Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I feel that people are focusing too much on the OPs property being a council house and putting responsibility on the council to resolve this.   imagine for a moment that the OPs house is privately owned, now what powers would they have to take action on the trees? Pretty much none without taking the tree owner to court right. Well as the trees are privately owned, that is the same power that the council have right now.   the information with the £375 will be inline with high hedges legislation as this will be the only power the council will have and it is common for there to be a charge for this.   this is not a social housing issue, but a neighbor dispute with a private homeowner.   i used to work as a tree officer for a local authority and from experience have seen that people’s idea of dangerous and what is actually dangerous are two different issues. A councils power to enforce tree works are also limited and will usually only be where a private tree poses a risk to the highway, not to another property as that is a civil matter (even where the council own the 2nd property).    With regards to risk to underground pipes, this is something you will be unlikely to successfully argue as various studies have found that unless a tree is planted on top of the pipe and crush it, the roots will not cause damage, but rather only enter through already damaged areas as they are opportunistic, any tree roots in drains are usually a secondary issue where a pipe had existing damage and to resolve it will require a permanent repair to the pipe to prevent recurrence.   the only options i see here are to calculate the height allowed under high hedges legislation (it varies depending on what direction the property faces , the location of hedges etc) and try to enforce that which will involve the fee. Otherwise there is little you can do as the private homeowner has a right to have trees in their garden although they may be liable if they were to cause damage to your property (such as a shed) or the councils property in the future.
    • Served on 16 Feb.   On reviewing the MCOL website today for an updated, I noticed that 1) Hermes has aknowledged the claim, but not yet filed a defence, and 2) that I there was a glitch / error on the form. Essentially, it looks like I had accidentally left the "I will send detailed particulars of claim" box ticke (I thought I had unticked it), with the result that the claim section has been truncated, and some extra text has automatcially been added - in red below):   "...Claimant seeks £XXX, plus I will provide the defendant with separate detailed particulars within 14 days after service of the claim form. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of..."   This is obviously not ideal. Is it better to try to amend the claim somehow, or to just submit a brief POC that a) clarifies that I am seeking £XXX plus costs (which was automatically truncated), and b) sets out my calculation of the £XXX?  
    • Hi   It amazes me how they pass the buck as they don't want to deal with a private homeowner but if the shoe was on the other foot they would be hammering down on you for breach of tenancy.   As this is council housing you need to make a Formal Complaint in writing to the Council Housing about this (as a social housing landlord they have a complaints process they have to follow). you need to exhaust their complaints process. Make sure and title your letter Formal Complaint.   From what you have posted this tree is not just a nuisance but also a Health & Safety risk:   1. The tree being overgrown is now a danger to the occupants/Guest/Visitors to your property   2. The tree has overgrown into the Council Housings Boundaries your property causing damage/endangerment to the occupants/guest/visitors.   3. As the roots of the tree are also overgrown into your property you have concerns that these may be causing/damaging to any underground pipework that may be within the boundray of the property.   4. So far the Councils actions have been to treat their Council Housing tenant as a third class citizen with a private homeowner aloud to cause endangerment/possible damage due to these overgrown trees which are encroaching on your council house property/bounderies.   You also require clarification why you were sent the Healthy Neighbourhood Information which states I have to pay £375 to make a complaint. (make sure and attach a copy of the response that states this cost)   You also require copies of the following:   1. Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Customer Service Standard (not the leaflet) 3. Health & Safety Policy (not the leaflet) 4. Public Liability Insurance Policy. (not the leaflet) 5. Clarification from you if their is any underground pipeworks running through the bounderies within the garden area (you should have full knowledge of this it being your property/plans) 6. Compensation Policy (not the leaaflet) 7. Equality & Diversity Policy (not the leaflet)   When you get the above policies sit with a pen/pencil/highlighter and take you time reading them and just think to yourself 'DID THEY DO THAT' if not mark it then leave it for a while then do the same again this way you can basically throw/write back stating the haven't followed x policy with which part of that policy and your reason. (you are building evidence to use against them using their own policies. I would also like to refer you to The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provision) Act 1976: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1976/57/part/I/crossheading/dangerous-trees-and-excavations     You need to remember yes it is the Council but the Council Housing is a separate entity and is a Registered Social Landlord (RSL)   Is the Council Housing classed as a registered Charity? (what is their registration number whether charity or RSL?)   Also have a wee look at this CAG link:     
    • @rocky_sharma   Fame at last!!   Dunno how much help it would be in your case, but I could try digging out the txt of my defence if you think it might be relevant to your defence. We might hafta do this via PM, then e-mail though if ya wanna go down that route.   Good luck with yours anyway mate.
  • Our picks

