Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • 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. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • 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.
  • 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

Roof damage - want to issue small claim v neighbour?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 364 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

Am helping out my friend.

Friend is overseas and the roof of his cottage has been damaged by his neighbour.   

The damage is clearly not naturally-made.  And not made by my friend as the cottage has been empty.

He has a grade 2 listed cottage.  The adjoining cottage is not listed. 

The neighbours of the adjoining cottage undertook building works to their own cottage and roof without notifying my friend - which I believe they should have done due to his cottage being listed? 

Somehow the builders made a hole in friend's cottage roof.

The neighbours have refused to acknowledge the damage or to pay for it.

 

Friend's son has repeatedly asked them to fix and pay for the damage.   They just refuse.   

The son has done no temporary repairs and has not taken any legal action, on behalf of his father, against the neighbours.    There has basically been a stalemate for years.  This means the cottage has had a hole in the roof for ages.  Wind, rain, snow has now damaged the internal rafters.   

Personally I find this silly - which is why I have got involved. 

 

I went and spoke to the neighbours several months ago.  I asked them if they could sort the roof repairs via their insurance.  The guy just laughed and said its not his roof and he's not paying to repair it...

So clearly he needs some pressure put on him.

The neighbour applied for planning permission to build an extension and are currently in the midst of further building works - so clearly they do have some money.

 

Can friend write a Letter before Action as a precursor for making a MoneyClaim via small claims court?

I have got some quotes from local roofers.  They all did a site visit.  All have quoted apx £8-9k to do a full repair.   One firm can do a temp patch up job almost immediately and the full repair in a few months.

Can friend write a LBA stating the cost of both the temp and full jobs - and stating the neighbour needs to cover the costs or he will make a small claim?

Is the small claims court suitable for something like this?

Friend does not have the funds to pay for this himself.  He's an oap.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say years, how long exactly?

 

It begs the question, why on earth have they waited this long????

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't actually know how long.

It does beg the question why the son has not sorted out a temporary repair before?  But he does refuse to pay or do anything on behalf of his father.  And although I understand he has complained to the neighbour, he has taken no action.

I was told about it.  So I just did what the son could have done - and remotely sourced some roofers online and got them to go to the site and give quotes. 

I sense a bit of dysfunctional family issues.

And I also sense the son would quite like to get the cottage cheap off his father... so no repairs = damage = cheaper cottage???

 

However, I like to take care of friend who is frail.  And now I've seen the damage and got the quotes I'd quite like to help him take action against the neighbour.  Is this possible?

 

 

 

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not an insurance expert but it could be that the insurer could have put pressure on the neighbour or their insurer.

 

Why are you pursuing this on behalf of a family who don't seem to care though? You seem to have plenty of problems of your own, HP Mum.

 

ETA: You haven't said how long this has been going on and I don't know if there's a cut-off for insurance claims.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks HB.  I find this a positive distraction from my own stuff.

I help him where I can because his children don't.  He was a neighbour of mine, lost his wife, got sick and frail. 

I do at least talk to one son (never met).   Perhaps, now I have quotes I could get him to call the neighbour and give the guy his options: put through his insurance or we'll make small claim?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to find out exactly how long ago the hole was made otherwise how do you know whether or not any court claim is time barred?

 

Even if not time barred one obvious problem is that there appears to be no evidence that the builders next door did cause the hole in the roof. It all sounds very circumstantial from your description.

 

Another problem is that your friend is under a duty to mitigate his losses but has not done this. Leaving the hole unrepaired has resulted in significantly more damage to the cottage than if it had been repaired at the time. A court would be unlikely to award compensation for all this extra damage.

 

The neighbour and his insurers are under no duty to do anything about this because your friend has not made any claim against them. The neighbour can't "put it through his insurance" even if he wanted to. Your friend should have claimed on his own Buildings insurance policy but it's way too late to do that now

 

Court procedure isn't my special subject but I doubt your friend's son has any legal standing to bring a claim unless he holds some formal power of attorney to do so. I assume from your post that the son does not own the cottage.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ethel

 

There is absolute evidence the builders working on next door's roof caused the damage.  The neighbours knew it at the time and still know it now.

 

The son repeatedly asked the neighbours to remedy the damage to mitigate the damage and they repeatedly refused.  They knew the owner was overseas and cottage empty and the owner unable to remedy himself.  The neighbours just did not want to spend money on fixing his damage.  

