Thanks but already done that. Had a plumber in yesterday to check everything and definitely no leaks my side

Reading was taken by the installer when it was installed. Reading was “32”. As I was absent from uk for several months I couldn’t take a reading myself. Plus, the engineer didn’t show me how to do a reading. As he was installing it, I asked him if he needed me to stay at the house and he said it was ok for me to go. (He was obviously outside the house doing the job).

I had a water meter installed because I hardly use any water as I'm away most of the time abroad. I live alone. The man who installed it didn't show me how to read the meter. He gave no instructions at all. Affinity did a manual reading after 6 months. It showed 532,000 litres of water!! I would literally use about 100 litres a year. I assumed this was an estimated reading, but it wasn't estimated. Affinity say I must have had a leak, but I know I definitely don't have a leak anywhere. I had a plumber in today to confirm this. The last 2 months meter reading has increased by a reasonable 20 units (first 6 months were 332 units). So clearly their meter is faulty. Plus ,as I said, I wasn't given any instructions on how to read the meter. They are trying to charge me £1200 for the first 6 months of use. I'd say it should be more like £50. They are coming next week to check for leaks outside the house. If they don't find one, what is my position? I have no intention of paying anywhere like £1200. I would also argue I've been a customer for 35 years. for the last 10years I was paying £350pa non-metered, so was overpaying given my use was genuinely about £100 per year. i reckon I've kinda overpaid them £3000 over that period. Will that help my negotiations?

it was private

I employed RAC to inspect a car I was looking to purchase. I bought their top service, the 400 point one. Apparently the owner had put tape around one of the hoses. I didn;t know this. You would have thought the rac would have noted the tape in the report, as it could have been masking something. But no mention was made. I bought the car, and a few days later the car was losing water. I ended up having to replace all the hoses at a cost of £800. The RAC deny responsibility . They say I should have had it pre-checked for oil or water leaks at a garage prior to rac looking at it. I think this is nonsense, and they are trying to get out of it. What do you think, as I'm considering suing them.

I paid over £400 for a 300 different tests on a Porsche Panamera with RAC inspection service. I bought the car as RAC saw nothing major wrong. Less than a week on and a garage has found 2 major faults: 1. several hoses need replacing 2. more crucially, they say the gearbox will need replacing soon, at around £5000. They can tell because when you reverse it it takes time to build momentum. Surely RAC should have spotted both of these faults. How do I go about getting RAC to pay to for these repairs?

I have received an enforcement letter for a civil debt in the County Court. The problem is we don't know the person it's addressed to. The named person has never lived at my address. I have no idea how the plaintiff got my address, but they have made a mistake. I can prove via council tax and electoral records that only me and my wife have ever lived here. We are elderly and are very worried. I don't know if it's a scam, but I've looked up the enforcement company and they appear to be genuine. How can I stop them chasing me for a county court judgeent which has nothing to do with me?

I bought 2 separate bulky items from Ebay. They were sent by royal mail tracked.I am the recipient. The signature on each item is "sp1" Apparently this is their code for 'nobody at home to receive". If noone was home they should have left with a neighbour (they didn't do this) or returned to sender. I believe they were left outside my door, where presumably thy were stolen. This is negligence. All I know is I've paid for items I haven't received.I'm now in a vicious circle because royal mail say it's not their responsiliblty. Ebay are not interested as the items show as delivered. I've contacted the sellers.One hasn't replied at all, and the other no longer has the postage receipt, so he can't claim for me. Why should he anyway? it's not his fault royal mail have acted negligently. I've been reading it's very hard to sue royal mail... something about tort? But i'm not prepared to let this stand.they have to take responsibility. can someone please tell me exactly the correct name and address of Royal mail I need to sue. This has become a matter of prinicple.

thanks the ticket was timed 2 minutes after the time displayed on the badge clock. presumably this is too soon to give me time to drop off my passenger,so i have a good defence. can you suggest some good wording in my defence letter?

thanks reverse is here: http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh49/mammothd/pcnreverse.jpg in fact, it did say no loading, so not sure if i have a defence. I did have a blue disabled badge displayed, but ,again, not sure if this would help.

can anyone tell me if there are any legal reasons I can appeal this PCN.Is it legally worded ok? eg. date of issue, etc. http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh49/mammothd/pcn.jpg

thanks adamna. It's true, what does "in " windscreen mean? especially since I recall a lot of tickets have glue on the back which instruct you to affix on to a window. The problem is, the adjudicator is funded by the councils themselves, so are not really on the motorist side. do i really want to risk a whole morning off work and another £40 when I've no more than a 50/50 chance.

I'm saying it was defective if the instructions had been to afix "on " the screen. Obviously "in " the windscreen would be taken to mean it's dsiplayed so someone outside the car can read rthe ticket through the windscreen. I bought a parking ticket today,BTW, and it had no glue on it.Clearly, these tickets are not designed to be stuck on to glass.They are,presumable,meant to be put on to a dashboard. Although I did so, it was just my bad luck it turned over after I walked away, and I'm resolved I'll have to pay it.

Just thought of something which,in fact, harms my case. The ticket says "display in windsreen". It doesn't say "ON" windsreen. Therefore they'll argue it deliberately doesn't have glue on it because it's only supposed to be displayed in a way that the warden can read it through the windscreen. This would clearly include the dashboard. From this the adjudicator would argue it wasn't defective as an instrument, and it was my responsibility to ensure it was displaying correctly.

Thanks a lot for your help.The ticket was upside down, so you couldn't read the front of it From reading the LB Wandsworth case I'm 99% sure I have no chance. That chap did what was asked. ie. stuck it in the windsceen first, and still got refused the appeal. I didn't actually do what was asked. I put it on the dashboard because there was no glue on it. I daresay an adjudicator would say I should carry sellotape with me! Interestingly, I NEVER put a ticket on the windscreen.I always display it on the dashboard. So strictly speaking I could always be done for not displaying in the proscribed manner.But I never have been before (of course, in those cases the ticket was at least perfectly readable by a warden). My best defence is the ticket has no glue on it at all, so is a defective instrument. But maybe a hostile adjudicator would suggest I'd rubbed off all traces of glue after the event to make my case look better (I haven't done this,of course). What do you think of that defence? I think this is important because there must be hundreds of cases like m ine every year.