sallysas

Mediation - a bad idea

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3151 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

There is a thread here in general section about courts doing away with AQs. My local court sent me an aq but also a mediation form stating I would have to explain to a judge why I would be disagreeing to this. This seemed a good idea to me at the time but GaryH feels this is a good way for the banks to delay things and cost us money. Does anyone have any experience of this and any reasonable proposals why mediation cannot be considered for our purposes. Thanks in advance, Sally


If my advice has been helpful tip the scales

 

West brom SETTLED

 

Halifax current SETTLED IN FULL

halifax curent (2nd) stayed. Visa - SETTLED

2nd visa LBA sent

halifax for the 3rd time. LBA sent

 

Egg - SETTLED GE Money - SETTLED Barclaycard SETTLED twice

 

Sainsbury's - Awaiting court date

 

Co-op cc SETTLED IN FULL 2nd claim. Settled in full

 

 

National Westminster Settled in full. 2nd claim. N1 submitted

 

 

HFC bank SETTLED. HFC 2nd claim - lba sent 21/10/08 Time Retail N1 filed Argos settled in full Creation - SETTLED IN FULL

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a bad idea - it will cost you and is expensive, it will also not get your case settled. I used this letter to refuse

 

Dear Sir/Madam

I respectfully refuse the offer of mediation in this claim. My reasons for refusing to mediate are as follows

 

1. I have entered into meaningful dialogue with the defendant prior to issuing a court claim, but have received in response to my requests for further information template letters and standard leaflets from the defendant.

2. We are litigants in person and to meet the cost of mediation would put us at severe further financial hardship.

 

3. It will be settled out of court and therefore produce no useful decision from a higher court.

 

4. It is further submitted that the defendant in the instant case has no intention of going to a hearing.

 

5. It is submitted that the pattern of cases settled so far suggests very strongly that the banks and financial institutions are merely using the justice system as a publicly funded means of intimidating their customers and dissuading them from pursuing their legitimate right. This is further evidenced by the defendants counterclaim to which a defence is submitted with this allocation questionnaire

 

6. It is submitted that the Overriding Objective requires that my case is allowed to proceed speedily so that a just settlement may be obtained by the parties to this case. There is no complicated issue of law. The common law relating to contractual penalties is settled law since the late 1800s and has been reinforced as recently as the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 which itself is the result of a European directive.

 

7. It is submitted that this is abusive of the justice system and of the public resource.

 

8. As submitted above, mediation favours the bank by delaying the claimant’s pursuit of his legitimate remedy without placing any restriction upon the banks activities which the claimant submits are unlawful and/or retaliatory.

 

The OFT and their powers under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 gives the power to the Office of Fair Trading to seek injunctions to prevent the use of unfair terms in consumer contracts. More than that, the UTCCR specifically prevents the private citizen from pursuing this remedy on his own behalf.

It is not at all clear why the OFT has not now proceeded to seek injunctions in the face of the financial institutions refusals to comply. This is particularly serious when the Regulations have prevented the citizen from doing so.

 

It is submitted that an order for standard disclosure will assist greatly in bring these and other similar claims to a speedy and just conclusion.

 

The matter is suitable for the Small Claims Track as it involves no issue of law – the law is well established. It only involves questions of fact – in particular the true costs of the Early Redemption Charges system. The OFT has already formed its conclusion about this. Standard disclosure will put the matter beyond doubt. I submit that these financial institutions do not act in good faith in relation to me or their other customers in the matter of penalty charges.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 


Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that looks powerful stuff. I agreed to mediation just after Easter. In your opinion could I send this letter in now for it to be added in with aq? Naturally I would send copy to cobbetts.


