Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi T911 and welcome to CAG. As you say, an interesting screw up. So much for quality control! Anyway, our regular advice is to ignore all of their increasingly threatening missives... UNLESS you get a letter of claim, then come back here and we'll help you write a "snotty letter" to help them decide whether to take it any further with their stoopid pics. If you get mail you're unsure of, just upload it for the team to have a look.
    • Thanks @lolerzthat's an extremely helpful post. There is no mention of a permit scheme in the lease and likewise, no variation was made to bring this system in. I recall seeing something like a quiet enjoyment clause, but will need to re-read it and confirm. VERY interesting point on the 1987 Act. There hasn't been an AGM in years and I've tried to get one to start to no avail. However, I'll aim to find out more about how the PPC was brought in and revert. Can I test with you and others on the logic of not parking for a few months? I'm ready to fight OPS, so if they go nuclear on me then surely it doesn't matter? I assume that I will keep getting PCNs as long as I live here, so it doesn't make sense for me to change the way that I park?  Unless... You are suggesting that having 5 or so outstanding PCNs, will negatively affect any court case e.g. through bad optics? Or are we trying to force their hand to go to court with only 2 outstanding PCNs?
    • That is so very tempting.   They are doing my annual review as we speak and I'm waiting for their response once I have it I will consider my next steps.    The debt camel website mentioned above is amzing and helping to. Education me alot    
    • Sending you a big hug. I’m sorry your going through this. The letters they send sound aweful, and the waiting game for them to stop. But these guys seem so knowledgable and these letters should stop. Hang in there, and keep in touch. Don’t feel alone 
    • In my time I've never seen a payout/commission from a PPC to a landlord/MA. Normally the installation of all the cameras/payment of warden patrols etc is free but PPCs keep 100% of the ticket revenue. Not saying it doesn't happen mind. I've done some more digging on this: Remember, what your lease doesn't say is just as important as what it does say. If your lease doesn't mention a parking scheme/employment of a PPC/Paying PCNs etc you're under no legal obligation to play along to the PPC's or the MA's "Terms and conditions". I highly doubt your lease had a variation in place to bring in this permit system. Your lease will likely have a "quiet enjoyment" clause for your demised space and the common areas and having to fight a PPC/MA just to park would breach that. Your lease has supremacy of contract, but I do agree it's worth keeping cool and not parking there (and hence getting PCNs) for a couple months just so that the PPC doesn't get blinded by greed and go nuclear on you if you have 4 or 5 PCNs outstanding. At your next AGM, bring it up that the parking controls need to be removed and mention the legal reasons why. One reason is that under S37(5b) Landlord and Tenant Act 1987,  more than 75% of leaseholders and/or the landlord would have needed to agree, and less than 10% opposed, for the variation to take place. I highly doubt a ballot even happened before the PPC was bought in so OPS even being there is unlawful, breaching the terms of your lease. In this legal sense,  the communal vote of the "directors" of the freehold company would have counted for ONE vote of however many flats there are (leases/tenants) + 1 (landlord). It's going to be interesting to see where this goes.  
  • 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

Wound up company owes me approx £12k of stock.


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2366 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,

 

A few years ago I purchased approximately 10k if investment wine. The portfolio has done pretty well and is now worth at least £12k. The problem is, I went to contact the broker the other day to look into selling it all up and he has disappeared along with the wine. A little search shows he there was an insolvency winding up order 5th Feb 2016 and he's not answering any calls or messages. He's changed his surname on social media and hasn't been active in some time.

 

Depressingly he was an old friend.

 

I'm sure I can find him if I try hard enough but is there anything I can do once I track him down? If he wound up the company with that stock as assets, surely he has acted fraudulently? Could the same be said if he sold the stock in an attempt to bail out the company prior to the winding up order? If so, I would like to pursue that avenue. The family has money and would likely bail him out if threatened with a criminal offence.

 

Any help, advice and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be wrong, but i thought you actually bought wine and it was stored away somewhere. There might be storage fees payable, which the broker is not paying.

 

Do you have a copy of the original terms and conditions for this investment ? What does it say about security of your investment ?

 

If the business was would up, there should be details of the person or company that dealt with the insolvency. You need to contact them for more information.

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 OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is info online about such issues. Some are genuine investments with wine bought and others are just a con. If it is the latter, then it needs to be reported.

 

http://www.decanter.com/wine-news/fca-warning-wine-investment-scams-305251/

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 OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

When a company is wound up, its assets are used to pay creditors.

 

Did you have a set of written terms and conditions with a 'retention of title' clause stating that you owned the wine? If not, he owned the wine - and you were just an unsecured creditor.

 

If you were just an unsecured creditor, there is unlikely to be anything you can do.

 

However if you could prove that he simply transferred the wine to himself, then you could go after him.

 

The first step is to have a look on the companies house website (https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/) to see what happened. Consider contacting the insolvency practitioner if one was appointed.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst there are charlatans out there (the site auto-censors the word that starts with sca, and rhymes with ham!), let us assume your (ex-?)friend had a legitimate business that just didn't succeed.

 

2 'leading cases' (where the law has dealt with such issues, to give an answer) spring to mind, and hinge on if you were buying actual individual (& identifable!) bottles of wine that were then held for you, or "10 bottles of the stock of 200 that we hold as an investment".

 

Re Goldcorp Exchange Ltd

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re_Goldcorp_Exchange_Limited_(in_receivership):_Kensington_v_LiggettRe

and

 

London Wine Company (Shippers) Ltd

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re_London_Wine_Co_(Shippers)_Ltd

 

In summary, if there were specific (identifiable) bottles that were being bought and held for you:

(So, bottle 21 is yours, a fine Mouton Cadet 19-blah-blah, and bottle 76, a 19-whatever vintage champagne, and so on),

then a 'trust' was established, the bottles being held in trust for you, and you could claim them.

As others have noted, there may be storage fees unpaid that you'd need to pay (or some or all of the bottles may have had their ownership taken over to pay the storage fees).

 

If however, you were buying an interest in "a collection of wine held as an investment" (so, "there is a stock of 200 bottles, and you are buying 10 of them, 5% of the total"), and your 10 are never individually identified, then no trust is created (due to lack of 'certainty of subject', of the trust), and there is no consequent breach of a trust, only breach of contract, where (as the business is insolvent) you'll get back less than you put in, and potentially little or nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BazzaS,

 

I don't have individual numbers for the bottles, but it certainly is my understanding that I own specific bottles and that is what the invoices say.

 

I certainly think he was honourable at the start but the business came undone.

 

As for storage, I was storing them under his account so there was no fees, but this is also where the problem lies.

 

I have contacted the liquidator, they want a week or so to look into it. Depending on what they come back with I may have to look at some professional advice.

 

Thanks for the links and taking the time to reply everyone.

 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...