Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi   I assume this mattress was the Tenants own property?   So after moving out the Tenants provided an attachment showing a stained mattress and wanting full deposit back and threatening to claim against you for this.   1. Tenants failed to notify you of this stained mattress issue until the end of tenancy after they had vacated the property.   2. You have no evidence that this was the actual mattress used in that property nor evidence to back up there claim the staining caused this mattress damage.  (i.e. one of them could have had an accident and wet the bed or done this when they moved from the property).     3. Ask them that you wish the mattress independently inspected. (which you are fully entitled to do and if it proves this claim is false it will be added to the deposit claim by you the landlord for damages as well as the Garden if you need to get landscapers in to carry out the work that should have been carried out by Tenants as per Tenacy Agreement and raised  by yourself (Landlord) on a few occasions which Tenants failed to rectify even at end of tenancy.   4. Ask them to provide you with the contact details of there Contents Insurance Company (tenants whether Private or Social Housing should always take out and have Contents Insurance but is up to that tenant) bet they don't provide it Big question is the Deposit protected in a Tenancy Deposit Scheme (TDS) and those Tenants that have left were given a copy of the Prescribed Terms for that TDS? (Bear in mind you may need to tell TDS that you are in dispute with the Tenant about damages i.e. mattress and Garden)    
    • plenty of time to research and calm down. nothing much to do until the end of june.    
    • well ...... 1st you need to go back to post 1 and carefully read ALL this thread from the start again and pay attention to the advice and the undertones it explains about 'debt'.   2nd ...the truth is you owe no-one ANYTHING, the OC wrote off and sold the debt, and got most of it back against tax and business insurance schemes ...throw the morality card out the window...the OC did by selling the debt on for <10p=£1. and the DCa want the full balance ...id so many fools stopped paying powerless DCA's tomorrow, the whole industry would collapse overnight.   3rd the only reason this is still around your neck is because you failed to follow given advice...had you ..it would now be statute barred.      ^^^ very important research the M+S credit card debacle using our enhanced google searchbox on this page   as for the PAPLOC reply,   D.. desipte a previous CCA requests, the claimant has yet to supply any/all of the required paperwork.   i: delete [CC is attached to this reply form]"   
    • Hi again   Yes, it's been a lovely day weather wise.   Guess you've better things to do with weather like today than help with this problem, so thanks very much for your input, it's very much appreciated.   Late this afternoon I did receive a reply from the tenants, and they are asking me to go 50/50 with getting the garden sorted, not only that, as they have moved away they are expecting me to get the quotes.   Regarding you view on this issue, its so easy not to see the whole picture and my thoughts that the staining damp may be of their own doing didn't occur to me as I was so locked into the historical leak. Taking a closer look at the room in question today, I'm convinced that they are trying it on with the stained mattress- they did mail through a picture and then a receipt for supposedly the mattress. My wife and I then took both the pic and receipt to the bedding store where purchase was made to ask if the two married up, the picture does not show any emblems/manufactures logo or such to prove that this is the case, so we are none the wiser- our thoughts being that the stained mattress is from elsewhere.   A few days back I spoke to our letting agent regarding all of this, as was quite correctly mentioned there are two parts to this equation, namely the mattress and then the property.   Our agents mentioned to me that as an inventory was not carried out initially with the let, (hindsight) the pictures that were used to advertise the property could not be used as evidence to present to the TDS to be compared to the pictures now as there is no proof that the advertising pictures were in fact how the property was when the let started. I mentioned that all digital pictures have a means of finding when that pic was taken- Geo tag/Metadata- agent was quite surprised by this. The agents thoughts then went for a hide in a vacuum-   This is going off at a tangent here-many moons ago my wife studied computer science at a local University, one of her classmates who she is still in touch with is now a practising Solicitor. My wife suggested that maybe I give her a call, a bit rude I guess, but I did  phone and with the pleasantries out the way  I asked for her opinion of the best way to get this sorted. Her remit isn't landlord type stuff, however she will speak to a colleague on Monday and come back to me.   The property is due to be relet on the 21st, we will ensure that the new tenants move in to a home that is immaculate and welcoming, trouble is its getting a tadge close to get the garden issues sorted in time.   I know that all this will get closure in the end, but at the moment I've had more fun with a toothpick-   Again, many thanks.
    • The collection is currently stored at curator James Blower's home, but he has now found a space situated in an old bank premises where he hopes to exhibit them from this autumn or early next year. View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Packlink agreed payout then changed their mind advising insufficent packaging


Recommended Posts

Thanks.

