Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Dear PIXeL_92 It has been explained to you in previous correspondence that the roof tiles that are the subject of your complaint, at the time of inspection were heavily covered in moss. It is in your agreed terms that the surveyor will not carry out an asbestos survey and is not required to scrape away moss if the surface below is obscured. The surveyor will carry out only a visual inspection and comment on defects visible at the time of inspection. Roofs can fail at any time particularly in periods of inclement weather. As stated in your report, the surveyor confirmed that the roof was in a satisfactory condition at the time of inspection therefore would not require replacement in the immediate future. The subject building is a utility building and is not a habitable room of the main property. As previously explained, tiles on an outbuilding of this nature would not affect the property value. You state you would have factored in the cost of removal/replacement into the purchase offer however as advised at the time of inspection the tiles were in a satisfactory condition and you have not sought to replace the tiles in the three years following the date of inspection. This confirms the comments provided by the surveyor. You have previously stated that the roof became damaged due to high winds and the roofing specialist you instructed to replace the broken tiles made you aware of the possibility that the tiles may contain asbestos. However, you have not yet had the tiles tested to confirm the presence of asbestos. Our surveyor revisited your property and confirmed that you have had the damaged roof tiles replaced. A roof that contains asbestos will only become a health and safety risk if it is disturbed and it therefore seems odd that the roofing contractor was happy to replace the tiles if in fact asbestos was present. We understand that raising a complaint and progressing to legal action as you have suggested you wish to do can be a lengthy drawn-out and expensive process with no guarantee of success. If necessary, we will notify our legal team to address this matter on our behalf however, we are happy to attempt to settle this matter in advance to avoid prolonged communications and extending this matter for many more months. In an effort to conclude this matter to the satisfaction of all parties, we shall increase our goodwill offer to £500 in full and final settlement of this matter. This offer will be available until Thursday 27 August 2020. There will be no further offers made after this date. I look forward to your response. Yours sincerely, Walker Dunn MRICS   ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************   Dear Walker Dunn,   Apologies on the delayed reply unfortunately I had to attend to some personal matters that left me unable to reply to emails.   A few points I want to make regarding your previous letter.   You mention at the time of the inspection that the surface of the tiles was covered in moss and obscured the view of the tiles, we however have pictures from when we moved in showing this was not the case, whilst there is moss on the tiles it in no way obscured to the point that the material would have been assessed incorrectly and you can also see the curling of the edges to a large amount of the tiles and this is a characteristic of asbestos.   You state in the report that the roof was in satisfactory condition, however, if the roof was indeed slate that your report indicated this would have been correct however the curled edges of asbestos tiles indicate that they are fatigued and need replacing and that is not satisfactory condition, again the material was not identified correctly at the time of the report.   As for this point "You state you would have factored in the cost of removal/replacement into the purchase offer however as advised at the time of inspection the tiles were in a satisfactory condition and you have not sought to replace the tiles in the three years following the date of inspection. This confirms the comments provided by the surveyor."   We had put away money to have this done, at the time as it was deemed slate in your report we didn't prioritise this as a repair, as you know the roof of the main property was in an awful state and was leaking into the bedroom this took priority along with having all the plumbing in the bathroom replaced as we discovered it was stuffed with kitchen roll under the bath to hide a set of leaking pipes that eventually made its way into the kitchen. We then also had a passing in the family that took us away from the local area for around a month and then my partners dad became homeless due to a gas explosion that destroyed his property so we had to accommodate him for a year and half so most work we had planned got put on hold. This doesn't confirm your comments in your report, this just allows you to assume it did as it wasn't done straight away however this was not the case. We have all the paperwork and invoices to show the above work was done to the main property along with pictures along with all the details surrounding the gas explosion.   We don't agree that part of a building being a habitable room of the main property makes a difference in our case, of course any structure on a property would affect the properties overall value when offers are being made as you make your offer based on the overall property and if you wanted to use the outbuilding for a specific reason you would be more inclined to go for a property that dose have an outbuilding over one that doesn't or if you want another example one with a swimming pool selling for a higher amount as that is considered a premium.   You then say "You have previously stated that the roof became damaged due to high winds and the roofing specialist you instructed to replace the broken tiles made you aware of the possibility that the tiles may contain asbestos. However, you have not yet had the tiles tested to confirm the presence of asbestos."   We had the roofer come and take a look instructing him that we wanted two slate tiles replacing due to us believing at the time the roof was slate based on your report, he then mentioned from a simple visual inspection that they are in fact asbestos. He said he could replace them with two slate tiles but we would have dispose of the two slipped asbestos ones safely as he wasn't licensed to do so, they were removed in a safe manor to avoid cracking them due to how brittle they were.   We have at several times offered to have them tested for you if you would cover the costs of testing if they are in fact asbestos tiles but this simple question has still remained un answered, so for this reason we have now booked a test and this will be added to the costs we will be pursing if and when we are forced to go down the legal route along with all legal cost and the cost of disposal and replacement of the roof, as mentioned before I just wanted the disposal costs covered, but our solicitor has now advised us we should be entitled to have the full costs awarded so we are left in the same place financially along with the roof material matching the report.   