Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • 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 2887 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

Need some advice for family member please.

 

A and B are a couple and were moved under protection from Y to Z overnight.

 

They were in temporary accommodation until early 2016 so were unable to update keeper details until they knew where they would be living.

 

19/02/16 at 0750, Bailiff knock requesting £787, £477 fine? plus £75 compliance and £235 enforcement (Nothing received beforehand) He also threatened same day removal and threatened them with another £110 for that pleasure.

 

I have a copy of every text sent from Bailiff and family member.

 

Finally agreed £50 a week, they have make every payment on time (except Bank holidays) but bailiff has demanded the £50 this week, plus the last £37 or he will add more charges.

 

Just someone to check figures and any advice gratefully accepted.

 

Jogs

Link to post
Share on other sites

A payment arrangement was agreed at the rate of £50 per week and all payments have been made according to the proposal.

 

The way in which I am reading your question, there is a balance remaining of £87 (which consists of a weekly payment of £50 and the final balance of £37) and the enforcement company require both amounts to be paid , failing which, they will 'add more charges'.

 

A Compliance Fee of £75 and an enforcement fee of £235 has correctly been applied. The 'sale stage' fee of £110 may only be applied if prepartions are made to remove goods.

 

Did the enforcement agent ever gain entry into premises?

 

Was a Controlled Goods Agreement ever signed?

 

I have dealt with many payment plans with Marston Group (and all other companies) but it is usually always the case that the final payment is paid as a last installement. This does not seem to be the case here. I am currious as to the reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have been done under "failure to change details" then surely their "handler" can speak up for them?

 

Thanks PT.

 

They have no idea what charges were laid as they didn't realise they could ask for them. I have advised they phone the courts and ask what the charges are and how much they were fined. Can they still SD and get a refund?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A payment arrangement was agreed at the rate of £50 per week and all payments have been made in accordance with the proposal.

 

The way in which I am reading your question, there is a balance remaining of £87 (which consists of a weekly payment of £50 and the final balance of £37) and the enforcement company require both amounts to be paid , failing which, they will 'add more charges'.

 

A Compliance Fee of £75 and an enforcement fee of £235 has correctly been applied. The 'sale stage' fee of £110 may only be applied if prepartions are made to remove goods.

 

Did the enforcement agent ever gain entry into premises?

 

Was a Controlled Goods Agreement ever signed?

 

I have dealt with many payment plans with Marston Group (and all other companies) but it is usually always the case that the final payment is paid as a last installement. This does not seem to be the case here. I am currious as to the reason.

 

Thanks BA

 

I have advised they to call and ask what is going on and to follow up with a letter of complaint. As asked in reply to PT's post, could they SD as they knew nothing of the fine etc until the EO turned up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BA

 

As asked in reply to PT's post, could they SD as they knew nothing of the fine etc until the EO turned up.

 

Technically, he (or she) could file a Statutory Declaration.

 

I am only being cautious here because I dealt with an enquiry through my website yesterday regarding a Statutory Declaration hearing that took place last Friday. The court refused the application because it had been made in excess of the '21 day' deadline outlined in the regulations.

 

A Statutory Declaration should be made 'within 21 days' of.....'becoming aware of the offence'. In the case last Friday, the debtor 'became aware' of the offence approx one month before making the application. The court were not willing to accept his reasons for the delay.

 

In your friends case, they 'became aware' of the offence on 19th February. A three and a half month delay in submitting a Stat Dec may be difficult. However, that it not to say that they could not try.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing ventured nothing gained particularly as it seemed to be under "special circumstances".

 

I can see the point here. Also it can depend on the offence. If the offence was speeding, then there would also be serious complications with the driving licence. And of course, future vehicle insurance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...