Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Landlord selling up, unwilling to negotiate an earlier end to tenancy


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2147 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

We've been in the property 12 months, and 10 months in the landlord has served us with a section 21. So we have two months to leave.

 

An estate agent has been in touch regarding viewings and we have been as accommodating as we can.

 

We have found another place to rent and have asked if the landlord is willing to end the tenancy early, and the answer was no. We can leave early but still need to pay until the end of the 12 months.

 

The new landlord doesn't want to wait that long and if we cant move in earlier he will have to let it to someone else.

 

So, in an attempt to persuade the current landlord I have pointed out that we have been very flexible with the viewings, but have no reason to do this. If he isn't willing to negotiate the leave date, we have no reason to be as flexible as we are, even to the point of not allowing viewings at all.

 

Am I within my rights here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In short no.

Your LL doesn't have to agree to an earlier date. You can of course just pay the rent and move earlier, but not many people can afford that.

You need to refer to the clause in your lease on allowable access and notice for your LL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK thanks. Yes I realise I can pay the rent and move early, but that just doesn't make much sense.

 

I was thinking the 'quiet enjoyment' clause would cover us here but youre right the tenancy agreement does say that within the last two months the landlord can access the property with tenants or purchasers but must give reasonable notice.

 

Which leads me onto another question; when we fist let the property we had a verbal agreement that the landlord would not enter the property without us being present because of our dog.

 

If the landlord decides to let his self in for viewing and the dog attacks someone, is that our fault?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Verbal agreements mean very little when a paper contract is in place. They can be denied knowledge of and it falls back to the paper one.

However the landlord cannot just let themselves in. You need to be there.

A big sign on the door warning of a dog may be prudent, but my argument is its the dogs home and if your unsupervised and the dog feels threatened that's your fault, not the dogs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just inform the LL and estate agent in writing that you have a dog.

If they then decide to take a risk and enter the property while you're not there you could not be blamed.

However, as we live in a "other's fault" society, I wouldn't be surprised if you were blamed if the dog attack them despite your warning.

Written communication and sign on the door would seem reasonable to a reasonable person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alternatively you can change the locks until you leave and then change them back..

 

 

That way no one can enter whilst you are not there, and if they ask why you have changed them, you know that they have tried to enter without permission.

I am not a solicitor :!::!:

 

Most of my knowledge came from this site :-D:-D

 

If I have been helpful in any way at all .............. Please click my star..... :-(:-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not??

 

 

 

it is not against any law, in fact it is what all tenants should do as soon as they move into a new property..

I am not a solicitor :!::!:

 

Most of my knowledge came from this site :-D:-D

 

If I have been helpful in any way at all .............. Please click my star..... :-(:-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2016/10/18/tenant-penalties-breaching-tenancy-rules-changing-locks/

 

It is the tenant’s right not to be disturbed or harassed while living in the property. Landlords are not entitled to enter the tenant’s living area without written permission as they have the right to use the property as their home. However, as mentioned, the landlord has the right to ‘reasonable’ access to carry out repairs for which s/he is responsible, but s/he should always ask for the tenant’s permission, and should give at least 24 hours’ notice (s11(6) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985).

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

Agreed, but the op wants to stop the LL showing potential TT round whilst he is out... and is well within his rights to dissallow the LL to do so, and if the LL will not stop doing so, then TT is within rights to stop this.

 

 

also this method is better than TT's dog being destroyed for attacking the LL and viewers.

I am not a solicitor :!::!:

 

Most of my knowledge came from this site :-D:-D

 

If I have been helpful in any way at all .............. Please click my star..... :-(:-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alternatively you can change the locks until you leave and then change them back..

 

 

That way no one can enter whilst you are not there, and if they ask why you have changed them, you know that they have tried to enter without permission.

 

 

I agree, changing the locks would be the best way forward, then changing them back when OP final leaves.

 

Just to point out.

 

Section 11 of 1985 Landlord and Tenant Act refers to landlords Repairing obligations in short leases and not showing new tenants around.

Please use the quote system, So everyone will know what your referring too, thank you ...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...