Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Ah I see what you mean. That is unfortunate, but guess there's little I can do then. Thanks very much for your help!
    • OK I sent CCA request on Monday 7/6 recorded delivery with a postal order uncrossed with £1 stating on the back that it didn't go towards any alleged debt.   Wednesday 9/6, received the postal order back from Arrow with a cover letter saying they no longer charge a fee and 'we will respond as soon as we can'   Then on Friday 11/6 morning a letter dated the 10th (they said if we didn't hear back from you by the 11th) I got a letter of claim from Drydens saying 'if you do not provide proposals to repay, legal action may be issued in the county court'.  Along with 'you have 30 days to respond'. Attached is a printout of an income and expenditure sheet.
    • Your attachment was viewable in your first post.   Does the issue you mention with the wallpaper/slight stain really constitute a breach ?  Is it significant enough ?   The wallpaper was probably applied before the wall was properly dry.  But the other possibility, is that the tenants did not open windows regularly to ventilate the room.  It is important for windows to be opened or put into a vent position on a regular basis, to ensure that moisture is allowed out.   If the tenant had clothes drying in the house, with baths/showers being used etc, this may have helped cause the wallpaper peeling  and the damp stain.   Today has been a lovely Summer day in many parts of the UK, so the tenants may not be as quick to respond.  Same issue with replies to this site, so you might get other responses later.   The tenant is unlikely to try to pursue you for the matress or health issue they say is caused by a damp issue.  Unlikely to have sufficient evidence and their own actions may be the cause.   They are most likely deciding whether to complete work in the garden or not.   You are within your rights to hold onto the deposit for now, until the reasonable request to return property to pre let condition is completed.    
    • Oh Yorky, I'm so sorry you're still having trouble with your dad's hospital.   I can't believe they are still being so awkward, I sometimes think they (companies in general, not just hospitals) forget that we put ourselves through this stress and worry not because we want to, or even because we have to, but because we want what's best for our loved ones.   Their advice for you to deliver the form in person is at odds with the advice on their own website stating that visits have been suspended due to Covid. I mean, I would understand if someone wanted you to drop off clothes for your dad, but a piece of paper? Which could end up anywhere? That's... crazy.   I don't know if the following link is worth a try or whether you've been down this road, but the hospital website has details of all the consultants Consultants | North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust WWW.NTH.NHS.UK If you want to find out details of our hospital consultants and contact information you can search for them in our A-Z. obviously you'll know your dad's consultant name, but the phone numbers on there, are they ward ones that you've tried before or do they look different?   That said, even if you are more successful with that, definitely still get PALS and as much senior management on board as you can with a formal complaint. You shouldn't have to go to such lengths to get hold of the right people and for the right information, especially at such a stressful time.   You point out that you remember you're doing this for your brother and your dad, which is the best approach. I'm sure they, in their own way, know that you are pushing yourself and pushing the hospital for an outcome as you are is because of them.   I know it's easy for someone on the internet to say "look after yourself", "do this to help with stress" etc, but if you do feel you need extra help with dealing with your stress/worry, please don't be afraid to seek help from a doctor yourself. A "well" you is the best sort of support for your dad and brother.   I wish I could offer more support and I'm sure that if anyone else of the CAG community has any other suggestions, I'm sure they will come here and let you know.  
    • Ok update.  I have spent the last week or two, trying to get help from the Staff Nurses and Matron, regarding the Consultant or someone to have my dads lack of capacity documented, either their own paperwork or me sending COP3. I   they have informed the consultant looking after my dad, who at this moment is sounding very ill, with medical issues on top of delirium and confusion, he is apparently having blood transfusion bag things. not eating and drinking. I have even spoken to the consultants secretary to explain the urgent matter and to have the consultant contact over the last few days WITHOUT SUCCESS, conversion ended today with its a legal form can I take it into hospital personally, er..I dont drive and Im in Northampton, Hospital is Stockton on Tees.    the nurses cant help need to speak to consultant!!!!!!! conversation ended with well I will complain to PALS, GMC secretary of Health or whoever......reply was looks like it then?   I have just compiled a 3 page letter [well e mail one] sent to PALS, I will follow up with a written one and to whoever else I can contact.   I need this medical form before I can do anything else with court or appointee   anyone have any ideas cos Im now at my gasping point, wondering why the hell am I taking on all this stress and worry, then I think of my younger brother, and that reminds me why I am doing it and doing it for.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Correct use of "Implied Right of Access"?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1904 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,

 

First thing, is this notice now legal or does it need more work?