Our next step would be to have the test results come back, and send those tests results if they come back as positive with the invoice and three quotes for removal of asbestos to yourselves to decide if you want to cover those costs or if you wish to continue with legal proceedings and as mentioned before if we have to issue legal proceedings we will be asking for all costs to be covered and a complaint to the RICS and Ombudsman will also be issued.   Unfortunately at this point we are rejecting your £500 settlement but if you decided you wanted to settle it without facing any potential legal action or complaint we would settle for the sum of £2000 and that will be the matter resolved, we believe this to be a fair amount as the testing has now cost us £150 and the mid range quote has come in at £1900.   Regards   Robert Atkins   ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************   Dear PIXeL_92 I refer to your email sent on 7th September. I am disappointed and dismayed that you have decided to not accept our very reasonable offer. We have now notified our legal team in preparation should you decide to proceed along the legal route. You have told us you are receiving legal advice, therefore I am sure that your solicitor will have explained to you that in matters of alleged negligence, if the court finds in your favour, they can only make an award on the basis of diminution of value and not the cost of repairs.   Therefore to quantify the diminution in value you would need to obtain a report from another surveying firm that identifies the value of your property three years ago with a slate roof to the outbuilding and the value of the property three years ago with an asbestos roof to the outbuilding. To do this effectively, the surveyor would have to identify comparable properties in the area with and without such roofs to be able to justify his findings. This would be no easy task.   To further complicate matters, the guidelines set out for the court are that they only award losses based upon diminution of value that exceed 5% of the property value, which is considered a reasonable margin of error for surveyor to work within. In this instance therefore, you would be required to identify a loss in excess of £6,000. This figure does not include your legal costs. Because this is a claim for alleged negligence and not for a debt, it is not a matter that can be dealt with by the Small Claims Court, it would have to be heard by a higher court. This would mean we would then be able to claim the costs of our barrister, solicitor and any experts for however many days the hearing lasts, plus you would have your own costs, if you were unable to prove your claim. Once you submit a claim, you are unable to then back out without incurring costs. I hope you find this advice helpful and I am sure that if you present this letter to your solicitor, he will be able to verify whether the above information is correct. We will await your response on how you intend to proceed. Yours sincerely, Colin Walker MRICS
    • Sorry for the text heavy post, we are getting nowhere with them, I need some help deciding our next steps, I have a couple more emails as PDFs that I need to attach below.   Dear PIXel_92, We confirmed in our previous email that our offer would be made available until Friday 14 August 2020. This offer was presented as a gesture of goodwill based on the information you have provided in support of your claim. Thus far, we have not had sight of a Specialist Report confirming the presence of Asbestos or quotations for the required works. Since you have not furnished us with any additional information we are unable to provide any further comments on the matter at this time. If you’re able to provide the requested information we will be happy to review the matter and discuss it further with you. Kind regards, Customer Relations ************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** Dear Walker Dunn,   I have on two occasions offered to have it tested further than a visual inspection but if it comes back as asbestos you cover the costs, you asked me for the costs involved in getting it tested and you neither agreed to nor declined to cover that cost if it came back as asbestos, again I am happy to have it tested but if it comes back as asbestos to have those costs covered.   I have sent communication from a roofer on headed paper confirming they belive it to be asbestos but they aren't registered to remove it.   I am happy to get three formal quotes written on paper and provide them, I have spoken to a roofer that deals in asbestos that was here to do another job at the time and he said just going off rough size it would be approximately £2000 to remove the roof and dispose of the asbestos. I will get some quotes over the next week and get back to you with them.   Regards ************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** Dear Walker Dunn,   Could I please get confirmation regarding if you are going to cover the cost of testing if it does come back as positive before I go ahead with it.   I now have 3 quotes for removal of the asbestos too.   My solicitors has also forwarded me this to read through, https://www.rics.org/uk/upholding-professional-standards/regulation/how-we-regulate/disciplinary-process/panel-hearings/disciplinary-panel-hearings/walker-dunn-limited-and-colin-walker/.   This will be our next step going to the RICS / property ombudsman as we seem to be getting nowhere and it has been going on for some time due to you not answering the above question.   If you don't answer it we can get it tested and look at legal action to recover the money at a later date if that's how you want to do it.   Regards **************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************  
    • So you did...should have gone to specsavers......so as this debt is in your name only only a restriction type K can be placed on your share of the equity.   You have still not explain why " you dont actually own any equity "...you can PM if you rather this was not divulged on the open topic....as this may be important and possibly stop any interim charge.....subject to your response.
    • unfortunately, under the statute of limitations Act, that has has been around for probably +100yrs, yes.
    • At some point in the video it has screenshots of this forum and the narrative suggests that some people agree that an enforcement agent has the power to enter into a property to check on identity. I think that it is intended that the CAG is associated with this belief. There would be quite wrong and it's a shame that this very interesting and relevant video has tried to express this.
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 4 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2023 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

