Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better to keep my suggested paragraph as one rather than split it......defence above amended.
    • So they've produced a copy of a statement amounting to the figure claimed for AND a copy of the CCA but it isn't signed... Not sure if that's admissable or not due to it being online, it does have my account number and address on, but the customer signiture and date section is blank.  They posted this up online the day after the case meeting....   Is it game over?
    • PD 44 Timing of summary assessment   9.2 The general rule is that the court should make a summary assessment of the costs – (a) at the conclusion of the trial of a case which has been dealt with on the fast track, in which case the order will deal with the costs of the whole claim; and (b) at the conclusion of any other hearing, which has lasted not more than one day, in which case the order will deal with the costs of the application or matter to which the hearing related. If this hearing disposes of the claim, the order may deal with the costs of the whole claim, unless there is good reason not to do so, for example where the paying party shows substantial grounds for disputing the sum claimed for costs that cannot be dealt with summarily. https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part-44-general-rules-about-costs/part-44-general-rules-about-costs2#para9.5    
    • I find many inconsistencies in the posts from Louiseannmarie, not least her reference to her 'badge number'. Since when have the British Police held badges? They are issued with a warrant and use collar numbers for identification. Possibly has watched too many American movies!   'Her' spelling and grammar are less than I would expect of a Police Officer and her threat to report the site to the West Midlands Police, whilst claiming to work for them does not ring true.  Suspect that 'she' is a troll.
    • Thanks @lookinforinfo.   The text is updated:   1.       This case is often quoted by the claimant as assisting their case. However, in this instance it actually assists mine. It is contended that the act of stopping a vehicle does not amount to parking. This predatory operation pays no regard to the byelaws at all. It is likely that this Claimant may try to rely upon two 'trophy case' wins, namely VCS v Crutchley and/or VCS v Ward, neither of which were at an Airport location, which is not 'relevant land'. The Airport land is subject to the Airport Byelaws as specified in 'Section 63' of the Airports Act 1986 [EXHIBIT A]. Both cases involve flawed reasoning, and the Courts were wrongly steered by this Claimant's representative; there are worrying errors in law within those cases, such as an irrelevant reliance upon the completely different Supreme Court case. These are certainly not the persuasive decisions that this Claimant may suggest. Furthermore, VCS has been running the parking business at airports over the years it would be expected that they would become familiar with the Airports Act. Unfortunately, they choose to neglect and deny the Act in their Witness Statement.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 834 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

My mum lives on the first floor of a three storey building and is almost 80. The housing association she rents from have moved in a single mother with a child above her and she is going through hell with the noise and it's making her ill.

 

The woman has had people coming in doing DIY at all hours - 7:45pm tonight - and her children are often up at 6am, and sometimes earlier, which wakes my mum (and sister, who lives with her) up and they are unable to get back to sleep due to the noise.

 

They're often also running around late at night as well so mum has to wait until almost 10pm and later before she can go to bed.

 

She's tried writing a very reasonable letter to the occupant upstairs about the noise but this has been ignored.

 

I know that when children move in, everyone around them automatically loses their right to a reasonable quality of life because of this, but does my mum have any recourse ?

 

Most nuisance neighbour policies i've looked in to, as well as the housing association's anti-social behaviour policy, all basically exempt children from any action being taken which I think is grossly unfair because at almost 80, my mum simply can't "just move".

 

And she's lived there for nearly 20 years as well, so why should she give up her home because of some inconsiderate above her ?

 

She'd be willing to go to mediation with the woman, but since the woman has ignored her letter, is there any other way to get this to happen ?

 

Apologies if this is a bit of a mess of a post but i'm just getting quite concerned about my mum's health overall.

 

Thanks in advance for any ideas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DIY at 7.45pm is not unreasonable and nor is a level of general domestic noise at 10pm as 10pm is not late in the eyes of the law so just complaining without some specific point or expected remedy is not going to get anywhere.

What she will have to show is that the noise is above a certain threshold for more than a certain length of time and that means she will need to speak to environmental health and get use of some noise measurement kit and monitor it over a lengthy period.

She should then ask the landlord to consider looking into better sound insulation if what is there doesnt come up to current spec. They are not obliged to do more than the statutory minimum so you should lower her expectations as there is no entitlement to quiet, just not be subjected to excessive noise and the measure of that will very according to the time of day and length of time over which it is made.

Alternately she can carry on sending letters to the other tenant and get evicted for harassment

Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate the response but we're looking at other avenues now to tackle this issue.

 

I still think it's wholly unfair that your rights are simply summarily removed as soon as children enter the equation, but this appears to be the norm and people who don't have to live with it usually don't really get it either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Exactly who has said your rights are removed as soon as children enter the equation (or is this your assumption?) as this is incorrect in the housing association issue you are referring to as those children are the legal responsibility of the Parent in that property and the Parent can be held accountable for there actions.

 

I do agree with ericsbrothers post#2

 

For the Housing to take action they would require evidence of the issues to be able to take any action so your mum needs to keep a record of every incident this PDF may be of use:

 

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

 

What your mum needs to also do is make a Formal Complaint in writing to the Housing Association explaining the issues

 

I can appreciate you saying it been your mums home for over 20yrs but sadly the property may be your mums home but in reality it belongs to the Housing Association.

 

As for your comment that people that don't live with it don't get it either is unhelpful as you are been given good advice

 

Yes I do know exactly what it is like as live in a HA Property and had a few years ago a single parent with 4 children in the flat above me running riot 24/7 took a lot of evidence which I provided and a lot of months later they moved before being evicted.

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

you say rights summarily removed but you cant say what those rights are because they dont actually exist.

 

As said, there is a right not to suffer from excessive noise but there are tabulated values for what is and isnt excessive and they vary for place and time but from wat you have said so far there is nothing to act upon. A road drill in use 6 hours a day in the flat wont breach the regs as long as she gets a half hour break in the middle and it is between 8am and 9pm

 

Now how about speaking to environmental health and HA and see what they come up with.

Saying it is unfair when it isnt ( they have a right to live their lives as well) will get you nowhere so start off by looking up what councils think is acceptable and unacceptable and ask about borrowing a suitable decibel meter and datalogger and then keep a diary.

 

The HA will be obliged to see if the insulation meets building regs and they may find it cheaper to add insulation to the flooring above rather than spend a fortune on endless meetings even if the current situation meets the requirements of the law

 

You have to quantify things or you get nowhere

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...