Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sending you a big hug. I’m sorry your going through this. The letters they send sound aweful, and the waiting game for them to stop. But these guys seem so knowledgable and these letters should stop. Hang in there, and keep in touch. Don’t feel alone 
    • In my time I've never seen a payout/commission from a PPC to a landlord/MA. Normally the installation of all the cameras/payment of warden patrols etc is free but PPCs keep 100% of the ticket revenue. Not saying it doesn't happen mind. I've done some more digging on this: Remember, what your lease doesn't say is just as important as what it does say. If your lease doesn't mention a parking scheme/employment of a PPC/Paying PCNs etc you're under no legal obligation to play along to the PPC's or the MA's "Terms and conditions". I highly doubt your lease had a variation in place to bring in this permit system. Your lease will likely have a "quiet enjoyment" clause for your demised space and the common areas and having to fight a PPC/MA just to park would breach that. Your lease has supremacy of contract, but I do agree it's worth keeping cool and not parking there (and hence getting PCNs) for a couple months just so that the PPC doesn't get blinded by greed and go nuclear on you if you have 4 or 5 PCNs outstanding. At your next AGM, bring it up that the parking controls need to be removed and mention the legal reasons why. One reason is that under S37(5b) Landlord and Tenant Act 1987,  more than 75% of leaseholders and/or the landlord would have needed to agree, and less than 10% opposed, for the variation to take place. I highly doubt a ballot even happened before the PPC was bought in so OPS even being there is unlawful, breaching the terms of your lease. In this legal sense,  the communal vote of the "directors" of the freehold company would have counted for ONE vote of however many flats there are (leases/tenants) + 1 (landlord). It's going to be interesting to see where this goes.  
    • @Whyisitthisthank you very much for asking. I am still feeling anxious, especially when someone rings the doorbell, or when I receive a letter I feel a it paranoid. I stopped going to the shops unless I really have to. I shop online now. When I see security I feel paralised. 
    • My expectation was their WS would include the best paperwork, like at least true copies of originals, but these just look wrong somehow, perhaps the font and size of font... Not sending me the DN in CCA request but producing it for evidence I would argue could be a tactic used by them... - Page 11 with ticks - there is no reference to IP addresses - Home addresses are correct for dates in documents   Just looking up example Defendant WS's while awaiting your thoughts on this
    • Hello lovely, just posting to check in to see how you are feeling now? Hopefully your feeling better? 
  • 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

knellyk 2 vs Abbey!


KnellyK
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4817 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

  • Replies 198
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hiya Knelly

 

Still waiting for my scarf............

 

Yep the House of Lords next Tues, Wed and Thurs.... so we will see.

 

Not sure how long the house of lords will take to make their decision, but I guess we have waited two years..... another 2 months is not the end of the world.

 

Tuttsi xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

read on tother site there in court again next week cross fingers eh kk just not when your knitting cou1d be nasty :Dxxkia

 

 

It could! :)

 

 

Very nasty indeed! :D

 

Especially if I was trying to multitask with some of the equipment we have at our disposal on the Angels thread! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya Knelly

 

Still waiting for my scarf............

 

Yep the House of Lords next Tues, Wed and Thurs.... so we will see.

 

Not sure how long the house of lords will take to make their decision, but I guess we have waited two years..... another 2 months is not the end of the world.

 

Tuttsi xx

 

 

Don't hold your breath!

 

It could be longer than 2 months! :rolleyes:

 

Plenty of time to do a bit more knitting!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It could! :)

 

 

Very nasty indeed! :D

 

Especially if I was trying to multitask with some of the equipment we have at our disposal on the Angels thread! ;)

:lol::lol::lol:xxxkia
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Don't hold your breath!

 

It could be longer than 2 months! :rolleyes:

 

Plenty of time to do a bit more knitting!

 

Yep probably September/October when the HOl resume and then it is a guessing game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Well ...............

 

It's September so I thought I'd pop in on my old Abbey thread and see how much dust there is in here ~ it's nearly 2 years since I was supposed to go to court, it's a good job I've been keeping myself busy!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still knitting!

:rolleyes:;):p

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

OOooohhhhh! It's October :D

 

I'd like a judgement soon!

 

In fact, I'd like the judgement by 14th November - that's a very special day! It'll be 2 years to the day that I should've been in court - but I had to find something else to do instead. :D:D

 

 

I've put the knitting needles down now! ;)

Edited by KnellyK
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

wot ya knitting missus?