This website has been a lifeline for me over the last few months. I've read avidly and learnt so much from other people's experiences and from the advice posted.

 

I'm currently managing my "relationship" with Rossendales and have managed to survive this far without too many hiccups.

 

 

Empowered by knowledge gained here, I've stood my ground, kept my doors and windows locked, parked my car miles away :),

have sent out the requisite standard letters (found on here) and,

finally, have sent my first payment directly to the Council via online payment completely bypassing Rossendales.

I'm sure Rossendales will discover this fact soon if, indeed, they haven't already.

 

The computer-generated letters from Rossendales were becoming more and more "assertive"

and despite my advising them in writing that hell would freeze over before they crossed my threshold

and paying them what I thought was a "reasonable and sustainable" amount each month to cover outstanding Council Tax from 2006,

they still insist on demanding "full payment" in contravention of the OFT guidelines.

 

 

However, thanks to everyone here, I feel as if I'm back in control of the situation and can sleep nights.

 

Bailiffs are indeed paperless, powerless tigers - but, unfortunately, like mosquitos they do need to be controlled cos they're pesky!!

 

Thanks again!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Impecunious,

Your situtation sounds similar to mine, in that my life seems to be a constant drag of dealing with DCAs and bailiffs so I zoomed in on your title as I feel exactly the same. There's no "link" between the two but they can both make your life a misery, but now, thanks to this site, I don't allow them to have so much control.

 

I suppose I'm saying that this site, and the people on it offering advice and encouragement is a godsend.

 

Keep going, we'll get there in the end :D

 

And thanks to all you lovely people who make this site possible.

 

Eliza

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your support Eliza!! Much appreciated. I hope you manage to keep head above water!

 

The DCAs and the Bailiffs are really just a side-show - my main focus is on trying to mitigate the amount of damages in a personal injury claim against me - they're looking at £30,000-£50,000 plus legal costs. Hence my name on here "impecunious" -- modest income, no assets, no insurance cover. Dead in the water really - no hope of ever being able to satisfy any judgment against me but just hoping to survive the ordeal of going to court again.