Nothing new. You should get a directions questionnaire fairly soon. Let us know.

Now that you seen the standard defence, make sure that you have read sufficient of the Hermes stories on the sub- forum to understand what your position is in respect of each point they make.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Andyorch said:

 

 

Thanks i found that online seems a pretty basic form to complete just giving my contact details and to advise i would consider mediation

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

After no action for a while I have seen it being updated today to say a general sanctions order has been submitted.  
 

From research I am guessing that they have not submitted the DQ back but will be given additional time to do this.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a disgrace that they are given this latitude. They are a huge well resourced company that routinely exploits the small claim system not for justice but simply to intimidate their customers and to try and whittle down the number of claims against them.

It really is an abuse of process and it's a shame that the deadlines – certainly as they are intended to apply to business litigants, are not enforced robustly

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I know every step of the way they have filed things on the last day possible.  They don’t even attempt to resolve the issue when you contact them before going down the small claims process probably aware a lot of people would give up at that point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Make sure you rehearse all the points that you are going to make.

I suggest that you use a Microsoft Word document with a two column table.

In column number one make a brief note of the point they are making – and in column number two, put your argument in response. – All very briefly so you can simply refer to it during the mediation telephone call.

Read the mediation stories on the sub- forum. There are some excellent summaries and in fact when your mediation is over, we'd appreciate if you could put up summary of your mediation journey as well – so take notes.

You may well come under the pressure from the mediator to give some ground. Don't forget you are completely in the right and there is no reason for you to give any ground. However, you can tell the mediator that the advantage to Hermes are settling now is first of all they will be able to carry on bullying people into thinking that they must see pack link and that they don't have the advantage of the 1999 Act. You can also tell the mediator that if Hermes want to go to court, you are perfectly happy to do so and you will also ask the judge to consider the fairness or otherwise of their requirement that their customers insure themselves against Hermes own negligence or the criminality of their employees.

You can tell the mediator that you will tell the judge that you were forced to take out this insurance cover because of fear but you still consider that it is unfair and you will ask the judge to consider that. Point out to the mediator that under the Consumer Rights Act the judge will have a duty to examine the fairness of the term and the Hermes should be warned, that if the judge finds that the insurance requirement is unfair, this will cause very substantial difficulties for them in the future because you will make sure that the judgement is plastered all over social media.

Tell the mediator to tell Hermes that if they want to go down that route – you are absolutely delighted because it's no skin off your nose and 255 quid is not a big deal for you anyway. Ask the mediator to point out to Hermes that it's only 255 quid to you – but it would be a huge amount of money to them. Do they really want to do this?

 

In any event, it's extraordinary that you were promised compensation and then they reneged on it. It shows that there even more untrustworthy than anybody thought. Tell the mediator that you will be pointing this out to the judge as well and that the judge won't be very pleased.

You want everything you are entitled to – every last penny including all of your court costs and you will give no ground.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, Hermes may come back and say that the decision to pay you out was a decision of Packlink and not them. Tell the mediator once again that this makes no odds. It was still a contract for you to end your complaint in return for the payout and Hermes are equally bound by this under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.  I’ve been reading the posts from here in preparation.

 

i will do exactly as you advise and draft notes including the fact they’ve deliberately delayed the process with missing deadlines to get information back to court.  This has lessened my willingness to compromise 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't give any hint that you were ever interested in compromising.
I don't think there's any value in pointing out their delays.

I think you should simply stick to the substantive issues

  • Thanks 1
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...