Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Recommended Topics

  • Posts

    • Thanks both,   The only thing I am still not clear on is there were 4 DCA's that were reporting on my credit report and as I complained they have stopped BUT there is no default date on these debts. Can they start reporting these debts again on my credit report if I stop paying.   When I tried to re-mortgage a few years ago I was refused as these 4 were showing as in a DMP. Ofc they are not now as I told them it should have defaulted BUT they werent actually able to add the default date - so in theory could this happen again.   Thanks so much for your help
    • I'm afraid these kinds of stories are all too common with this company. The impression is that they're not too interested in installing and maintaining heating systems – but rather the finance behind it. Did you do this on some kind of finance agreement? Was it secured on your property? You seem to be doing everything on the telephone – and I think it's about time you started establishing a paper trail. You may end up having to arrange your own service with their authorised installer and if that doesn't happen then you may end up having to get in your own repair person. Of course ASG will then say that you are in breach of their warranty et cetera and that they are entitled to recover all their money back. You will have to show that you are a paper trail in them on notice and that they're not responding and then eventually you had to take matters in your own hands and organise your own repair – for which you would be going to them for reimbursement and also you would have to establish that you had no choice and they are fully liable – including the not allowed to dishonour a warranty. I'm afraid the stories we are getting about this company are dreadful and frankly very distressing
    • i don't think the matter of you were told the Decreasing Term Assurance was compulsory makes any difference, it doesn't detract from the fact the FOS appear to agree that disp does apply and you are out of time .   i don't think there is any harm going to the FOS with it..BUT although, and this twigged my memory about DISP ( which didn't exist then) but the ABI code did, and i believe that doesn't cover your situation, i'e , the fact it was made compulsory is not against any guidelines that were around at the time.   you could drill down on the ABI coding and see what it advised about lenders making DTA compulsory, but sure as eggs is eggs, by 2005, when disp had arrived..all lenders were forced or had stopped long before making any type of life cover compulsory. so they knew their mis-selling of such was on the cards   Critical illness cover (financial-ombudsman.org.uk)  
    • Or try email request.   [email protected] Request for copy of Judgment Copy Judgment [email protected] General correspondence
    • I've just tried to ring. Number 67 in the queue. I'm guessing it's better to call earlier in the day!
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2300 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

Hi guys,

 

 

I urgently need some help/advice if at all possible. It's going to turn out to be a long-winded post, so bear with me.

 

 

Basically, I've been in a rented house for the last 23 years, but in early September received a Section 21 (4) (A) - Notice requiring possession of a dwelling-house let under an assured shorthold tenancy ... so a notice to quit. The document states that the landlady gives notice that they require possession by 30 November.

 

 

I started looking for another property and am awaiting confirmation on this matter.

 

 

At the end of October I decided (rightly or wrongly) that I wouldn't pay the full rent for the coming month as I didn't know if I'd still be in this house by 30 November. Instead I paid two weeks up front, and would pay the remainder week-by-week. The rest of the rent has now been paid up to the end of November.

 

 

Got a call from the landlady's office asking why the rent hadn't been paid. Told them I wasn't paying up front and they asked why I was leaving. Told them they should know considering they delivered the S21 and they denied it was a notice to quit. During this conversation I was told that I had signed and returned a bond document which was impossible as no such document was received.

 

 

I have spoken to the housing department at the council and the CAB, who both confirm it is a notice to quit. Despite this, the landlady is ADAMANT it is not and is a legal requirement that every tenant receives this document. She also said that neither the CAB nor council know what they're talking about.

 

 

She is also insistent that I give a month's notice in writing and pay a month's rent, although the CAB say that as she has served notice on me it is not necessary to give her a month's notice or pay a month's rent, if I move before 30 November. Furthermore, the CAB say if I move after the 30th I should only pay for the time I remain - either weekly or fortnightly and that I don't have to give notice, because she has already served notice on me.

 

 

The landlady is saying that if I don't give a month's notice or pay a month's rent she can take me to court, make me bankrupt and can also find me wherever I go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LL is correct, you, CAB & Housing are wrong. s21 is not a Notice to Quit only notice to seek Court repo after expiry date, basically LBA.

At this time of year it will prob be Feb/Mar before LL can get such an Order.

If you vacate by 30 Nov your rent & property liability should cease on that date, but courtesy to let LL know and arrange to return keys.

