Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That is great news. Many people would have given up and paid after losing two appeals so well done for hanging in and fighting. It has paid off and they have finally backed down before getting whipped in Court. I looked at your NTD and your NTK again to see if there was a chance of going for a breach of your GDPR. Sadly although your NTK on its own could have well deserved a claim, the NTD is good enough not to warrant a claim even though it wasn;t compliant with PoFA. As it is the first Notice that mostly accounts for  GDPR breaches there is a reasonable cause for the NTD to have been issued. However you are now freed from worries about appearing in Court and you have learnt about the dangers of parking especially where the rogues that patrol private parking spaces are concerned. Thank you for making a donation and should you fall victim in the future to the parking rogues or anything else that we protect from, you are always welcome .
    • Hi guys I'm about to submit the defence as per below     There has been no reply to our CPR 31:14 request.  Is it worth adding that I (driver, not registered keeper) didn't actually enter or park in the car park and was sat at the petrol station forecourt the entire time?  Or is that covered by the simple points?   Thanks
    • a DCA is not a bailiff and cant enforce anything, even if they've been to court who are they please? sar to the original creditor FIO isnt applicable they are not a public body. who was this query sent too all the more reason to teach her young upon how these powerless DCA's monsters  work... she must stop payments now  
    • Unsettling the applecart?,  I'm going to be direct here, I know how this works , I've been in far worse situation than your relative, and I can assure you , now that there i likely a default in her name, it makes absolutely ZERO difference if she pays or not. Denzel Washington in the Equalizer , 'My only regret is that I can't kill you twice'... It's the same with a default, they can only do it once and it stays on your credit file for 6 years if she pays or not, and as it stands right now she's flushing £180 of her hard earned money down the toilet  so that the chaps at Lowell can afford a Christmas party. As for the SAR this is everybody's legal right, originally under the Data Protection act 1998 and now under GDPR, it's her right to find out everything that the original Creditor has on her file, and by not doing it the only person she is doing a massive disservice to is her self. As the father of 2 young adults myself, they need to learn at some point.. right?
    • Thank you for your pointers - much appreciated. dx100uk - Apologies, my request wasn't for super urgent advice and I have limited online access due to my long working hours and caring obligations - the delay in my response doesn't arise in any way from disrespect or ingratitude. I will speak to her at the weekend and see if she will open up a bit more about this, and allow me to submit the subject access request you advise - the original creditor is 118 118 loans and from the letter I saw (which prompted the conversation and the information) the debt collection agency had bought the debt from 118 and were threatening enforcement which is when she has made a payment arrangement with them for an amount of £180 per month. It looks as if she queried matters at the time (so I wonder if I might with the FIO request get access to their investigation file?) - the letter they wrote said "The information that you provided has been carefully considered and reviewed. After all relevant enquiries were made it has been confirmed that there is not enough evidence present to conclusively prove that this application was fraudulent.  However, we have removed the interest as a gesture of goodwill. As a result of the findings, you will be held liable for the capital amount on the loan on the basis of the information found during the investigation and you will be pursued for repayment of the loan agreement executed on 2.11.2022 in accordance with Consumer Credit Act 1974"  The amount at that time was over £3600 in arrears, as no payments had been made on it since inception and I think she only found out about it when a default notice came in paper form. I'm a little reluctant to advise her to just stop paying, and would like to be able to form a view in relation to her position and options before unsetting the applecart - do you think this is reasonable? She is young and inexperienced with these things and getting into this situation has brought about a lot of shame regarding inability to sort things out/stand up for herself, which is one of the reasons I have only found out about this considerably later Thank you once again for your advice - it is very much appreciated.    
  • 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 
        • 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 2902 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


Start your own new thread

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



Recommended Posts

We live in a private block of retirement apartments with no assisted help

and a visiting manager employed to look after the building.



A mentally ill man has been living in an apartment owned by his sister.

For the past 6 months this poor chap has become violent and delusional.



He has caused damage and has threatened and terrorised elderly residents.

He also exposed himself and made many lewd comments.

He also was involved in an incident where he had a gun and threatened residents, paramedics and the police with it.



4 armed policemen, three others and a dog handler eventually disarmed him (it was a replica gun)

and he was detained under section 2 of the mental health act.

After one month this was upgraded to section 3.


His sister has put the apartment up for sale with a view to finding the poor chap more suitable accommodation.


It has left many of the residents mentally traumatised and nervous.

Some have had to leave for a while and some are under their doctors for nerves and heart problems.

Some will still not even leave their apartment.


We have now been told that he is to come back under section 17,

initially for an assessment with a view to returning.


Obviously residents are now even more terrified after assuming he would not be back

and more suitable accommodation would have been found for him during the 10 weeks he has been absent.


His sister has told us she cannot look after him because she is scared of him

and there is not enough room for her and her husband and brother in their three bedroomed house.

The sister is breaking the rules of the lease by allowing an unsuitable tenant in her property

who cannot look after himself.


Our managing agent will not get involved,

The police have met us and explained that we cannot lock him out.


