Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • lookinforinfo
      MET CCTV PCN Starbucks closed - Southgate Park CM24 1PY

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      You will probably get a couple more reminders followed by further demands fro unregulated debt collectors with even increasing amounts to pay. They are all designed to scare you into paying.  Don't. It's a scam site and they do not know who was driving and they know the keeper is not liable to pay the PCN. Also the shop was closed so they have no legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear. So to charge £100 is a penalty as there is no legitimate interest which means that the case would be thrown out if it went to Court.  Keep your money in your wallet and be prepared to ignore all their letters and threats. Doubtful they would go to Court since a lot more people would not pay when they heard  MET lost in Court. However they may just send you a Letter of Claim to test your resolve.  If yoy get one of those, come back to us and we will advise a snotty letter to send them.  You probably already have, but take a look through some of our past Met PCNs to see how they are doing.
    • Jaksmyboy
      IVA failure-DCA chasing-advice please

      By Jaksmyboy · Posted

      Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
    • Malocclusion
      MET CCTV PCN Starbucks closed - Southgate Park CM24 1PY

      By Malocclusion · Posted

      hi all just got the reminder letter, I have attached it and also the 2nd side of the original 1st pcn (i just saw the edit above) Look forward to your advice Thanks   PCN final reminder.pdf pcn original side 2.pdf
    • NewsBot
      Singapore air offers to pay turbulence victims

      By NewsBot · Posted

      The airline said it was offering to pay $10,000 to those who sustained minor injuries.View the full article
    • NewsBot
      BMW China parts probe expanded by US Senate panel

      By NewsBot · Posted

      The Senate Finance Committee wants answers from BMW over its use of banned Chinese components by 21 June.View the full article

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

What is law regarding separation of co-habiting partners

Guest TractorGirl

By Guest TractorGirl
in General Consumer Issues

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6046 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

rory32

rory32

Posted
Posted

She wants to do things fair, he gave her £15k depo to help her out and some type of contract was written up but he has taken her copy

 

Then she needs to get a lawyer to request a copy of the contract.

 

She could sell her place with no major comeback

Without a copy of the contract this is only an assumption.

 

he cannot sell their house without her agreement....So i think she must be in a stronger position

 

Again this is only an assumption, without the contract you don't know this. He put the majority of money into the purchase of this property (the one where they both lived). This will not be split 50/50 as they are not married.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
JonCris

JonCris

Posted
Posted

She owns the flat outright & unless there was an agreement to pay interest then all he would be entitled to is his original 15K & no more

 

As for the jointly owned property as has been stated it depends on how it is owned whether jointly or as tenants in common.

 

If jointly he may be able to recover his intial investment & divide the rest 50/50 If tenants in common & in eother case it's not recorded as otherwise then it will be assumed they own 50% each

Link to post
Share on other sites
JonCris

JonCris

Posted
Posted

She owns the flat outright & unless there was an agreement to pay interest then all he would be entitled to is his original 15K & no more

 

As for the jointly owned property as has been stated it depends on how it is owned whether jointly or as tenants in common.

 

If jointly he may be able to recover his intial investment & divide the rest 50/50 If tenants in common & in either case it's not recorded as otherwise then it will be assumed they own 50% each

Link to post
Share on other sites
rory32

rory32

Posted
Posted

Just to add to my last post, a friend of mine split from his partner a couple of years ago. As he was the one who had put down a sizeable deposit on the property (several 10's of thousands) and had a higher income and contributed more to everything, she was legally entitled to nothing from the sale of the house as they were not married.

 

This is quite a complicated part of the law and I am not saying that this will be the case in this matter, but your friend does need to seek proper legal advice ASAP.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PriorityOne

PriorityOne

Posted
Posted
She owns the flat outright & unless there was an agreement to pay interest then all he would be entitled to is his original 15K & no more

 

As for the jointly owned property as has been stated it depends on how it is owned whether jointly or as tenants in common.

 

If jointly he may be able to recover his intial investment & divide the rest 50/50 If tenants in common & in eother case it's not recorded as otherwise then it will be assumed they own 50% each

 

That's what I thought as well JonCris....

 

I think in this case though, a lot might rest in what's in this contract that he's holding on to though. Can your friend remember what it was that she agreed to ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
PriorityOne

PriorityOne

Posted
Posted
Just to add to my last post, a friend of mine split from his partner a couple of years ago. As he was the one who had put down a sizeable deposit on the property (several 10's of thousands) and had a higher income and contributed more to everything, she was legally entitled to nothing from the sale of the house as they were not married.

 

 

Rory, to have come away with absolutely nothing.... she can't have been on the deeds. That's my understanding of it anyway.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
rory32

rory32

Posted
Posted

He had a very good lawyer. Female I might add.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
JonCris

JonCris

Posted
Posted

If the OC's friend is registered at the LR & the mortgage is in joint names then she will be entited to 50%. She may even be entitled to 50% of the total sum which includes his deposit.

