Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

An unusual tenancy/buying situation


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 519 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

One of my passions has been legal issues, I know a lot about various things and I should really post here more but have been so busy, often I only come here for advice. 

 

A strange legal issue I wasn't to understand more of are the legalities and even the potentially consequences of a potential but to let misuse with my friend. 

 

A very good friend wanted to help me get on the property ladder but perhaps in an unofficial way. With my standing, even though I'm a business owner I just have no chance. 

 

I only knew this after that my friend applied for a buy to let mortgage (really I didn't know, they said about the idea as a general mortgage). The plan is and still will be that I cover all mortgage payments, all maintenance to the house and after once mortgage is paid off, I give them 10k as a thanks and that's that. 

 

I just want to know about some of the laws surrounding this and what my friend has done for me (no intention to shaft them, they are a top friend, I just want to add the legalities to my knowledge bank). 

 

So... Firstly. 

 

Buy to let is, well, a mortgage where someone pays if off and even profits via a tennant. I, as they've even said only pay mortgage payments plus all maintenance of the property. 

 

So firstly. Mortgage companies on this basis may not be happy if they knew, but I'm seen as a tennant paying rent and the mortgage payments are down to the owner? Via my money? Is it breaking the law by them not disclosing this arrangement in advance? Or is it just nothing a mortgage provider would care about?

 

Let's say for example, I stopped paying my friend. Would same rules apply as being a tennant? Legally what would be the situation? Applying to courts for eviction? Would that still work the same way whereas even though I did sign a tenancy agreement, I have proof of our unofficial agreement. 

 

Would things always revert back to the tenancy agreement I signed? Aka still subject to same eviction laws. 

 

If the mortgage company found out, my friend would have to repay the part of the mortgage they owe in full within a certain time? 

 

If I didn't pay the "rent" would that mean typical legal action and then if I showed that the agreement was more about me paying to own the house, would it trump a tenancy agreement in the eyes of the law?

 

My friend has been awesome and they've put themselves on the line potentially to help me. So make no mistake, every last penny will go to them and more. 

 

I'm just wondering about the legalities out of interest and also posting here may help someone who is in a similar situation (unlikely that they are) but you never know what searches are made online. 

 

Cheers all, let's have the knowledge bank filled further. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My semi guess by the way is my friend has committed fraud?

 

But only the sort of fraud that would be bought to notice if payment discrepancies happened. 

 

Such as if someone lied about how much they earned a month to get extra credit. Although it's fraud, it will only be enforced if the person misses payments and more detailed checks are made (which then uncovers said fraud). 

 

In this case though the tenancy agreement could play a part? Fraud by mouth? Seen as a friend just renting to a friend via buy to let? 

 

If I'm technically legally a tennant based on the tenancy agreement being signed, would evidence to the contrary be legally enforceable? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dave421 I have no expert knowledge on this but from what I know from friends and family who have bought on BtL mortgages it's irrelevant to the lender who the actual real life tenant might be. BtL borrowers typically buy the property with a BtL mortgage first and then advertise for a tenant once the purchase has completed. Lenders lend based mainly on what the notional rental income will be and whether it will cover the mortgage repayments, not on any actual tenant or actual tenancy agreement.

 

The property owner has one contract with the lender (the BtL mortgage) and another with the tenant (the tenancy agreement) but the two contracts aren't linked in any way. Each stands on its own.

 

I assume your friend applied for the mortgage in their own name as a BtL mortgage.

 

Or have I entirely misunderstood your question?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ethel Street said:

@Dave421 I have no expert knowledge on this but from what I know from friends and family who have bought on BtL mortgages it's irrelevant to the lender who the actual real life tenant might be. BtL borrowers typically buy the property with a BtL mortgage first and then advertise for a tenant once the purchase has completed. Lenders lend based mainly on what the notional rental income will be and whether it will cover the mortgage repayments, not on any actual tenant or actual tenancy agreement.

 

I assume your friend applied for the mortgage in their own name as a BtL mortgage.

