We spoke to our conveyancing solicitor on the phone today who confirmed that all of our details were passed to the service management company at the time of us buying including that it was a rental property. They backed this up in an email so we could forward it on. We called their solicitor to let them know that we are not at fault and they agreed that if it is proven to be true they would refund the admin and legal fees. They said it would take up to 7 days to investigate. We will allow them the time and see if they are true to their word. So far only a verbal commitment over the phone.

The solicitors are the ones that added their "clients legal costs" so I am not sure how to check the legality of that now. The LBA states the terms for admin fees: I guess we just need to suck it up and put it down as an expensive lesson!!!

We have paid it as fees would keep being added. I dont think I have made myself clear so I will start again. We purchased a flat with a sitting tenant in April. The management company for the building have been sending bills for service charges to the flat instead of our home address. We were not aware of the bills but were expecting to pay the service charges. A week ago my wife was in the flat because there was no hot water and the tenant is in hospital. she notices a letter with our name on so opened it. i t was a bill for the service charges of £578 and arrears which seem to be before we owned the flat. she tried to call both payment and normal office number but got an answerphone so left a message to call her back. Today we received a letter from the management companies solicitors stating we would need to pay just over £3000 for the original outstanding £578. We phoned them and they said we need to pay £1418.68 which we did as the stress is too much with fear of additional charges on top. This is made up of original £578 plus 2 admin fees totaling to £920 then a legal fee of £498. They say they didn't have an address for us except for the flat address but the tenant was binning the letters rather than passing them on. My question is: Who should have passed over details to the management company? is it the conveyancing solicitors as if so I would like to sue for negligence and get this extra cost compensated.

I have received a legal letter to claim monies owed for ground rent including legal and admin fees after the management company were sending the bills to the flat address instead of mine and the tenant was throwing the letters in the bin. I knew we would have to pay ground rent and was just waiting for a bill not knowing the frequency. the law firm state the leaseholder management company only have the flat address and not our home address. My Question is who is responsible for giving the management company our contact details? all of the mortgage stuff has our home address and so has all correspondence with the conveyancing solicitors. Should this have been handled by them?

My fitted fridge freezer broke down after only 3 years so I contacted Wickes through thier social media and was ignored (I know not best way). I decided to go into the store I purchased from to ask them to help me out. They stated as it was out of manufacturers warranty I would need to contact AEG. I asked if they were sure because "my contract is with Wickes" and they told me "no you have to contact AEG". My next step was to contact their customer service department which I did by way of a letter template from Which as below. They then replied with I have called the service engineer out and they attempted a repair which failed and have told me the repair needed is to replace a valve and the compressor which is not covered by the service fee and therefore the appliance is a write off. I have written back to Wickes to let them know the outcome and have asked for a replacement FOC and for my repair fees to be reimbursed. I am currently awaiting a response but wanted some advice on how to respond if they deny my request.

@BankFodderI sent a Say years ago and they said they had no record of me. @dx100ukI don't have any details because they denied having any info on me when I submitted a SAR years ago.

I just received a cheque from Blackhorse completely out of the blue. I wrote to them many years ago and the just told me they had no record of my account. It was a finance loan and I wasn't sure if I took ppi or not. Anyone else had this?

weird eh. Website takes me to Resolver which states: If you have previously made a PPI mis-selling claim and been rejected, then you may be able to make a separate claim under the Plevin ruling. If you have previously had a successful claim for mis-sold PPI and had money returned to you then you are not eligible for another claim. They say in my letter I was rejected but I was paid out on a Tomlin order but they always said I was not miss sold PPI.

I have the same letter and I did already get a payout from them when I took it practically to the doors of the court!! I have updated my thread too!! https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?307079-Are-Capital-1-contacting-customers-***WON***

Holy thread revival batman!!!! I received a letter from Capital One today stating " You, or someone acting on your behalf, complained to us previously about our sale of your PPI policy. We rejected the complaint because your policy was not mis-sold. Following a supreme court decision and new rules and guidance from the FCA, you can now make a new type of complaint to us about the sale of your PPI policy. You could now receive some money back if we took a high level of commission on your PPI ploicy but didnt tell you this............. Its free and simple to complain bla bla bla." So its all come from some case law where it was proved that there was an unfair relationship (Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance LTD). Funny that I was also alleging the same for my case which caused it to be re allocated to Fast Track!!!!! So I agreed a payout. does that mean I cannot claim? Does it make it more complicated? should I just fill out the form and see what happens?

