be owned by the alleged debtor ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you make a FORMAL COMPLAINT to the CEO of the council

regarding the levy AND the maladministration of your account

 

you have proof of payment its there incompliance that's put you in this position

and you cant be held responsible for it

 

put the ceo on notice that you will not be going away any time soon

and if necessary you will be taking your complaint to the ombudsman

 

are capita the back office provider for the administration and enforcement council tax for your council

they happen to own 2 bailiff firms Equita and Bristow & Suitor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...