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. 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.
    • 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

Jet2 - Caught up in NATS issue *** Settled JET2 paid out ***


Isiris
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 222 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

I have this morning returned from Rhodes following 11 days holiday. 

We were due to fly home from Rhodes on Wednesday @23:55 but we were allowed to get to the airport and when we got there, we received a text message that said

Your flight has been delayed due to unforeseen operational issues. 

The flight in fact was not delayed, we were just denied boarding. They boarded another group of passengers who had had their flight cancelled. The flight took off and landed as advised on their website. 

We was put up in a hotel and then we tried again the next day where our flight was due to leave at 23:15 and we took off at 01:45

As our flight was not cancelled, they just chose to fly a different set of passengers, are we entitle to compensation under EU261

Whatever I post is my opinion and should be taken as such, an opinion. While it is what I believe and is offered in good faith, it should not be taken as a statement of truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

I'm sorry you haven't had any replies yet. We have a member here, @Kyosanto who's very good on travel and aviation rules, hopefully he will pop in if he's around. 

I did post up an article from the Independent in the travel stickies section the other day but I can't post a link from my phone. 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, this is an open and shut case.

  • You are due £350 (Assuming your home airport is indeed in the UK) for denied boarding under EC261. As your flight actually operated, you you were denied boarding, and there are no exceptional circumstances here for the airline to not pay you. You need to file an EC261 claim with them. Please let us know what airline it was.
  • In addition it seems like you spent 24 hours extra in Rhodes. Hope you enjoyed the day? The airline already paid for the hotel so that's good. They also owe you all meals expenses from that day, as well as transport from/to the airport, so if you are out of pocket for this you need to gather your receipts and bank statements and claim for these separately from the above, under duty of care.
  • In addition to the above two claims, you may have an additional £350 claim for your next flight being late. But here the departure time does not matter, it is the arrival time, and it needs to have arrived 3 hours late for you to be able to claim. Do you remember the exact arrival time?
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the exact and concise reply; much appreciated. 

The flight return landed at 01:30 so we were not more than 3 hours late on arrival. 

Again, many thanks and sorry it took a while to reply. 

I will file the claim and then advise how we go ;) 

Whatever I post is my opinion and should be taken as such, an opinion. While it is what I believe and is offered in good faith, it should not be taken as a statement of truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. I have just submitted my claim and noticed something. 

Ill put the relevant flight numbers down

When we were supposed to fly back from Rhodes, we were flight number LS820. The next day we flew out as LS4820 (They added a 4)

I have just checked the flights from Rhodes the night we were supposed to fly home and the same again, LS820 was "Cancelled" but flight LS4820 (which was the same actual plane as I did check) flew out. 

Does this make any difference?

Thanks again

Whatever I post is my opinion and should be taken as such, an opinion. While it is what I believe and is offered in good faith, it should not be taken as a statement of truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, so this one is going to be intresting I think.

The 4 letter flight number is an emergency flight code, so Jet2 did in fact cancel your flight and replace it with an emergency flight that was taking the pax from the day before you instead of you. And you got taken the day after in another emergency flight, which presumably "stole" the seats from the pax scheduled to fly that day etc...

Looks like Jet2 cancelled LS820 on the 29th, 30th, and 31st, before returning to normal.

Now the NATS issue has already been deemed an "exceptional and unforeseeable circumstance" and therefore any passengers who were on flights on the 29th do not get the compensation. Whilst on the 30th the issue had already been resolved, I'm sure JET2 will argue that the flights cancelled on the subsequent days were an unavoidable domino effect.

Jet2 could  probably have operated your flight normally. In that case the people who got cancelled on the 29th would potentially have had to wait for a really long time for free seats. Instead, Jet2 chose to reschedule everything for a few days, so that people go home in order.

If I think about it, it seems a fair way of doing things, but it's also possible they did this to avoid paying other airlines to bring ppl home. What would a judge decide in this case, I don't know. You would have to see if there is a precedent.

Anyway you did the right thing which is to file the claim. Now you can wait for the airline's response.

Note that this only affects your £350 compensation. The duty of care is fully payable regardless of everything else.

Keep us updated of the response!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afternoon

Received an email from Jet 2 this morning confirming that they will be paying £350 per traveller, the 3 hotel rooms I booked and the taxi fairs too and from the hotel. 

Excellent result :)  and thank you

  • Like 1

Whatever I post is my opinion and should be taken as such, an opinion. While it is what I believe and is offered in good faith, it should not be taken as a statement of truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

well done and thank you too @Kyosanto

please consider a donation to keep us here

everyone is a volunteer

we dont get paid

but our hosters and isp dont understand

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Jet2 - Caught up in NATS issue **WON JET2 paid everything**
18 hours ago, Isiris said:

Afternoon

Received an email from Jet 2 this morning confirming that they will be paying £350 per traveller, the 3 hotel rooms I booked and the taxi fairs too and from the hotel. 

Excellent result :)  and thank you

What about your court claim issuance fee ? Have you discontinued the claim with the court or informed them it been settled ?

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • AndyOrch changed the title to Jet2 - Caught up in NATS issue *** Settled JET2 paid out ***
9 hours ago, Andyorch said:

What about your court claim issuance fee ? Have you discontinued the claim with the court or informed them it been settled ?

 

Andy

Sorry Andy. The "Claim" I referred, was with Jet2, not anything a CC.


Thanks

Whatever I post is my opinion and should be taken as such, an opinion. While it is what I believe and is offered in good faith, it should not be taken as a statement of truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...