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

fence repair: neighbour dispute


cheesy
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6232 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

HI, does anyone know about this sort of thing?

 

In the storms of mid January, the fence at the bottom of my garden blew down. The neighbour was quick to come round and demand I repair it. I refused, on the basis that it isn't my fence. I explained it was hers.

 

It transpires the neighbour is a tenant. Her housing association sent a surveyor who removed the debris immediately. Part of the boundary is an eight foot wall, and at the same time the surveyor deemed this to be dangerous and took it down. So there is now no physical boundary at all at the bottom of my garden and it's been like this for more than two months. The neighbour tells me the housing association say the fence and wall were not theirs but were mine.

 

I have my deeds and I bought a copy of the neighbour's from land registry online. To my untrained eye, I can proove conclusively that a) the boundary isn't my responsibility and b) that the boundary is theirs. I can also prove that they have an oblication to maintain a fence because of a clause in their deeds.

 

I have written numerous times enclosing copy documents, but the housing association has never even acknowledged my letters let alone entered into any dialogue. I have not had any success by telephone either.

 

As far as I can tell, my neighbour is not pursuing this and it is only me dealing with the housing association. I am not their tenant.

 

I want a new fence errected to give me provacy. I would also like a small sum in compensation for my shrubs which were killed.

 

How do I get them to put up a new fence and wall? More than two months have passed and I'm at the end of my tether. I am worried about the cost of getting solicitors involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want a new fence errected to give me provacy. I would also like a small sum in compensation for my shrubs which were killed.

 

How do I get them to put up a new fence and wall? More than two months have passed and I'm at the end of my tether. I am worried about the cost of getting solicitors involved.

 

You can't - unless it is specifically stated in their deeds that they are required to maintain the boundary fences/walls - and then you will have a battle to enforce what is known as a restrictive covenant. Technically, only the person who established the covenant can enforce it. Without such a covenant, there is nothing you can do - they are not required to have a fence if they chose not to.

 

If you want a fence/wall for privacy, then you will need to erect your own on your side of the boundary. If you do erect a fence, you are not required to give them the 'good' side - you pay for it, it's yours and you are entitled to have it put up whichever way round you like.

 

As to the damages to your plants, it's either your insurance of forget it. To make a successful claim against the housing authority (the owner) you would have to prove that they were aware that the fence was likely to collapse and cause damage and didn't nothing to prevent this.

 

Sorry, probably not what you wanted to hear

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if they have come along and removed the debris and the wall then they are showing that it is their responsibility?

Otherwise if they are saying it's cheesys wall and fence then they have commited criminal damage?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if they have come along and removed the debris and the wall then they are showing that it is their responsibility?

Otherwise if they are saying it's cheesys wall and fence then they have commited criminal damage?

 

But cheesys has already posted that he/she can prove from the deeds that it belongs to the neighbouring landowner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

straight forward common sense, if between to neighbours gardens there is a fence, the person who put up the fence 90% of the time would not put the wood panel onto the supports on the neighbours side, as they would have to stand in there land to do it. So if the supports are behind your fence panels ther is a 90% chance that the fence is yours. however this is not the case with a fence that backs onto no ones land.

Link to post
Share on other sites

straight forward common sense, if between to neighbours gardens there is a fence, the person who put up the fence 90% of the time would not put the wood panel onto the supports on the neighbours side, as they would have to stand in there land to do it. So if the supports are behind your fence panels ther is a 90% chance that the fence is yours. however this is not the case with a fence that backs onto no ones land.

 

Sorry, I dont get your description, are you talking about panels being nailed through the face onto a timber upright behind them?

My fence is concrete posts with the panels between, so there is no supports behind or in front.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...