 

Thanks again!!

 

Impecunious! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...

Just a kwickie! Does anyone know how long a Liability Order for unpaid Council Tax is valid for?

 

I believe that my Liability orders were issued in September 2008.

 

Thanks - your replies will be interesting.

 

 

 

Impecunious! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a kwickie! Does anyone know how long a Liability Order for unpaid Council Tax is valid for?

 

I believe that my Liability orders were issued in September 2008.

 

Thanks - your replies will be interesting.

 

 

 

Impecunious! :)

 

As far as I know as long as the Liabilty Order is obtained before the Statute of Limitations kicks in then there is no time limit at all. If after the SOL is passed then technically they can still go for it but it is advised not to - very rarely does this happen.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a kwickie! Does anyone know how long a Liability Order for unpaid Council Tax is valid for?

 

I believe that my Liability orders were issued in September 2008.

 

Thanks - your replies will be interesting.

 

 

 

Impecunious! :)

 

There is no time limit although there have been a number of Ombudsman's ruling if a local authority attempt to pursue recovery after 6 years.

 

Yours is in date and is enforceable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tomtubby

 

I thought that was the case!

 

I am refusing to deal with Rossendales who have had my account for the last 17-18 months (without gaining peaceful entry or levying). I'm waiting for the account to be taken back under council control - NULLA BONA -however, the council are refusing my payment plan. I've tried paying online directly to the council but the reference number is not recognised. I'm continuing to set aside an amount each month to send to the council (for last 7 months).

 

The council have stated that my repayment plan is unacceptable without even knowing my monthly income and expenditure. Every penny of my monthly salary (and more) is accounted for.

 

I regularly state to the council that I am a "can't" pay - not a "won't" pay and I feel that, given my financial circumstances, that the amount I set aside is realistic and sustainable and one on which I will not risk defaulting on.

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

Impecunious! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya - yes - have been trying for the last 7 months to pay them online but the reference number they gave me is not accepted.

 

I have asked the council on 3 occasions to provide me with the reference number and a copy of the liability order - yesterday, I asked again and gave them 14 days to comply - then FORMAL COMPLAINT to their Chief Exec.

 

Impecunious! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some advice would be much appreciated.

 

My account for council tax arrears from 2005-2006 nas been with Rossendales since October 2008. I have refused to deal with them and tried paying the council directly online but system won't recognise the reference number. I have therefore set aside an amount each month since last year to pay the council direct once my account is returned to them by Rossendales.

 

I have been in correspondence with the council and they have threatened me with an attachment to earnings (they're not happy with my proposed repayment plan) despite the fact that I am more than willing to make regular sustainable and realistic monthly payments on which I am unlikely to default (given my present impecunious circumstances).

 

I'm just wondering where I go from here.

 

 

Impecunious! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankfully not fluffy bunny - just overwhelmed by debt - massive CCJ in respect of recent "spurious" claim for personal damages in the sum of some £26,000+ - that I could not appeal due to lack of finance.

 

The claimant's solicitors didn't have the good sense to check my ability to satisfy a claim for personal injuries BEFORE they had judgment in their favour by default. That's no win no fee solicitors for you!

 

My disposable income after basics and arrears is non-existant.

 

Impecunious! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are going for AoE then they are planning a Committal Hearing - this is one of the options open to them at this stage. If it comes to it it will be worth telling the Court of the money you have put aside, you will have to list I & E and ask for a payment plan be put in place by the Court - not AoE. Unfortunately in both scenarios CT is classed as a priority debt and comes before a lot of things.

 

I'm interested in the other matter you mentioned particularly as you found against with Judgment by Default as this appears to suggest you were missing some paperwork.

