Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

CT arrears caused by Councils overcharging for water rates?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2929 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I currently have a very important thread in the water section. Here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?463644-Are-Councils-overcharging-for-water-rates&p=4896054#post4896054

 

Why am I linking it here? This is a good question! Due to the other thread and the case hand down earlier this year. It could be looked at that due to this significant overcharge many residents have been overcharged by a significant amount of money..

 

If the LA'S involved were to pay back this money to the residents plus the interest due could clear most of a debtors CT arrears if the have them.

 

This could also reduce the amount of money involved with the EA'S getting as well.

 

If you take this in to account and the amount involved could cost Councils £m's as it has done with this LA.

 

If an LA has been found overcharging for their water rates and pay this back. The debts owed to the LA for CT arrears could be reduced significantly. The snowball effect could cause quite a stir, in as much as less cases going to the Courts for LO'S then less cases going to the EA!

 

Now regular posters and readers may like this information as it could help debtors in the long run.

 

Please have a look at my attachments within the linked thread then work out what could happen in the very near future...

 

That would be the LA paying back the arrears plus interest, they could use any payment due to be used to offset any council tax arrears and maybe just maybe there could be some left over to give their tenant enough to pay some off rent arrears if there are any due.

 

The amounts involved in the overcharging is significant! This also could have gone to paying CT in the 1st place leaving fewer debtors as well.

 

Many of us want to have the EA out of the lives of debtors and this could be a way.

 

Feel free to read the hand down from the Courts and see what has happened and why. There is plenty of reading and cross referencing but very well worth the effort especially to anyone that gives advice for a fee or for free!

 

If you want to help get involved in reclaiming these over payments and pay off the CT arrears with it then no more EA'S and fees....

 

 

Your thoughts!

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The amount in my case the weekly overcharge was just £7-56. Not a lot is it? No but annually it equates to nearly £400pa. This figure is nearly half of my due bill.

 

As you can clearly see the amounts could wipe out much of the debts owed the council's for CT arrears..

 

In one London Borough it has cost them over £8m a year already.

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Note to admin.

 

Some how this got posted in the main forum and not the discussion forum can you ease move for me and correct any spelling errors plus can you change the £400pm to £400pa for me thanks I also had a spelling error dye was used instead of due....

 

MM

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread moved and errors corrected

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...