 

READ THIS NOTICE

Removal of ‘Implied Right of Access’ Notice:

Except: Family, Friends, Postal Services, Delivery Services and the Emergency Services - (limited to the time needed to deal with the reported emergency), a Bailiff with a valid Court Order Signed by a Judge including full printed name of Said Judge. (Note: A Bailiff has NO legal right to force access (nor is it implied by this notice) to a residential property, only by “Peaceful” enter by invite only)).

Any other person(s) and/or any companies not on the exceptions list above will be liable to Prosecution for Trespassing - definition: [Entering onto land without consent of the landowner/homeowner or Tenant] and be fined £1000.

Access MUST have been granted by prior appointment ONLY by the landowner/homeowner or Tenant of the Property.

Note: CCTV is in use on this PRIVATE PROPERTY.

Thank you.

 

Second, if you have this notice up can this be used as a defence against the "amended in 2014" Dangerous Dogs Act", which states "Except Trespasses", meaning your Dog will not be taken away as the "Implied Right of Access" Notice (excluding people named on the Exceptions) are now trespasses.

 

Thanks for any input and help.

 

Paul Barnes

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its fine for people who do not have a right in law to attend, unfortunately Enforcements Agents do, under section 14 of schedule 12 of the tribunals courts and enforcment act. so it will not be of any use there they will just ignore it.

 

It was rumored to be effective before the change in the law but even then there is case law which shows it was not effective.

 

What it will do is give the EA the impression that you are a debt dodger, which is not advisable, but that bit is just my opinion.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this Better:

 

Removal of ‘Implied Right of Access’ Notice:

Except: Family, Friends, Postal Services, Delivery Services and the Emergency Services - (limited to the time needed to deal with the reported emergency), Enforcements agents operating under section 14 of schedule 12 of the tribunals courts and enforcement act (Note: A Enforcement agent has NO legal right to force access (nor is it implied by this notice) to a residential property, only by “Peaceful” entry by invite only)).

Any other person(s) and/or any companies not on the exceptions list above will be liable to Prosecution for Trespassing - definition: [Entering onto land without consent of the landowner/homeowner or Tenant] and be fined £1000.

Access MUST have been granted by prior appointment ONLY by the landowner/homeowner or Tenant of the Property.

Note: CCTV is in use on this PRIVATE PROPERTY.

Thank you.

 

--

 

Thanks for the input of the first part of my questions, I will point out that I have no debts at all, this post is merely for my own personal continuation of educating myself.

 

Paul Barnes

Edited by Paul Barnes
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry misread you post I will have another look

 

Incidentally there is a very good article about this by Paul Caddy it is not yet available on line i believe, perhaps we can get permission to post it.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would leave the stuff about bailiffs out altogether if you do not need it.

 

Just a simple withdrawal notice .stating that all callers depending an an implied rights to enter this property hereby have that right withdrawn as per the appropriate common law.

 

edit YOu could add a list saying this applies to cold callers debt collectors etc.etc. and put at the end, this list is not exclusive, if there is any doubt please call for authorisation. Something like that.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for reply.

 

Any thoughts on this part?

 

Second, if you have this notice up can this be used as a defence against the "amended in 2014" Dangerous Dogs Act", which states "Except Trespasses", meaning your Dog will not be taken away as the "Implied Right of Access" Notice (excluding people named on the Exceptions) are now trespasses.

 

Paul Barnes

Link to post
Share on other sites

I m sorry but I am not familiar with this act, Is there anything within it that states that any particular person may enter a premisses ? If so then this would not be an implied right and therefore cannot be withdrawn

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

paul

not sure of your reference, do you mean re (no) permission. has it been decided in court. but not really at first. anyone on notice will have to have the chance to leave the property.

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

paul why do you need it please

its pretty mickey mouse freemen of the land rubbish

 

 

who do you think is coming to your door?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can forget the bit about prosecution, only the state can prosecute someone. You can't for a civil wrong.

 

As above, typical FOTL rubbish.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul

 

More backstory please. You will get into trouble with that notice... It doesnt work ... Ever...

I assume its to do with dangerous dogs?

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

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

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Implied Right of Access is a law within Common law, which is the main law that governs our land (England), so can not be in any way rubbish. Law is law....

 

Note, I am here to further educate myself by asking people that I believe have the correct knowledge of this field, I also agree that many sites misrepresent common law (bailiffs for example and IRoA), causing a great deal of problems for people that are just wanting the correct answers, but listen to the wrong people.