If my advice has been helpful tip the scales

 

West brom SETTLED

 

Halifax current SETTLED IN FULL

halifax curent (2nd) stayed. Visa - SETTLED

2nd visa LBA sent

halifax for the 3rd time. LBA sent

 

Egg - SETTLED GE Money - SETTLED Barclaycard SETTLED twice

 

Sainsbury's - Awaiting court date

 

Co-op cc SETTLED IN FULL 2nd claim. Settled in full

 

 

National Westminster Settled in full. 2nd claim. N1 submitted

 

 

HFC bank SETTLED. HFC 2nd claim - lba sent 21/10/08 Time Retail N1 filed Argos settled in full Creation - SETTLED IN FULL

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, I just ignored the mediation letter with the AQ. Nothing happened. Regards, Mad Nick


Abbey £8370 settled 17 Apr 07

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, perhaps I will do the same next time but gizmo's letter looks like the beesneezzzzzz


If my advice has been helpful tip the scales

 

West brom SETTLED

 

Halifax current SETTLED IN FULL

halifax curent (2nd) stayed. Visa - SETTLED

2nd visa LBA sent

halifax for the 3rd time. LBA sent

 

Egg - SETTLED GE Money - SETTLED Barclaycard SETTLED twice

 

Sainsbury's - Awaiting court date

 

Co-op cc SETTLED IN FULL 2nd claim. Settled in full

 

 

National Westminster Settled in full. 2nd claim. N1 submitted

 

 

HFC bank SETTLED. HFC 2nd claim - lba sent 21/10/08 Time Retail N1 filed Argos settled in full Creation - SETTLED IN FULL

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My case was recommended by the judge for mediation and when I phoned the court they couldn't find my file because it was already with mediation.

 

I've had to put in my bundle really early, so think it's a bit of a liberty expecting me to go to mediation.

 

But I'm not sure how the judge would view it if I don't try it and, according to the letter it's a free service.

 

Regards,

John.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate how you feel as my letter said I would have to explain to the judge my reasons for not agreeing to mediation. I sent the letter above which I think explains it beautifully and this question was not raised again. My letter also stated it was free but Gary H thought differently. Might it be an idea to talk to Mediation with Gary's letter to hand and see what they say about cost?


If my advice has been helpful tip the scales

 

West brom SETTLED

 

Halifax current SETTLED IN FULL

halifax curent (2nd) stayed. Visa - SETTLED

2nd visa LBA sent

halifax for the 3rd time. LBA sent

 

Egg - SETTLED GE Money - SETTLED Barclaycard SETTLED twice

 

Sainsbury's - Awaiting court date

 

Co-op cc SETTLED IN FULL 2nd claim. Settled in full

 

 

National Westminster Settled in full. 2nd claim. N1 submitted

 

 

HFC bank SETTLED. HFC 2nd claim - lba sent 21/10/08 Time Retail N1 filed Argos settled in full Creation - SETTLED IN FULL

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the suggestion Sally. I'll get the letter and do as you suggest.

 

I found your letter a couple of weeks ago and it's been in my docs since then, typed and ready to go. As everyone says it's a great letter, very well reasoned.

 

Regards,

John.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK mediation is not free - it is quite costly.


Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm nice - letter saved for future use.:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic letter! The last paragraph mentioning the Standard Disclosure etc. Should we replace that with the draft order for directions if we are choosing the response with our AQ's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fantastic letter! The last paragraph mentioning the Standard Disclosure etc. Should we replace that with the draft order for directions if we are choosing the response with our AQ's?

Hello, has this question been addressed anywhere please?

Thanks in advance.


The matrix is intrinsically flawed. Within it is the program for it's own destruction. If you are reading this, you are in the matrix and it's days are numbered...so watch out! :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi bustthematrix

 

This is a very old thread and I have no idea if the posters are even still around.

 

You might be better advised to start a new thread and ask the question again


Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...