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

JCI/Bw Lettter Of Claim - old EE mobile debt


2021Oops
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

Am I right to assume this is important, not just a scareogram?, same as a letter before action?. Annoyed as they've not written once, have had emails from EE and other companies but I genuinely had a phishing email from EE today so for obvious reasons take no notice.

Amount is about £750, seems high considering I defaulted on £240 but then I know they can charge the remainder of the contract.

They did offer £200 off in an email im now seeing a couple of months back at £20 a month which is affordable and it also says in this letter they may consider previous offers still.

I'm in a situation where im now trying to deal with what were mostly Covid defaults in order of priority and at as low a cost as possible, I did default several accounts in a short period and am hoping some might time out. Situation is a bit better than even 12 months ago and would really like to come out of this without ccj's

Is there anything I can do here?, it definitely doesn't just look like a normal letter, ive had millions.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to JCI/Bw Lettter Of Claim - old EE mobile debt

are you indicating the letter of claim was an email attachment?

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

we know what one looks like

ok just hit letter of claim

and follow post 4 there.

as long as all these dca/debt owners have your correct and current address ...i'e you've not moved since taking whatever out an it being sold to a dca you are ok and protected from backdoor ccj's

 

dx

 

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

I have moved, I'm a month from the end of my Royal Mail address forwarding. I guess I need to let them know along with other creditors.

Actually can I ask, how would I inform a creditor ive moved address without admitting to a debt?, I think I have about 5 now all with Lowell as well as a couple of others. I was thinking of just writing with my previous address and literally asking them to update it.

 

This protocol lines up with what was in the envelope. I honestly think the amount is about right but if I can get them to accept the reduced offer from June and repay at £20 a month I'd be all too happy to do so in order to just nip it in the bud. Maybe then in a few months I could make a final offer or something then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is  as simple as writing to them and informing them of your new address.

Dear Bill & Ben.

Please update your records with my new address.

Regards.

 

Royal Mail will have told them anyway as they do when anyone 'forwards' their mail.

But belts and braces where DCA's are involved, peace of mind for the cost of a second class stamp and free proof of posting.

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

dont forget to inc some form of ref number and state what type the original credit was and who the OC was and their a/c numer

writing to anyone is NOT admittance of a debt.!!

its only that if you speifically state i agree i owe you and sign the letter!

you should always be reading around not go into isolation an stick to your own thread CAG is self help too.

court letters/claims ARE NOT REDIRECTED. they state on the envelope do not redirect

so for more than a year now you've been lucky not to get a backdoor CCJ...simply because you did not self help.

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

16 hours ago, 2021Oops said:

Am I right to assume this is important, not just a scareogram?, same as a letter before action?.

Minor clarification: what is often called a "letter before action"/"LBA" on online forums isn't officially called that in the pre-action protocols. The PAPs call it a "Letter of Claim" and that's what people have usually received when they say they had a LBA. You haven't posted up what you've received but, yes, I imagine it is the same thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bazooka Boo said:

Royal Mail will have told them anyway as they do when anyone 'forwards' their mail.

If you buy the Royal Mail Redirection service they don't tell anyone that they are forwarding your mail, or where to. They just forward it, the sender won't know it's been forwarded.

Unless it's one of the categories of letter that can't be forwarded, like court papers, benefits letters from DWP, etc, then RM return it to sender.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boo + Dx, thanks

Yes I will try and have a read around.

As far as the redirection thing my other claim from Aqua was redirected. Maybe that was my local office making a mistake?

Ethel its headed specifically Letter Of Claim but yes I knew from before they were required to send a letter before action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, 2021Oops said:

As far as the redirection thing my other claim from Aqua was redirected. Maybe that was my local office making a mistake?

Possibly. The decision that a letter can't be redirected is made at the local delivery office when a letter arrives there addressed to your old address. So thousands of RM  staff across the country will be involved in deciding whether something's a non-forwardable item. So not surprising if sometimes mistakes are made.

RM's T&C for redirection don't give a list of items they can't forward and give only benefits post as an example.

" There are laws that prevent us from redirecting certain items. There are also laws that require us to return certain items to the sender and we may need to inform the authorities of this (for example, mail from government departments related to benefits)."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, the redirection address is my dads and he's lived there for 50 years and I lived there for 28 years + know most of the managers in the sorting + post office fairly well on a customer basis so maybe they have some discretion?

Edited by 2021Oops
Link to post
Share on other sites

yes quite likely

i think if you look on court envelopes it states right by the address window important court docs enclosed. do not redirect.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...