 

I just want clarification from people that are in the know, of the laws, acts I was enquiring about, also after reading posts in this forum I personally respect the opinions of most people with in this community, which is the reason for posting here and not other forums.

 

Paul Barnes

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Paul.

 

Might I ask where you found this notice and why you think you need it please?

 

HB

 

Hi,

 

This notice is located on many sites that talk about common law in different forms, however the one I posted was sent directly from corresponds with a Solicitor in Nov 2015, although the more I look at the wording, I tented to find "implied licence" is more appropriate for trespass point of view (again I'm learning all the time so maybe completely wrong). I also agree that this is a civil matter and would need to be dealt with in civil court (trespass).

 

The reasons for all this is to stop, 7+ per day cold callers (over years) and to protect my Dogs from the barbaric changes to the Dangerous Dogs Act (amendments 2014). Again don't get me wrong, I respect the right of postals services, delivery services and the police etc entering my land without fear of being attacked by my dogs (2 German Shepard's). But as the DDA now stands anyone walking passed that fears for their safety (even though the Dogs are not being aggressive) can use the DDA again me and have my Dogs removed / destroyed. My Dogs are chipped, chained and secured but this means nothing to the DDA now.

 

Hope that helps clarify my reason for these enquires / postings.

 

Paul Barnes

Link to post
Share on other sites

well as long as you've no dog warning notices showing

you are quite safe from the dda.

 

 

if you put up 'warnings' of any kind

it actually works the otherway around.

 

 

as you have already acknowledged there is a potential problem should people enter your land.

 

 

best idea is to do nothing.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul

 

We are not having a go here at you and we respect that you have turned to us for advice and experience.

 

However, the deal is quite a raw one with these notices. Quite simply they dont work.

I want to hear the full story before we continue to advise and there is a good reason for this.

 

We need to see if we can help you in a different way. As for the dangerous dogs act, are you threatening to have a dog taken away?

My understanding of this is that only a court can order it and it would need to be done by a specialist. Police would need to get involved and all sorts.

 

At that point, Police, Judges and appointed specialists then have full rights to attend the property and collect said dangerous dog / s.

The notice is FOTL stuff which is frowned on here, and with good reason. I recently saw 2 people who attempted to use a Strawman argument in court to avoid paying council tax that was in arrears.

The hearing lasted 5 minutes and a liability order was set out for the full amount. The users even attempted to use these notices for the bailiffs and they just laughed at him.

 

Why do you want to use these notices so much? Let me understand so we can help you. Remember - CAG is for anonymous advice. We can change your UN if you are worried about people recognising who you are (On an opinion based piece of advice, quite clearly, your username states who you are)

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

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

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But as the DDA now stands anyone walking passed that fears for their safety (even though the Dogs are not being aggressive)

can use the DDA again me and have my Dogs removed / destroyed

Rubbish. Although a dog does not have to bite to be deemed aggressive or dangerously out of control

there does have to be a real and reasonable fear of being attacked.

 

 

I have a vocal and boisterous GSD who is capable of frightening the bejesus out of most people.

Callers may well feel quite anxious at the sound of him barking from behind a closed door or gate

but this doesn't translate into any sort of reasonable fear of imminent attack under the act.

 

well as long as you've no dog warning notices showing

you are quite safe from the dda

I've been advised otherwise and have a notice on the back gate saying 'dogs running loose, please use front door'.

The dog isn't always outside but if he were and a stranger entered they could claim a real fear of being attacked.

That's where the act can be unfair on the dog but that notice should cover.

 

 

Any notice which gives the impression of an aggressive dog ain't smart so 'beware of..'

or 'my dog can make it to the gate in 3 seconds, can you?'

would invite trouble.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Implied Right of Access is a law within Common law, which is the main law that governs our land (England), so can not be in any way rubbish. Law is law....

 

Paul Barnes

 

Just thought I would comment on this. Whilst it is true that common law is the ancient system of law, it is incorrect to say that it is the main lawn law and it has superior standing to parliamentary law(statute).

 

Statute can overwrite common law and does so frequently.

This is a mistake that many forums which support the FoTL make when they present the common law arguments.

 

Despite what some may say, legislative law is far more prevalent in this country than common law due to the latter being codified or overwritten over the years.

 

Parliamentary supremacy is not so called lightly.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Something about the bills being a legal fiction because they are addressed to their straw man persona or did not contract for it, although it may be the other way around, never understood it .

Funny how they do not acknowledge the law but are quite happy to use it when they need it.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...