 

The son didn't do any work because it is not his house.  This doesn't make sense to me but that's family dysfunction for you! 

I went and saw the damage and have been trying ever since to get the son to get a roofer to mend the hole. 

It seems that they have all been arguing over who will pay rather mitigating the damage.

 

The damage was done before covid lockdown.  Not time-barred yet.

 

Friend doesn't have building insurance.  Neighbours either won't put it through their insurance or don't have insurance either.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is this "absolute evidence" that the neighbour's builders caused the damage? 

 

Are there photographs taken at the time showing the builder cauing the damage?

 

Or at least taken closely before and after the damage was caused?

 

Are there any independnent witness statements fro someone who saw the damage being caused?

 

Has the neighbour &/or the builder admitted causing the damage?  "The neighbours knew it at the time and still know it now" needs evidence that they knew it. What is that evidence?

 

If none of those then what evidence would your friend put before the judge if he took the case to court?

 

As I posted before, the neighbour can't "put it through his insurance" even if he wanted to. His insurance doesn't cover your friend's roof. If your friend made a formal claim against the the neighbour then his insurers would treat it as a third party liability claim under the public liability section of his policy. But the insurers wouldn't pay anything unless your friend could establish that the builders had negligently damaged his roof, with evidence.

 

The duty to mitigate losses falls on the person who has suffered the damage, not the person who is alleged to have caused it.

 

That your friend isn't insuring his own cottage is beyond stupid. Although until he mends the roof it is probably uninsurable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear you about being stupid!  He is an oap and frail though - which is why I try help.  

 

Yes the son took photos.  He has sent me some.

For clarity - the damage is man-made.  There are only the 2 cottages in the vicinity.  When the damage was caused the neighbours had scaffolding erected and builders on their own roof.  There was no hole in friend's roof - and suddenly there was.  They are semi-detached.

Thank you for helping and advising about ensuring he has irrefutable evidence.  I will push the son to send me everything 

 

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

The son took photos of what? A hole in the roof with nothing to show how it was caused?  When did he take them?  Back pre-covid when the hole in the roof was first made? Or recently?

 

Back to your original question in Post #1, can your friend bring a small claims court action?

 

He can if thinks it worthwhile, starting with a letter before action and following the usual SCC processes described elsewhere on here. If the claim is £8k - £9k as you suggest then he'll have to pay a fee that from memory is around £450. If the judge decides, on balance of probabilities, that the builders caused the damage then the neighbour is likely to be held liable and ordered to pay for the damage. 

 

But is it worthwhile is the question. I can't see that evidence is compelling, but even if successful your friend wouldn't recover anything like the £8k to £9k it will cost to repair the damage now. Only what it would have cost to repair the damage at the time it occurred.  All the subsequent damage caused by water penetrating the roof space is a result of your friend's failure to mitigate his losses and not down to the neighbour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks Ethel for your thought.

 

The son took photos when the neighbours had scaffolding up. When the hole "happened".  They had builders doing roof work.  I understand the builders placed something (heavy bucket?) on friends roof. Friend was away so no-one other than the neighbours builders could have caused the damage.  They just refused to mend and took the scaffold down.

 

I think friend may be eligible for court fee waiver?  I will check the requirements.

 

I hear what you are saying about further damage being caused which will now cost more.  Friend was away and son didn't do any further damage preventative repair. But son and friend constantly told neighbour to fix it - and they refused.   Yes someone should have done the repair.  If I had been involved earlier I would have organized a patch job.  I now understand the son did put tarpaulin over the hole. - but it wasnt/ isn't good enough.

 

I think I may get a roofer to patch it up now - whilst friend and neighbour communicate properly to come to a resolution outside of the courts.

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck to him! From what you've said my guess is nothing is going to make the neighbour come to an agreement to pay for it, or to discuss it at all, unless your friend starts the SCC process.

 

Bear in mind that mitigating losses doesn't mean asking the neighbour to repair it. It means repairing it himself to prevent further damage then claiming the money from the neighbour.

 

Small Claims Courts/MCOL only deal with claims for monetary compensation.  Even if your friend had started a SCC when the damage was first done, and even if the court had found the neighbour's builder 100% responsible for the hole, the court would not have ordered the neighbour to repair the roof themself. It was always your friend's responsibility to repair his own roof and then start a SCC for monetary compensation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...