Our question is

what rights do we have,

His sister has refused to house him with her but it appears we cannot refuse to house him with us

even though he does not own the property.

Why can his sister do this and yet we cannot,


We fully understand that there has to be anti discrimination laws

but this appears to be discriminating against us.


The mental health unit have assured us that they feel he is OK to come back.

If that is the case, he should be OK to live with his sister.


Where are we going wrong with out thoughts and is there anything we can do to safeguard the health

of the other 70 residents who live here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Noebys,


Sorry to hear the troubles you are having, I've moved this thread to our Residential Lettings forum as you may receive more help there.





Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites



This is such a difficult position to be in especially after what has happened.


Now I am not defending this individuals actions but as we are unaware of there mental health condition there could be reasons that they may have reacted the way they did i.e.


If on medication and this has been changed and they have reacted badly to it or


there has been a change to there daily routine.


this is just an example as I am no expert in this area but what the Mental Health Unit are trying to do is help/assit/treat this individual so that they can integrate back into the community.


Have the Residents had any meetings with the Police/Mental Health Unit to air their concerns? ( I think it may be worth considering contacting both so the residents

can air their concerns and hopefully they will ease those concerns)


Now you say they are coming back under section 17 is "Leave of absence when detained in hospital" see link below for more on the different sections:



Now I know you mentioned the Managing Agent but do you have the Freeholders details who has Employed them?


Also the clause in the lease you refer to could you possibly type that clause here (minus any personal details)?


Something the Residents need to check is that they are not getting invoiced by the Managing Agent for any repairs to i.e. communal areas caused by this individual.


What the Residents not as a group but individually need to do is keep a written log of every single incident no matter how small and as well as logging it at the same time report to Managing Agent, Police (so it's logged), Mental Health Unit & Local Councils Anti Social Behaviour Team. (The PDF below may be of use)

Incident Log-with form fields -----.pdf

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there. I do feel for the other residents.


stu007 knows far more about property issues than I do, but I had a couple of thoughts. Is there a minimum age for people who buy/rent these apartments and if so, is this man over the required age?


Possibly not relevant, but why does the sister own an apartment in a retirement block as well as having a house?



Illegitimi non carborundum




Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your reply.

There is a minimum age and this man is over that age. However he has a diagnosed mental age of 9 according to his sister.


The story that the sister has told us is that when Mum and Dad died money was left in a trust for this poor man. So his sister bought the apartment in a independent living retirement rather than seeking the help he needs! The apartment is in her name.


His sister has now agreed it is not the right place for him and has put the flat on the market. Although everyone agrees it is not right for him, the Responsible Clinician in the Mental Heath Department has deemed that it is the correct place for him to return to, even though residents will unfortunately be hostile towards him!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your reply


I think without exception all residents here feel desperately sorry for this poor man. Sorry to put it bluntly but he has been 'dumped' here by his sister without any thought for his welfare, or ours. There may well be changes in his life that caused this, but what happens when changes happen again?


As detailed to Honeybee13 he is not an owner or a tenant with a shorthold lease. He is living free in his sisters flat in an independent living retirement development (which his trust paid for!) and has a diagnosed mental age of 9.


I agree that what the Mental Health Unit are trying to do is help/assist/treat this individual so that they can integrate back into the community. But I think they may need treatment themselves if they think that putting him back into a hostile situation is the way to do it! What better way than to put him back with his sister who has a house large enough to accommodate him. She appears to have the right to say 'No' on the basis she is afraid of him. Why can't we have this same right? His sister has now agreed that this is not the correct place for him and has put the flat on the market. So to integrate him back in the community, what better way than for him to live with her until a more appropriate place is found for him?


The most traumatised residents have had meetings with the police, but have not been offered victim support or anything similar. The Mental Health unit will not talk to us, only the police.


We have contacted both Managing Agents and Freeholders (both of whom are well known national concerns) with, as yet, no response.


The part of the lease that we refer to is copied below:


(2) Other than to an assignee or underlessee who shall be over the age of fifty five years at the date of any such assignment underletting or parting with or sharing of possession of the whole of the Dwelling with the exception of a married couple where one spouse only may be under the age of fifty five years pror.ided that such spouse is over the age of fifty years and who shall if required by the Lessor produce to the Lessor a medical certificate indicating that such assignee or underlessee is physically fit and capable of carrying out the obligations and requirements of the Lessee under this Lease save that the Lessor reserves the right to grant consent on such conditions as it may deem necessary to the assignment or underletting of the whole of the Dwelling to a person under the age of fifty five years for the continuous occupation thereof by a person or persons older than that age but subject to the proviso as to married couples above mentioned


Thank you for the reminder of checking the invoices from the Managing Agent. We are told we are not being charged, but we not got a copy of who paid it.


The written log form is very useful - thankyou. There have been logs kept of incidents but this will formalise it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of other links for you:


Solve a residential property dispute: https://www.gov.uk/housing-tribunals/overview


First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber): https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/first-tier-tribunal-property-chamber

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...