 

a waistcoat? or a cardie? or long johns?

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Right then......

 

 

It's time to put the knitting needles down and pick the pen up - or use the computer - to write to the court and the bank so they can dust off my claim and bring it back to the top of the pile! :):):)

 

 

 

 

 

It's a good job my hands found something interesting to occupy them during the past 2 years! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Right then, time to put my knitting down again and start thinking about my stayed case!

 

So..... I just looked through my documents, I was looking for something that says the charges cover their admin fees and found that the Defence Statement says ...

 

"8 The Claimant's contention that the fees are unenforceable and/or are"penalty charges" is denied. The fees reflect and are proportionate to the Defendant's administrative expenses incurred due to the Claimants breach of contract and are a genuine pre-estimate of the damage suffered by the Defendant.

 

9 Further or in the alternative, even if the said fees are not proportionate to the Defedant's administration expenses incurred (which is denied), the Claimant remains liable to ppay such fees as may be found to be proportionate and the Claimant is not entitled to claim repayment of the full amount of each charge made to the Account."

 

I've pm'd a mod to see if this is the type of statement that they're referring to in the new FAQs.

 

I've since found a letter -(signed by Abbey!) that states...

".......... Even if it were correct (which is not accepted) that the charges are greater than Abbey's actual loss in dealing with your account, Abbey would still be entitled to charge you something fore the expenses. Further you will see that the charges are liquidated damages , and not penalty charges and are therefore valid pre-estimates of loss."

 

 

I think I'm ready to amend my PoC ! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Knellyk

Just to give you the heads up, Abbey have sent a letter to all the courts asking the courts to strike out our claims.

 

Call your court tomorrow to see what your court is doing and if they have received the letter from Abbey>

 

Good luck.

 

Tuttsi xx

 

 

Right then, time to put my knitting down again and start thinking about my stayed case!

 

So..... I just looked through my documents, I was looking for something that says the charges cover their admin fees and found that the Defence Statement says ...

 

"8 The Claimant's contention that the fees are unenforceable and/or are"penalty charges" is denied. The fees reflect and are proportionate to the Defendant's administrative expenses incurred due to the Claimants breach of contract and are a genuine pre-estimate of the damage suffered by the Defendant.

 

9 Further or in the alternative, even if the said fees are not proportionate to the Defedant's administration expenses incurred (which is denied), the Claimant remains liable to ppay such fees as may be found to be proportionate and the Claimant is not entitled to claim repayment of the full amount of each charge made to the Account."

 

I've pm'd a mod to see if this is the type of statement that they're referring to in the new FAQs.

 

I've since found a letter -(signed by Abbey!) that states...

".......... Even if it were correct (which is not accepted) that the charges are greater than Abbey's actual loss in dealing with your account, Abbey would still be entitled to charge you something fore the expenses. Further you will see that the charges are liquidated damages , and not penalty charges and are therefore valid pre-estimates of loss."

 

 

I think I'm ready to amend my PoC ! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Knellyk

Just to give you the heads up, Abbey have sent a letter to all the courts asking the courts to strike out our claims.

 

Call your court tomorrow to see what your court is doing and if they have received the letter from Abbey>

 

Good luck.

 

Tuttsi xx

 

 

Thanks Tuttsi!

 

I'll do that tomorrow! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've responded to you but you haven't replied

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now :)

 

 

 

I see you found my thread!

Sorry but I have received nothing from you. I have resent you my email this morning

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well done Knelly, good to see things are moving for you.

Tuttsi xx

 

I've just phoned the court they still have a record of my claim which is good!

 

They advised me to write to them to request permission to amend my PoC. So, I'm going to get on with doing that this evening. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Quick update...

 

I didn't amend my POC and I didn't respond to the useless order that Abbey kindly sent to me.

 

Yesterday I received General Form of Judgement from the court, it orders that the stay is lifted and gives me 'til 4pm on 23rd Februsry to let them know in writing whether I wish to proceed, if I do, i have permission to amend my POC or Defence and Counterclaim.

 

If no action by either side then it'll be struck out with no order for costs.

 

Or I can apply for a set aside but I have to do that within 7 days...

 

 

Decisions, Decisions.

 

 

Has anyone had any luck with Abbey since the Supreme Court Decision?

 

I seem to remember that S French was doing something? If Anyone know that outcome?

 

Any advice would be gratefully received.

 

:-)KK:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...