If you stay after 30 Nov, as is your right, you are still required to give due Notice in writing. You may also incur repo hearing costs. £280

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've been put through the wringer, been given mis-information (by people who should know) and now basically been 'threatened' by being told she'll find me "wherever I go".

 

If she had included a covering letter and the required document that I was supposed to sign, the last two months of stress could have been avoided.

 

I've read post after post on different forums and none said it isn't a notice to quit. So when you get something like this through the door it's no wonder I'm confused.

 

It's strange, though, that if I leave before 30 November I don't have to give a month's notice or pay month's rent. So that contradicts what the high and mighty landlady is saying.

 

Would've thought she would have been more respectful after having rented her property for so long and being told previously I 'was a great tenant'. Now she's turning nasty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi guys,

 

 

I urgently need some help/advice if at all possible. It's going to turn out to be a long-winded post, so bear with me.

 

 

Basically, I've been in a rented house for the last 23 years, but in early September received a Section 21 (4) (A) - Notice requiring possession of a dwelling-house let under an assured shorthold tenancy ... so a notice to quit. The document states that the landlady gives notice that they require possession by 30 November.

 

 

I started looking for another property and am awaiting confirmation on this matter.

 

 

At the end of October I decided (rightly or wrongly) that I wouldn't pay the full rent for the coming month as I didn't know if I'd still be in this house by 30 November. Instead I paid two weeks up front, and would pay the remainder week-by-week. The rest of the rent has now been paid up to the end of November.

 

 

Got a call from the landlady's office asking why the rent hadn't been paid. Told them I wasn't paying up front and they asked why I was leaving. Told them they should know considering they delivered the S21 and they denied it was a notice to quit. During this conversation I was told that I had signed and returned a bond document which was impossible as no such document was received.

 

 

I have spoken to the housing department at the council and the CAB, who both confirm it is a notice to quit. Despite this, the landlady is ADAMANT it is not and is a legal requirement that every tenant receives this document. She also said that neither the CAB nor council know what they're talking about.

 

 

She is also insistent that I give a month's notice in writing and pay a month's rent, although the CAB say that as she has served notice on me it is not necessary to give her a month's notice or pay a month's rent, if I move before 30 November. Furthermore, the CAB say if I move after the 30th I should only pay for the time I remain - either weekly or fortnightly and that I don't have to give notice, because she has already served notice on me.

 

 

The landlady is saying that if I don't give a month's notice or pay a month's rent she can take me to court, make me bankrupt and can also find me wherever I go.

 

 

 

Hello nuttybutty

 

When you moved in 1991 approx

 

Was you issued with form s20 notice at the start of the tenancy, telling you have a assured short holder tenancy ?

 

About 3/4 down this page http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1...schedules/made

 

is

 

FORM No. 7

Housing Act 1988 section 20 Notice of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy

 

Was one of theses notices served on you when the tenancy 1st started !

 

PS

 

Keep paying your rent....

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you are offered a new contract, the Section 21 notice places a Sword of Damocles over your head.

 

At any moment the landlord can start eviction proceedings without further notice, and you are at risk of paying costs or having to move out with fewer than two months' notice to avoid a possession claim.

 

It would be reasonably normal for a landlord who wants to continue a tenancy to issue a Section 21 at the same time as requesting that a new contract be signed. But issuing a Section 21 without explanation suggests that something is up.

 

I have never heard it said that it is a "legal requirement" that a Section 21 notice is issued unless LL wants to either issue a new contract or end the existing tenancy.

 

I suggest that if you want to stay that you could either write to them explain the predicament that they have unnecessarily put you through and ask for a new contract. Or you could take them at their word and hope that they don't choose to evict.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless you are offered a new contract, the Section 21 notice places a Sword of Damocles over your head.

 

At any moment the landlord can start eviction proceedings without further notice, and you are at risk of paying costs or having to move out with fewer than two months' notice to avoid a possession claim.

 

It would be reasonably normal for a landlord who wants to continue a tenancy to issue a Section 21 at the same time as requesting that a new contract be signed. But issuing a Section 21 without explanation suggests that something is up.

 

I have never heard it said that it is a "legal requirement" that a Section 21 notice is issued unless LL wants to either issue a new contract or end the existing tenancy.

 

I suggest that if you want to stay that you could either write to them explain the predicament that they have unnecessarily put you through and ask for a new contract. Or you could take them at their word and hope that they don't choose to evict.

