Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

MCOL - taking LandLord throug small claims for Deposit not refunded


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2260 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

Hello all.

 

I submitted a claim using MCOL a few weeks ago for a Deposit I gave to a Landlord (LL) when I lodged with them for 6 months, a total of £600.

 

I am claiming that amount, including interest and court fees totalling just over £700.

 

I took all reasonable steps to get the deposit back but the LL started blanking me and made promises to pay but never did.

 

I started the MCOL process and they submitted an acknowledgment of service, stating they are going to defend the entire claim.

 

Fair enough, thats their right.

However herein the problem lies.

 

I had been using the LLs current address to send all my formal letters and put it into MCOL with served the particulars of claim to them at that address (thus enabling them to submit an acknowledgement of service).

 

However in their acknowledgement of service they put changed their address to their old address where they no longer live and havent done so for a year.

 

This now means further documentation from the court will go to their old address

- and my best guess is that when it comes to it they will try and get the claim set aside because they haven't received further court correspondence (because they've intentionally put an old/false address).

 

Does anyone have any advice on how to deal with this?

 

Thank you!

Edited by flyveryhigh-
Link to post
Share on other sites

well that's their problem!

they've ack'd the claim

they cant dispute they never knew it was proceeding then.

 

If they wanna play silly buggers let them

makes it easier for you to get a default judgement.

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

as its over £600 you should also be able to put HCEO bailiffs onto him for a small fee too!!

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all,

 

Firstly, I hope I have posted in the correct place.

 

Any help on this would be very much appreciated. So I rented a room in the landlords home as a lodger and paid a sum of £600 as a deposit. On leaving the house the landlord stopped returning my calls, answering my texts etc in regards getting the deposit back. For about every 10 messages I got like 1 response saying "I'll call you later" etc, but never called.

 

This has been ongoing for about a year now, and during the course of the year the landlord admitted they owed me the money and sometimes offered to pay but never did. I sent letters before action and formal requests for the return of the deposit in the post. Still nothing.

 

In November the landlord asked me if we could do a payment plan of £100 a month which I agreed to. The landlord missed the first installment date so I initiated a claim using MCOL in the small claims court. They messaged me asking why I had done this as we had an agreement and I stated they had missed the payment date so was now using MCOL to recover the money (I am claiming £600 for the deposit, £60 court fees and about £40 for interest).

 

I sent a letter and email to the landlord stating that should they wish for me to withdraw the claim I would accept £660 (deposit+court fees) - but they didn't respond. They then submitted an acknowledgement of service and stated they were going to defend all of the claim.

 

They have until Saturday (10/2/18) to file a defense however they haven't yet done so. On Thursday (08/02/18) they sent me an email in response to mine I sent them in which I stated i'd accept £660 and withdraw the claim. They put at the top of the email "Without Prejudice" and then wrote how they will offer me £600 in total, with £200 payable on 28th Feb and £400 on 30th March. They have fully admitted in the email again that they owe me the money. I have a few concerns:

 

1. I will only accept £660 minimum outside of court - and seeing that the email says "Without Prejudice" if I accepted then I could only claim a max of £600;

2. The "Without Prejudice" means that this isn't admissable in court meaning that if they don't keep to the agreement I wouldn't have any come back, correct?;

3. If I agree and they initially pay the £200 but not the remaining £400 I could only claim for this amount in future, meaning that I could not longer use HCEO to pursue the amount owed if they don't pay.

 

I want to reply to the Landlord stating I do not wish to accept their payment plan offer. If i put in the reply I would accept £660 to withdraw the claim as per my previous email and letter, then if this proceeded to court would this mean the maximum I could claim would be £660 as I stated this in response to their "without prejudice" offer.

 

I don't want to accept their offer because I will be out of pocket on the court fees and I genuinely don't think they'll stick to it as they have bailed out on informal agreements before and never paid.

 

How do you think I should respond to this?

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!!

Edited by flyveryhigh-
Correct place?
Link to post
Share on other sites

So they didn't put the deposit in a deposit protection scheme? You realise you could claim much more through court?

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stick to your guns.

For £60 they will bulge.

Nobody wants a ccj and bailiffs at the door for the sake of £60.

They messed you about for over a year, now it's time to cash in the money you are owed.

 

Maybe be worth sending them all communication in which the admit the debt and tell them you will use it in evidence.

 

That could make them realise that time is up and they need to open the wallet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread moved to Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Forum...please continue to post here to your thread.

 

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

please keep to one thread

threads merged

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

well my daughters old land lord regrets being taken to court as cost him/his wife (big mouth I wear the trousers here) 3 times the amount originally claimed, even then the Judge told them they are lucky it was not for more against them,

 

as I see it most of these rogue landlords expect people to not follow up with court action?

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

by changing the service address they are propbaly trying to dodge collection activity at their current addy when they decide not to pay up.

 

Wont matter as the total will be enough to get the matter sent up to the hight court for enforcement should the LL not pay.

 

If you get a default judgement it would be worth letting the LL know that you have the powers at your disposal and the bill will at least double for the bailiff costs.

 

I suspect that at the moment they are in denial due to a fit of pique over this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2. The "Without Prejudice" means that this isn't admissable in court meaning that if they don't keep to the agreement I wouldn't have any come back, correct?;

 

This letter relates to your current disagreement. If you come to an agreement, then they break the agreement, that is a new disagreement and you could produce this letter.

 

3. If I agree and they initially pay the £200 but not the remaining £400 I could only claim for this amount in future, meaning that I could not longer use HCEO to pursue the amount owed if they don't pay.

 

As far as I'm aware they could always decide to pay you £200 even without an agreement to pay the full amount.

 

One option is to accept the agreement if they agree that you can add on the £60 court costs and interest if they renege.

 

It's not pleasant to be out of pocket, but it's also a lot of work to prepare for court, and you are at risk of losing the lot if they work hard to never pay you, including lying in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...