Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Restriction on Land Registry set to cause Repossession and Eviction


ninethlife
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2874 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 hope someone can help with a situation that has arisen out of the blue,

 

just a few weeks before completing the sale of my home after battling repossession and eviction for the past 7 years.

 

Despite no contribution to the mortgage, bills, expenses or child support,

my ex-husband has engaged a solicitor to apply for a Restriction on Land Registry.

 

The mortgage company have a possession order and have tried to evict my son and I twice this year.

 

The judge allowed us to pursue a normal sale both times.

 

My 3rd hearing is July 11th and now this final twist has occurred,

which could sabotage the sale and leave my son and I homeless.

 

Both the LR and mortage is in my name only.

 

Please reply urgently with any advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

" Both the LR and mortgage is in my name only."

 

Then he cant apply for a Restriction on Land Registry.

 

Andy

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

a restriction does not stop a sale.

 

and in most cases if your sols is cute

a restriction can be ignored

 

what do you mean by your ex has put a restriction on

a restriction stopping the sale?

not my best subject sorry.

 

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

" Both the LR and mortgage is in my name only."

 

Then he cant apply for a Restriction on Land Registry.

 

Andy

 

His solicitor says they can put a Restriction without consent

and my solicitor says he doesn't have to justify or prove a claim for it to be accepted by Land Registry.

 

 

His solicitor says the sale can only complete with my ex's signature

and he will only sign after an agreement is made for him to receive 50%.

 

 

Any other thoughts Andy?

 

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

this may help you.

.

Myth about charging orders

.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=1839539&page=1

.

your solicitor may not know that a "restriction" is not a charging order and does not need to be "paid off" as a charging order would,

.

he only needs to advise the beneficiary (of the charging order/restriction) that a transfer is taking place and confirm to the land registry that he has done this.

.

The land registry should then proceed without further problems

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

His solicitor is threatening to put a Restriction without Consent on Land Registry in order that the sale completion would require my ex's signature and he would only sign for 50% of the proceeds.

 

 

how can he be entitled to anything?

has he even paid a dime on it?

 

 

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

Yes a unilateral notice does not require the consent of the proprietor nor is the applicant obliged to provide evidence to satisfy the land registry that the claimed interest is valid. Once the notice is registered however, the proprietor will be informed and will have the opportunity to object. Upon receipt of an objection the beneficiary of the notice is obliged to provide evidence of the interest being claimed to the land registry.

 

If he is unable to provide evidence that the notice will be removed. The notice is entered using for UN1 and removed using UN4.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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

Its mad really anyone could apply for a restriction on anybody's house of course then you would be committing fraud unless part 11 of UN1 is true.

 

Absolutely MB..or as in this case just trying to frighten the OP

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

RX1 form

 

If you dishonestly enter information or make a statement that you know is, or might be, untrue or misleading, and intend by doing so to make a gain for yourself or another person, or to cause loss or the risk of loss to another person, you may commit the offence of fraud under section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006, the maximum penalty for which is 10 years’ imprisonment or an unlimited fine, or both.

 

:spy:

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

how can he be entitled to anything?

has he even paid a dime on it?

 

 

dx

 

Apparently, he can claim that I agreed to give him half in a conversation he claims we had when we separated.

 

a restriction does not stop a sale.

 

and in most cases if your sols is cute

a restriction can be ignored

 

what do you mean by your ex has put a restriction on

a restriction stopping the sale?

not my best subject sorry.

 

dx

 

He hasn't put the Restriction yet but is aiming to do so. It may not stop the sale but it will stop access to the proceeds, which we need to use to obtain rental accommodation for my son and I.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope someone can help with a situation that has arisen out of the blue,

 

just a few weeks before completing the sale of my home after battling repossession and eviction for the past 7 years.

 

Despite no contribution to the mortgage, bills, expenses or child support,

my ex-husband has engaged a solicitor to apply for a Restriction on Land Registry.

 

The mortgage company have a possession order and have tried to evict my son and I twice this year.

 

The judge allowed us to pursue a normal sale both times.

 

My 3rd hearing is July 11th and now this final twist has occurred,

which could sabotage the sale and leave my son and I homeless.

 

Both the LR and mortage is in my name only

 

Please reply urgently with any advice.

 

Hi, a couple of questions please:

 

Are you divorced from your ex-husband yet?

 

Did you buy the house on your own before you got married?

 

Did he pay anything towards the bill or maintenance or did he do the DIY and upkeep etc himself?

 

Are you 100% sure it's a Restriction?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, a couple of questions please:

 

Are you divorced from your ex-husband yet?

 

Did you buy the house on your own before you got married?

 

Did he pay anything towards the bill or maintenance or did he do the DIY and upkeep etc himself?

 

Are you 100% sure it's a Restriction?

 

Only Decree Nisi

(He initiated divorce proceedings at the same time I faced repossession and eviction

and I didn't find out until years later that he'd never paid the fee for the Decree Absolute)

 

It was bought before we separated but we lost the sale on our existing home

so had to pay two mortgages for over a year, greatly diminishing the "deposit".

 

Nothing towards mortgage, bills, DIY, maintenance, child support.

 

The form his solicitor sent is an RX1 for a Restriction on Land Registry.

 

Thanks for your assistance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So was the house not dealt with in the divorce?

 

No, it was in negative equity and was about to be repossessed due to my unemployment.

 

 

By a twist of fate, I managed to find a job

the mortgage company didn't action the eviction warrant due to being taken over themselves

(due to the financial crash in 2008).

Because of that delay, I managed to negotiate an arrangement with them.

 

 

They tried to evict again a few months later, although I had fulfilled the arrangement,

but CAG helped me with advice and the judge suspended the possession order and cancelled the eviction.

 

 

I maintained the arrangement for 5 years, until I was made redundant.

After coming 2nd too many times in job interviews,

I decided I'd better sell but loads of DIY work needed completing before I could market the house

and some guardian angels came to my rescue.

 

 

Despite putting it on the market, the mtg co. tried to evict again in Jan and in May.

They have booked another eviction hearing for July, despite a sale being agreed in May.

(I became unemployed due to losing an 8 yr old business in the crash,

was made personally bankrupt and the OR claimed the house.

In 2011, the house was passed back to me by the OR as it was still in negative equity).

So that's why the house wasn't "dealt with".

 

 

Now, my ex is just blanking these details.

The label "it's complicated" applies here!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moved to Home Repossessions out of General legal Issues

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

  • 1 month later...

If the divorce settlement isn't finalised, and you are still married, can't he make an application under the Family Law Act 1996 for a restriction (using form HR1).

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/applications-under-the-family-law-act-1996/practice-guide-20-applications-under-the-family-law-act-1996#application-for-notice

 

Sadly, if he did this : it isn't something you can appeal.

Get the divorce through before he tries this....

Link to post
Share on other sites

He can't do so (Family Law Act route) once the decree is made absolute, it only provides a route that can't be objected to while you are married .....

 

He could still try to put the UN1 based restriction on, but then you object to it .....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...