 

 

The s21 will be invalid anyway

 

If form s20 notice was not issued at the start of the tenancy, telling the tenant they have a assured short holder tenancy...

 

Then OP has Assured Tenancy and not a AST http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/private_renting/private_renting_agreements/assured_tenancies and Does not have to move out.....

 

nuttybutty could you please answer post #4 thank you

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Struggling to find any S20-related documentation - although I could've packed it away in preparation for moving.

 

The only relevant paperwork I could find is dated more recently - 2008 - and is titled Assured shorthold tenancy agreement.

 

This paragraph on the back of the document is one more reason why the situation is confusing...

 

This agreement is an assured shorthold tenancy (as defined is section 19A blah, blah, blah). The landlady giving a section 21 notice must give at least two months' notice, in writing.

 

One reason why I'm still confused is why have I been given two months notice to 30 November if it's not a notice to quit? Is it any wonder a thickhead like me can't understand any of this legal mumbo jumbo?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, the back of the 2008 document states that I can only give a month's notice on rent due date (so 1 December). The landlady, though, told me yesterday that she doesn't know why I don't hand in notice now.

 

Could this be that she's panicking because from mid-December to early January she jets off abroad, so she knows there's no opportunity of finding a new tenant until the New Year and won't receive any rent for that period, hence why she also wants a month's rent? Also, she doesn't know what I could do to the house if my notice runs out while she's away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi nuttybutty

 

You said

 

 

 

 

Basically, I've been in a rented house for the last 23 years, but in early September received a Section 21 (4) (A) - Notice requiring possession of a dwelling-house let under an

 

which would make it around 1991 approx you moved in

 

you moved in between 15 January 1989 and 27 February 1997
And

 

your landlord did not give you a notice saying that you have an assured shorthold tenancy.
Then you have a Assured tenancy and you Do not have to move out http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/private_renting/private_renting_agreements/assured_tenancies

 

Your have what is called a secure tenancy/sitting tenant status...

 

Can you remember what your LL gave you if anything when you 1st moved in ?

 

You need to tell shelter and and council hosing dept you moved in 23 years ago and as far as you know No section 20 notice was issued when you moved in 1991.

 

I hope you can understand me and

 

You must keep paying your Rent, please don't stop paying it or your LL will be able to a possession order and bailiffs evict you for rent arrears...

 

 

 

 

.

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
but OP signed an AST in 2008? does this not supersede/ cancel the original tenancy ?

was any deposit paid and is it protected?

 

NO, it's what was signed in 1991 and served in 1991 that matters.

 

There was a case in the court of appeal a while ago when Tenant had Assured tenancy, but LL had got T to sign AST, Court of Appeal ruled in favor of T and signing AST did not invalidate the Assured tenancy...

 

To be honest I really can't remember what the landlord at the time (he's since handed properties to his daughter) gave me. I moved here in August 1991.

 

Your LL has to prove in court that the form below s20 notice was served on you when you 1st moved in 1991.. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1988/2203/schedules/made

 

If they cant s21 is Invalid.

 

 

nuttybutty

 

You must get you rent up to date and keeping paying your rent or risk loosing your home of the past 23 years...

 

And

 

You really do need to seek legal advice from a solicitor specializing in housing law....

Edited by 45002
added sentences....spelling..

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Responding to S.O.S - message sent to Lea_HTH.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks 4502 for clearing that up.

OP may not need a solicitor; OP just needs to set out his position to the LL and see what they do from there.

OP stay where you are and keep up with the rent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My help isn't needed - 45002 has it almost spot on (it's a tiny bit more complicated depending on the paperwork that is available to LL - as LL may have got OP to sign to agree to an AST from the AT, in which case the s21 would be valid). More information is needed - and because it involves looking at ALL the paperwork in detail (including original tenancy agreement), OP needs to go to see a housing solicitor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Lea_HTH

 

I'm still trying to find the Court of Appeal ruling I posted about early on

 

 

There was a case in the court of appeal a while ago when Tenant had Assured tenancy, but LL had got T to sign AST, Court of Appeal ruled in favor of T and signing AST did not invalidate the Assured tenancy...

 

The case was posted a while back by this guy on http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/member.php?14748-Snorkerz on LLz, But he has over 15,000 post and searching is a bit of a struggle :razz:

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...