Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Tenancy deposit not taken


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1836 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 went county court with my mum on Tuesday and the case was not heard as the judge recommended a 2 -3 hour hearing.

my mum is being taken to court for not protecting a deposit.

but my mother has a signed and witnessed assured short hold tenancy agreement that clearly shows that no deposit will be taken.

the tenant was claiming housing benefit and a Discresionary housing payment was awarded and paid directly to my mums account but she thought it was rent in advance but the council have said it was a deposit, 

i have a witness statement from the claimant that states that she only had the first and last pages of a 7 page agreement which contain none of the particulars and also a confirmation from the council that the agreement that they have does not contain anything about rent, dates , deposit or anything other than my mums name and the tenants name, 

there is also in the housing act of 2004 chapter 4, section 213. Paragraph 8 under the heading tenancy deposit, which states !

  • tenancy deposit”, in relation to a shorthold tenancy, means any money intended to be held (by the landlord or otherwise) as security for—

    (a)

    the performance of any obligations of the tenant, or

    (b)

    the discharge of any liability of his,

    arising under or in connection with the tenancy.

(9)

 I would be very greatful any any of your views on this as the costs of defending this are alot
Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't your mum have the original complete signed agreement?

Also, what about communication regarding the money that the council gave your mum?

There must be something in writing, otherwise the council wouldn't have transferred any money.

Should be easy to get the case dismissed if you find the paperwork and everything is above board. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi king. Yes she has the original signed and witnessed agreement. The council say they paid it as a deposit and sent my mum and the tenant confirmation of this but my mum thought they had uses the wrong terminology and thought it was rent in advance. In line with councils own policy on overpayments they would simply take it back on the next payment if wrong.

in the tenants witness statement they claim they only had the first 2 pages of the agreement which do not contain any of the particulars, I e the dates, the rental amount, how it is to be paid and whether or not there is a deposit. I it confirmed by two council employees that their copy of the agreement does not state anything about deposit, or rent in advance and the dates are wrong, tenant claims occupancy from 4th feb and agreement 15th. ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So they told your mum they were paying a sum of money as deposit, correct?

But in the agreement there's no mention of any deposit, correct?

Is every page of the agreement signed by the council official and tenant?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Correct, in the agreement signed by all parties and each parties signiture is witnessed and signed by the witness, not each page but on the last page as it is required. 

In the agreement it states no deposit will be taken and rent payable in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, last page as required, but leaves open the door for claims of falsification.

Always sign all pages of anything to be signed.

You will have a mission to convince the judge.

Have you spoken to a solicitor?

Have you got landlord insurance?

They usually cover legal disputes, check it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...