Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.View the full article
  • 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 3003 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 everyone..... I have recently got into a dispute with a landlord regarding the return of fees paid for referencing checks. I am about to file a small claims submission, but first I'd appreciate any advice/comments.

 

Basically what happened was put in an offer for a flat that he owns, and we believe he had accepted the offer (see email chain below). However when the tenancy agreement came through it was a higher amount than we agreed. I contacted him and he said he never accepted our offer, and the price is fixed.

 

We therefore decided not to move ahead with going for the flat because what he was asking was too high for the standard of the flat, and we didn't think it was safe to work with someone who acts in this manner.

 

I have tried talking to him about it but he refuses to accept that he should return the fee. I sent him a letter giving him 14 days notice before taking him to court, and he has again written back saying he will not return the fee. He says he never accepted our offer, and the price was on rightmove.co.uk.

 

Here are the emails between my wife and this landlord (I've blanked out names) where we put an offer to him, his response. I can't see however any way in which this can't be seen as acceptance of our offer.

 

We responded to this by negotiating an early release from our current landlord, so we could move in to meet the new landlords timescales. There were no subsequent discussions about the rental amount until I queried the amount showing on the tenancy agreement.

 

EMAIL TRAIL STARTS HERE....

 

Hi Charles,

 

Thank-you for arranging the viewing today, Graham was lovely and very helpful.

 

We liked the flat and are interested in renting the property from you, the only issue we have is it's slightly over what we had originally planned to spend. Would you be willing to consider £1200 per month please?

 

Thank you,

 

Emily

 

==============================================================================

Hi Emily,

 

Really pleased that you liked the flat and had a good viewing with Graham.

 

Graham said you are a really nice family and would be well suited in the flat and good tenants so I am keen to offer the flat to you.

 

What will help me make my final decision will be when you could take the flat on, do you have an ideal date to move in?

 

I would also ask if you can help give me some more info by filling in the attached document and send back to me. This will also assist with referencing if we go forward.

 

Thanks again and speak soon.

 

Charles

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

From the email you have posted it does not look like the landlord actually accepted your offer. The landlord states he has not yet decided - he says he still needs to make his 'final decision'.

 

A legally binding contract requires both sides to have clearly and unconditionally accepted the key contract terms. Unless you have another email in which the landlord actually says he accepts your offer, I don't think you would have a realistic chance of succeeding through small claims.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and thanks for your response. I think in subsequent emails it's clear that he has accepted (see below), I can't see how it can be taken in any other way. Especially when he says "I would be happy to offer you the flat" and in the last email in the chain below "I am happy to proceed if you are"

 

============================================================================================================

 

Hi Emily,

 

Thanks for sending these back, I haven't had chance to look yet as I am replying from my phone but I will look later.

 

Is there anyway you would be able to move in sooner than the start of April?

 

My current tenant moves out at the end of Feb so it would leave me with one month without rent and a mortgage still to pay.

 

I can confirm that the property is unfurnished but yes it does come with white goods (cooker, hob, fridge, freezer & washing machine)

 

Previous landlord as a reference will be fine.

 

Yes the flat will be professionally cleaned once the current tenant moves out and you will be requested to also use a professional cleaning company when you move out as well.

 

Also Graham will go into the flat before you would move in to freshen up the flat with some painting, etc.

 

I would be happy to offer you the flat but my main issue is the month gap, is there anything you can do here? Would your current landlord let you leave earlier?

 

Let me know, thanks

 

Charles

 

=============================================================================================

 

Hi Charles,

 

We have spoken to our landlord, and he has agreed to release us slightly earlier. This means we would be able to move in on the 19th March.

 

Is that acceptable to you?

 

Regards,

 

Emily

 

================================================================================================================

 

Hi Emily,

 

Thank you for sorting this out and although this is not ideal, it is a lot better for me so I am happy to proceed if you are?

 

Shall I give the OK to start the referencing?

 

Charles

Link to post
Share on other sites

" He says he never accepted our offer, and the price was on rightmove.co.uk. "

 

Was it?..I would assume it would have to be ?

 

So why did you offer £1200.00pcm ?

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Thread moved to the correct Forum.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it was.... but I think that's irrelevant. It's common practice for people to offer under the asking price when either renting or buying property. I believe the email trail I have shown above is clear that he accepted the offer.

 

We offered less because the property did not match up with the advert. For example it said two double bedrooms and luxury bathroom, when there was only one double bedroom and the bathroom was far from luxury.

 

I think the real question is will the court agree with me from the emails I have shown on here that he accepted the offer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a difficult one. I think the landlord has acted badly here - he should have told you if he didn't agree with your proposed price of £1200 per month.

 

I'm still not sure 'Happy to proceed' is enough for a legally binding contract though. I don't think this is enough for court because the landlord doesn't actually say that he accepts your offer at the proposed price of £1200 per month.

 

Can I ask roughly how much this fee was - did you see any T&Cs relating to the reference checks? If this fee was paid to the letting agency, might it be possible to go after the lettings agency for a refund? You would often get these fees back if the landlord pulls out.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally credit ref and other checks are for LL to decide whether to offer a T before it starts. Quite poss LL would have accepted your lower offer if refs OK, but no refund for work carried out.

There was a separate, unwritten Contract between you and LL to supply/occupy. Since you withdrew before occupying, you are in breach of this Contract and for either reason, I don't think SCC will find in your favour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely in addition to his earlier comment of "keen to move forward", when he says "so I am happy to proceed if you are" that's acceptance?

 

Our response to his question about OK to start referencing is below....

 

There were no T&C's with the referencing..... in fact, he didn't even say there was a cost until we got an email from the referencing company.

 

I'd disagree that we pulled out as well. We wouldn't have done if he had stuck to what had been agreed initially.

 

Hi Charles,

 

Yes, we are very happy to proceed - thanks. Although it's not ideal for us either as we are going to be paying two sets of rent for a while in March, but I think it's a fair compromise all round. Thank-you for your help with this, and we appreciate it has inconvenienced you also.

 

Thanks,

 

Emily

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we are very happy to proceed - thanks.

 

There's your problem...you agreed to the referencing and that is what your money paid for.

 

Rather than kick up a fuss and pull out, you should have stuck to your guns and started re-negotiating. The LL was clearly keen not to have a void period, and he would likely have accepted the lower rent rather than miss out on maybe two months rent looking for new tenants.

 

Too late now...but in my view a court is highly unlikely to rule in your favour - there was no acceptance of your offer as in between that and the contract was the matter of referencing. The referencing took place, therefore it has to be paid for. You might get money back if the referencing costs were unreasonable, but I think you are barking up the wrong tree with the argument you are planning on putting forward.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...