 

As for her SOLE property he is NOT entitled to a single penny over & above the 15K unless she claims the 15K was a gift then he's got a fight on his hands proving otherwise

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
PriorityOne

PriorityOne

Posted
Posted
If the OC's friend is registered at the LR & the mortgage is in joint names then she will be entited to 50%. She may even be entitled to 50% of the total sum which includes his deposit.

 

As for her SOLE property he is NOT entitled to a single penny over & above the 15K unless she claims the 15K was a gift then he's got a fight on his hands proving otherwise

 

Relief !! Not that I'm in a similar situation or anything.... but you never know what life's going to throw back at you ! :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
gizmo111

gizmo111

Posted
Posted

As for her SOLE property he is NOT entitled to a single penny over & above the 15K unless she claims the 15K was a gift then he's got a fight on his hands proving otherwise

 

Depending on what was in this missing contract and what is registered.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
rory32

rory32

Posted
Posted

Depending on what was in this missing contract and what is registered.

Exactly. Without a copy of the contract it is all speculation.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
barracad

barracad

Posted
Posted
As for her SOLE property he is NOT entitled to a single penny over & above the 15K unless she claims the 15K was a gift then he's got a fight on his hands proving otherwise

 

Depends on the circumstances and what agreements have been entered into. My partner is selling her house, her father paid the deposit - but is entitled to receive back a %age of the value of the house, not just the deposit which was paid at the time. If there is a similar agreement then he could be entitled to more than the £15k - e.g. £15k was put towards house valued at £50k, house now worth £100k he would be entitled to £30k back.

 

All this is assuming deeds are not in joint names - the details available from the OP are somewhat sketchy.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PriorityOne

PriorityOne

Posted
Posted
Depends on the circumstances and what agreements have been entered into. My partner is selling her house, her father paid the deposit - but is entitled to receive back a %age of the value of the house, not just the deposit which was paid at the time. If there is a similar agreement then he could be entitled to more than the £15k - e.g. £15k was put towards house valued at £50k, house now worth £100k he would be entitled to £30k back.

 

Your partner's father wouldn't be entitled to half though... which is what OP was asking.

 

All this is assuming deeds are not in joint names - the details available from the OP are somewhat sketchy.

 

The deeds were not joint on this one.... but they were joint on the one that's being sold. The partner already sold his place previously and put down a sizeable deposit on the joint property, whereas she put in nothing.... and now the joint property is being sold. She still has her own property seperate to this however, which is in her sole name only.

All this aside.... a lot hinges on this contract that he has. :cool:

 

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
barracad

barracad

Posted
Posted
Your partner's father wouldn't be entitled to half though... which is what OP was asking.

 

No, she wasn't asking anything at all about my partner's father. It all depends on what agreement has been entered into - he may be entitled to £15k, he may be entitled to X%, he may be entitled to 50% - it really all depends on the agreement.

 

The deeds were not joint on this one

 

Really? You seem to know more than the OP.

 

somekind of contract is written up !! Not sure of the contents

 

We don't know what's been signed by whom, and whether this is linked to whose names are on the deeds.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
gizmo111

gizmo111

Posted
Posted
If both parties are on the mortgage then they must both be registered at the LR as owners & if they aren't then the mortgage would not have been granted to both of them.

 

But it doesn't mean that they have to be registered on th deeds 50/50

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Josie8

Josie8

Posted
Posted

only if tenants in common -if beneficial then courts deem as a starting point that the intention is to give each party 50% interest regardless of who put larger deposit or paid higher mortgage.

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites
JonCris

JonCris

Posted
Posted

Agreed Josie & if the deed/contract entered into at the time of purchase by both parties is considerably prejudicial to one of those parties the court could set any such agreement aside.

 

This would most certainly apply if either one of those parties didn't seek legal advice before signing

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Guest TractorGirl

Guest TractorGirl

Posted
Posted

Hi All

 

I would like to say thank-you to most people on this thread. This is an update on the situation

 

They have decided to go 50/50 on everything including the contents. He has already requested the TV - What a Loser !!!

 

The joint house is sold and she is moving into her place later in the year. She will come out with about £20k in her pocket

 

This is the best situation for all involved but at least my mate has her own property to move into, whereas he has to move back to Mummy's whilst he finds a place......I know this sounds bitchy, but he has made his bed and now he's gotta lie in it.

 

Oh and FYI, this contract still hasn't appeared

 

And hopefully she has now learned the lesson to get contracts written up always read them and bloody keep a copy

 

xx

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
Guest TractorGirl

Guest TractorGirl

Posted
Posted

The Joint house sale was complete last Tuesday and she has now moved into her place with £15k in her pocket but most of this is now being swallowed up by DIY jobbies.......But she is really happy

 

Thanks once again

 

xx

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...