Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted.
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Moneybarn dilemma


Candystriper
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 478 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

So it’s an independent report and it confirms that the issues were there at the time of purchase?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

And there in lies your problem .

However submit a formal complaint to MB stating all the facts in a clear and concise manner, enclose a copy of the independent report, and state the outcome that you wish to achieve 

( Presumably cancellation of the agreement, return of the vehicle with no financial liability, and retrofit all monies paid)

Then see what,if anything ,MB are prepared to offer

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have sent the report to MB and got a call from them today saying they aren’t liable. They say within the first 6 months, the car should be repaired by the dealership. After that any issues are my responsibility. They offered to raise ‘a complaint’ for me after I told them I had taken legal advice. Comments please! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

as with MB they make up the rules as they go along.

 

they ARE responsible to sort this out ITS THEIR CAR.

 

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

So if they have rejected your formal complaint then off to the FOS 

In the meantime play along and let them “raise their complaint “

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

scan it up please to one pdf

read upload

 

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

VT would mean that, if successful , you would be saddled with your losses to date, but ultimately could see an end game financial wise you'd know.

 

  You could get vt then complain to the fos you feel you should not have paid for the repairs as the car was not fit for purpose, you might get something back. 

 

or dont vt and complain now.

 

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

Yes its rhe kind of response id expect, hiding behind wear and tear over 13mts/16k miles of use.

 

Have a read of this. You might find it interesting.

 

 

 

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

That post was only today 

 

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

Thanks- just noticed that. 
the arrears I have are for September, October and November- the months I haven’t had use of the car. I feel strongly that I shouldn’t have to pay this for a car I don’t have. if they default me can I still make a claim?

 

I found the breach of contract stuff you directed me to, really useful.

 

Should I now send that letter with a list of all costs incurred?

Or should I approach the dealer as it seems like they are liable?

 

But- my contract isn’t with the dealer, it’s with Moneybarn.

They do say they’ve investigated but haven’t even inspected the car! I doubt they spoke to the dealership at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well that's not what the agreement you signed with MB states, just because you don't have the car, doesn't absolve you from keeping to the agreement by making payment, this type of issue needs to be resolved once we know where this is going and making the right party - MB responsible to resolve any outstanding issues.

 

without scrolling back as im out in the field,...

are you indicating that, you have not, that MB have not, to your knowledge, involved the dealership at all to date?

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

but thats not what is needed to be answered,  the dealership would say that, its if the faults were manifestly there at time of purchase.

 

i'd p'haps write a letter like @BankFodder advised above and copy that to MB and the dealership...who was?

 

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

this lot

 

WWW.WOODSONCARS.CO.UK

Used cars for sale in Manchester & Greater Manchester: Woodson Cars Ltd: Competitive finance deals, part exchanges welcome, call now!

 

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

Bear in mind that if MB default your agreement and then terminate the agreement that you then lose the right to VT
An agreement can only be terminated once 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have written to them as suggested. 
in the meantime, the car as at my local Mini Garage.

 

They say that a company called Engage has rung them to arrange collection on behalf of Moneybarn.

 

does this mean they have terminated the agreement? If they have, I haven’t received notice of this….urgently need some advice!

 

Thanks

 

Here is the letter:

As you know,  on 29th September 2021 I bought a car from Woodson Car dealership, with your hire purchase agreement  no ..........

 

The car has demonstrated a series of serious faults and it is clearly not a satisfactory quality given its age, price mileage and general condition.

 

Within the first 4 months it was unreliable, with the half power engine light coming on repeatedly and making it difficult to drive.

 

The electrics started to malfunction, the radio stopped working and the parking sensors and seatbelt sensors.

 

As I was not fully aware of my rights and that the liability lay with you as the hire purchase company, I took it to the authorised Mini Service centre, ....................... on 17th January 2022 and paid for the work myself and incurred an expense of £457.42.

 

I am enclosing a copy of the worksheet and the bill with this letter.

 

They also diagnosed that the car needed new glow plugs, which were replaced by them, and a new Head Unit. The Head Unit was quoted as costing over £1000 and I decided not to get that fixed.

 

I then discovered that actually Moneybarn were responsible for repairs.

 

In June the car passed it’s MOT and was serviced- part of my responsibilities for general maintenance, which I complied with. An advisory note was that it may need a new timing chain at some point.

 

The half engine power warning lights have come on again at the beginning of September, the car has been unpredictable, and frankly dangerous to drive-

 

 I broke down twice, and the last time, I had to be towed by the AA to the Lloyds Mini centre.

 

I paid £99 to have a diagnostic test at Mini, and they informed me that there is a great deal of expensive work to be done on the car, and that further diagnostic tests are needed in addition.

 

This is not just a timing chain issue, the vehicle has other as yet undiagnosed issues.

  

I have been told that the inspection and the necessary work could cost as much as £2,000.

 

Having spoken to an advisor, I now understand as the provider of the hire purchase for the vehicle used in fact have the responsibility to address all of these issues even the ones which have already been dealt with by me.

 

At present the vehicle is undriveable and so it is off the road. This is having a serious impact on my life as I live in a remote rural area and rely heavily on the car for my daily transport.

 

I am writing to advise you that in my view the vehicle which has been sold to me is unfit for its purpose to the extent that I am entitled to treat the contract has repudiated by the dealer and by yourselves.

 

Under Consumer Rights Legislation, I am entitled to and have a reasonable expectation that the goods supplied would be of a reasonable standard and not break down and be unusable within the first year.

 

Clearly, the car was not fit for purpose. Moneybarn and Woodson are in breach of contract.

 

I accept that I have probably complicated the issue by having proceeded to have certain repairs carried out without reference to you but the defects which have not been dealt with by me are clear.

 

I expect that you will wish to carry out your own examination of the vehicle before you agree that it should be returned to the dealer and that I should be reimbursed for the purchase price and for any outlays incurred by me so far.

 

Please will you let me know what arrangements you intend to put in place to implement that inspection and whether the inspection should be carried out at ................ where the car is currently located, and as previously advised, incurring daily storage costs.

 

As you can imagine, this matter now needs to be dealt with quickly because I am in a position where I do not have a vehicle and this is something that cannot continue you very much longer.

 

I have paid the agreement upto September 2022, which is when the car became undriveable. I am happy to pay those arrears once we have a solution to this situation.

 

I cannot afford to pay for a car which I cannot drive. I believe and am advised that Moneybarn is in breach of my consumer rights, and this contract should be terminated and my money returned, minus anything outstanding. I am also entitled to be reimbursed for the money spent on repairing Moneybarn’s vehicle.

 

Regards

..............

 

cc. Woodson Cars

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...