 

PT

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

After negotiating all month with the Council, they have finally agreed to take back my A/C for CT arrears that has been with Rossendales for the last 18 months AND with a monthly payment that is both realistic and sustainable. :)

 

After eight months of paying Rossendales direct, I got fed up with their peristent correspondence campaign, steadily increasing threats for additional payments, removal of goods, commital to prison etc. etc. and tried paying the council online from August 2009. Unfortunately, my reference number wasn't recognised and payment was not accepted. However, since August 2009, I have religiously set-aside the monthly payment until such time as the council agreed to take back my account from Rossies.

 

I feel I can now breathe again.

 

I'd like to thank all my fellow CAGgers for their support and for the knowledge gleaned from each of their individual threads. There is life at the tunnel, you just have to be totally dogmatic and focussed and stay positive.

 

Thanks again.

 

 

 

 

Impecunious! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

A wonderful result for you. Don't doubt for one moment you feel as if a large weight has been removed, a very large Nescafe must be called for.

 

PT

ps For all of the other side watching may be this is a salutory lesson that if you played fair then you may get results!

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yay, *sings* Another one bites the dust :D well done..

 

we really do need to get a separate thread going for all the success stories, just to prove it can be done, and there is a light at the end of it all

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done impecunious, [love the name].

A seperate thread for success stories, seanamarts? There's enough now for several volumes... :)

 

Best wishes.

Rae.

 

[You haven't seen me, ok?]

Edited by RaeUK
just leaving sandwiches [some heavy on the pickle] and soft drinks as bribes. I can go 24hrs without being here. Honest.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks All

 

I'm delighted with the result, especially as I do not fall into any of the recognised "vulnerable" categories that are normally referred to here. However, I have an inkling I once saw "overwhelming debt" as being included under vulnerability.

 

Kelcou: I love the name too but wish it wasn't so! :) Wasn't my fault guv!

 

Best wishes

 

 

Impecunious! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

impecunious - well done good ole rossies are not having a good time of it at the moment are they lol, im just waiting for rossies to now send me a letter re there charges, then it all starts again haha

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 years later...

After moving from JSA into self-employment, my weekly income is just £33 New Enterprise Allowance which supports my new business and that will end in just 6 weeks' time. Until my business develops and establishes itself, it will be a while before I can draw a wage or break even.

 

 

I have historic CT arrears and am almost blue in the face trying to make my former council understand that it is only possible, at the moment, to make token payments as a gesture of goodwill until such time as my financial situation improves. They are demanding monthly payments of £30.00 and have sent the "bailiffs warning letter" (not too bothered by that really -- it contains the usual "may" take action, etc. etc and I'm totally up to speed on managing bailiff visits). I have completed the income form the council sent and it is blatantly obvious that a £1/month is actually more than I can realistically afford. (I successfully managed to deal with Rossendales before for this old debt (from 2005-06), had the account returned to the council and negotiated a realistic payment plan.)

 

 

I reduced my payments from an affordable £12.00/month whilst I was working, to just £1.00/month when I become unemployed over 14 months ago. (It took the council 10 months to come back to me and tell me that £1/month was unacceptable.) I have repeatedly advised my former Council that my first priority is to keep a roof over my head, pay my current CT liability and my fuel bills as best as I can -- and eat! Despite suffering financial hardship, I have continued to pay £1.00 every month as I am a "can't pay, not a won't pay".

 

 

I know these are priority arrears but my main focus is to survive now. I would welcome any input/advice to keep the council off my back for the next 3-6 months! (Really the same goes for energy companies and water company too.)

 

 

I'm trying to avoid claiming any more benefits, as I'm perfectly capable of working full time and earning my own living -- I just need some consideration and a little more time.

 

 

Exasperated Impecunious!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you tell us more about your situation, Are you male/female, single, married, any children. What is your business. This sounds very similar to a situation i was in although i was employed and went self employed, 4 years ago i had CT arrears of over 4k its now just £159 and due to end in April, i cant bloody wait.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the reasons they say £1 per month is not enough is because anyone who has an Attachment to Benefits is docked best part of £5 per week. Are you not able to claim Tax Credits?

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...