Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

my Leasehold/Freehold property and it's issues.


Recommended Posts

Nothing likely to happen within a few years of a repossession.  All they will attempt to do, is write to the debtor, so they comply with the Council for Mortgage Lenders rules on trying to stay in contact with debtor.  The rules were introduced around 2000, as some lenders were chasing up repo debts from the early 1990's, over 6 years after the debts were created. This was after having never written to the debtor.

 

Bankrupty very unlikely due to cost and little chance of return. Mortage lender will most likely have a way they minimise cost of the debt to them, in terms of the financial risk to them.  They may see the debt as a longer term asset, they can pass on to Debt Collection Agencies, where they have an agreement to share in any amounts collected. After say 10 years a debtor may be in a much better position financially, so the opportunity to recover the debt is much greater.

 

This is one reason, one of my relatives borrowed a few thousand from family, to negotiate full and final settlement of a £30k repo debt. They were advised that in order to move on with their life, that settling the debt in this way was the best option. It really depends on your position. But someone with a young family, might want to move on and not have the worry of being chased for a debt years later.

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

6 hours ago, HP Mum said:

And if theres no job/ no income?

 

If there is no disposable income over £20 per month, there would be no income payments agreement/order and all debts owed at the time of the bankruptcy application would be written off, the bankruptcy would be discharged after 12 months assuming there is no bankruptcy restrictions order in place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you start to receive demands for money - you can send them this (Special Delivery)   and see what they come up with - usually gets rid of them for a long time as they don't want to send you that info  :)


Subject access request

  Please supply me with all data that you hold on me. This includes in particular, but is not limited to, the following:-

  1. Details of the agent(s) responsible for marketing the property,  a list of the offers received and how they were reviewed.

  2. Copies of any newspaper or internet advertisements relating to the sale of the property.

  3. Copies of the valuations received on the property (minimum of two is required under the CML rules).

  4. Selling agent’s report on activity and any reports relating to visits to the property to ensure security of the property.

  5. If the property was sold under value please provide reports and supporting evidence to prove that the best offer was obtained.  

  6. If the property was sold at auction, please provide reports to support the decision to sell at auction.

  7. Specific details of the fees or charges levied by any other agency in respect of this account and a detailed breakdown of said fees or charges and what each charge relates to and on what date said fees or charges were levied.

  8. 8. A genuine copy of any notice of fair use of my data as required by the Data Protection Act 1998.

  9. 9. A list of third party agencies to whom you have disclosed my personal data and a summary of the nature of the information you have disclosed.

 


Yours faithfully,

 

 

XXXXXX

 

 

 

 

 

 

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks ell-enn.

 

Reference point 4 of the above doc to which you refer: "ensure security of the building":

 

The lender ripped out the burglar alarm and video entry system. 

They changed the locks - but now there's no other security.

The property is obviously empty.

And clearly people have noticed this.

So what happens if someone finds a way into the property

- because it is no longer alarmed (which was essential on previous insurance) ??

 

It should be noted that our family retain the Freehold of the building (not held personally/ it's protected). 

The lender only repossessed the lease. 

So the freeholder (us) still have rights over the land and the integrity of the building.

 

If squatters found a way in

- because the lender didn't secure it properly

- then does the freeholder have a separate claim against them? 

I don't even know if they've insured it?

 

It squatters got/ get in

- then the house can't be viewed or sold... 

which means the shortfall becomes bigger...

 

Any thoughts?

 

I have also double checked the figures.

I was wrong.

The almost identical neighbour property is listed 70% higher - by same agent. 

 

The agent is also marketing the property tenure incorrectly. This is provable. 

 

So should I pre-empt all problems and send in the sar now?

 

just to check - is it best to send the sar in before any sale deal is agreed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ell-enn said...

 

When you start to receive demands for money

 

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

in what way?

 

dx

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

I meant that lender is just threatening liability for huge shortfall - but no actual figures been demanded yet.

 

Lender lawyer advised a few potential buyers but when we asked for details lender won't disclose the exact amounts and specific terms.

 

They allege they have one offer close to their list price - but it's still super low in comparison to true market price - plus the buyer's offer is subject to having the Freehold.  The lawyer has demanded I "give away" - for free - the Freehold to help them sell the property.  It's not mine and its valuable.  

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is long leasehold, comparable length (bit shorter), with mostly a corporate freeholder (not selling FH) but our family also have a small share of the freehold. 

It is a fresh nice refurb but is slightly smaller, less outside space and no views - in comparison to mine.  It's priced 70% more expensive

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

What redress does someone have if a real estate agent is discovered to have knowingly marketed and offered a property for sale with the wrong tenure?

 

Meaning here: instructed to market and sell a property as leasehold only; yet offering it direct to prospective buyers as fh - to the point that written offers are made to include fh?

 

Is there an Act that real estate agents have to abide by?

Grateful for replies.  Thanks

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The property has not been sold.

The agent confirmed in writing their instruction was only for lease.

That is all they are allowed to sell.

The lender is trying - via Notice - to purchase the fh.  But the fh is not for sale/ doesn't have to be sold - even with Notice.   Agent was advised this in writing.

Yet agent has been offering it for sale as fh.  This is obvious as an offer has been presented in writing to include fh....

The agent is a well-known brand - which i won't mention here

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it the Misrepresentation Act 67?

The agent is knowingly and deliberately advising potential buyers that they can purchase a fh which is not part of their instruction.

 

Yes - they are part of the property ombudsman scheme

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's mine.

I would like the agent to be aware of the legal implications of trying to market a property on the wrong tenure.   surely it is misrepresentation?

to be clear - they can only market/sell the lease.  the fh is not for sale

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks honeybee - once read my message - on the most basic level - should I just ask agent who instructed them to market/ offer the fh for sale?  and refer agent to 08 cpr and bpr?

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...