 

This!

 

Wanted to explain it a bit more this the long post but to cut it short. 

 

- friend got a BTL with no intention of letting, just letting me live there and pay MG. Unofficially once I'd paid MG and it's put in my name, I give them 10k as a thanks. 

 

- it was purely on a hypothetical basis with q's. I signed tenancy agreement once it was all done and I was informed about BTL. 

 

What's the tale honeybee13 ? 

 

Would you like to see a copy of the tenancy agreement and text messages putting validity to what I'm saying?

 

I'm just curious about the whole thing. Who knows in future I might be in a similar position myself. It's just interesting to advance my understanding. Message me and I'll be happy to show the evidence of my so called "convoluted tales" that you have chosen to moan about. 

 

Thanks to everyone else that's responded. It's evidently not convoluted for all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you describe does sound like letting to me. You are living there and have a tenancy agreement and the 'rent' is the monthly mortgage repayment that you are paying. It matters not all that you pay it direct to lender rather than paying it to your friend and he pays the lender (but remember I am not an expert on this and I'm not a lawyer!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the part that's adding confusion in your mind is the transfer of ownership once the mortgage is paid off, and the fact that your friend has entered into this BtL mortgage knowing who his tenant would be. That's not necessarily the normal course of events as Ethel has described, and I think it's thrown you a little.

 

Provided your friend has arranged their BtL mortgage by providing truthful and accurate information to their lender, then knowing in advance that you were to be their tenant and you would be paying the mortgage payment doesn't matter to the lender as Ethel points out. Any further conditions you and your friend arrange, like who's responsible for maintenance on the property, are really of no concern to the lender.

 

One thing I would certainly do though, if you haven't already, is have some form of agreement drawn up that guarantees transfer of ownership on mortgage completion. The term of a mortgage, even a short one, is more than time enough for a friendship to sour, and I would hate to see you pay for the house and be denied ownership transfer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dave421 I agree with @theberengersniper If I were you there would be a lot more things to worry me about this arrangement than how the tenancy agreement operates.

 

For starters what is the point of this at all? If you can afford to pay your friend's mortgage repayments plus all the maintenance costs and bills  plus £10k as 'thanks' (for what?) why don't you just buy your own house and get your own mortgage? With the arrangement you describe effectively you are buying a a house for your friend.  If you can afford to do that why do you say "With my standing, even though I'm a business owner I just have no chance."?

 

Why not just buy a house for yourself not involving your friend at all? Or perhaps he could lend you the deposit  you'd need if he wants to help you get on the property ladder?

 

BtL mortgages are frequently interest only. Is this an interest only mortgage? If so when the mortgage term is up in, eg, 25 years, where is the money coming from to pay off the rest of the mortgage?

 

If it's a full repayment mortgage (interest + capital) then in effect you are buying a house for him with no guarantee that he'll gift it to you in 25 years time. The evidence you have that he has agreed to transfer the house to you apparently is just some text messages. Is that the situation? They'll be unsigned and in 25 years time how will you prove they are genuinely from your friend - even assuming anyone can read text messages in 25 years time!

 

If I were in your position I would see a solicitor for advice. A solicitor would probably recommend a Deed of Trust be drawn up and your interest noted on the title deeds at the Land Registry. (Or advise you not to do it all....).

 

And irrespective of mortgage type who is going to pay the Capital Gains Tax [CGT] that would likely be payable when the house is transferred to you in 25 years?

 

theberengersniper has pointed out the risk that your friendship might sour between now and when the mortgage is paid off. But you also need to protect yourself against the risk (and you have to think about these things) that your friend dies before the mortgage is paid off and the executors of his estate have no interest in being nice to you and will use every legal loophole to avoid transferring the house to you.

 

Whatever you decide to do get it all legally signed off and documented by a solicitor.

 

Is your friend going to declare to HMRC the amount of the repayments you make to his mortgage lender and pay Income Tax on them? Or is there a tax evasion motivation here?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...