I have restrictions on my ebay account as they say my wife abused the buyer protection after sending back only 3 items. they restricted my account for 90 days so I could sell only and now I still have no buyer protection so I cannot raise a claim at all. The would not explain why except they said I had similar buying trends so they couldnt rule out my wife owning both accounts. total load of rubbish. I have 100% positive feedback (391) since 2003 but this doesnt matter apparently. When I buy it still tells me I am protected but if I try and raise a case it says "We're sorry there's an issue with this purchase. Unfortunately, you're no longer covered by eBay Money Back Guarantee"

The stress is bothering him now which is not fair. I have said phone union and let them deal with it as it is just going to end up a tit for tat letter writing exercise. Solicitor wants paying for further advice which is expensive and she already said the only thing they could sue for is losses which we believe would not exist as his salary works out at around £165 a day whereas a temp agency teacher costs the school £150 per day. Why anyone would want to force someone to stay is beyond me! One other thing the head states is that it is acting in bad faith to leave early (even though he gave an additional 1 months notice on top of what they expect) after they have acted in good faith by acting and relying on his original resignation date? strange statement. I dont think the moving forward of a resignation date has ever been tested in court and believe any case would be expensive and complicated far outweighing any advantage. The fact that losses could not be shown would be a non starter imo. I asked the opinion of the HR dept at my work said they would never pursue this scenario as ample notice has still been given as per contract. They said if they cant recruit in the time allocated its not the fault of the employee so what would they even sue for?

So the plot thickens. Latest news is the head has said "Once an employee gives notice of resignation, it is effective and can only be varied or retracted with their employer's permission. Once notice is served, it is effective." The head also states "We are not obliged to release you early from your notice period. Accelerating your leaving date would have an adverse impact on the school..........bla bla bla". The head then proposes a compromise where he has to go in on afternoons and odd days to help with the Yr 11 exam kids. The last part says that leaving early "will undoubtedly be a breach of contract" and that it will result in the school perusing for "breach of contract for the recovery of additional costs, which the school will be put by hiring in short term cover in the period after 11th April" They will no longer be paying his salary which would be in excess of a cover teacher so this holds no weight whatsoever! He is not interested in the compromise after being threatened with legal action. it would mean he had 2 jobs too so would also be taxed as such. He will be forwarding this letter to his solicitor for further advice but it seems nuts to me!

The head will not accept a withdrawal of the original resignation though and previous advice has said they are within their rights to refuse to allow withdrawal hence it being an amendment request. Legal advice received as follows: " Your ‘new contract’ if you had one would be on the same terms as the old, eg. That you could resign provided you did so on notice with the notice ending at certain key points. So, if you are within your old contract provisions for resignation by Easter then that’s not a breach. Even if it were, the issue for the school you would be leaving is what exactly can they sue for? They have to prove that they have suffered a loss and generally speaking they make a gain in that they are no longer paying your salary. So, its hard for them to bring a claim anyway even if you were in breach. I think The HT is just trying to worry you and I would say that you have taken some initial advice and understand that you are able to resign even after an earlier resignation has been agreed. Stand your ground, I’m sure the HT will back down."

This is a strange one and been hard to answer so far. My friend is a teacher and has handed in his notice to finish on Aug 31st (notice period in contract gives latest date of May 31st for Aug finish). This was done before Christmas. His circumstances have now changed and he wanted to change the finish date to April (notice period in contract gives latest date of Feb 28th for April finis). This is still well within the contracted notice period but the employer has said he will have to work his original notice or be sued for breach of contract! Can this be the case? has he effectivly somehow signed up to a fixed term contract? Answers on a post card please. He will be taking legal advice but wondered if anyone has had previous experience of this.

re-worded version. Please find enclosed a letter to invoke the Grievance Procedure. As you are aware I feel I have been bullied by XXX for a considerable length of time. I originally collated the information for the Grievance during the school years of 2011/12 and 2012/13. I postponed submitting it sooner as I was under a lot of stress dealing with the immediate situation, hence being signed off by my GP with work related stress shortly before my leave started. For the sake of my mental wellbeing I took my maternity leave six week earlier than planned. It is now that my maternity leave is drawing to an end that the feelings of anxiety and worry have returned and now the issues need to be resolved before I can return to my post in January 2014. I feel I cannot return to work under the same conditions. I request that the grievance procedure is put into effect with immediate action being taken to resolve this issue before my return to work or if the issue cannot be resolved I feel a compromise will need to be reached.

Hello all. Long time!!! So my wife decided not to put the grievance in as she was not strong enough mentally and heavily pregnant at the time!!! The time has now come to start thinking about the return to work in Jan 2014. She saw her boss down town last week and wanted to cry. all the feelings are coming back and she feels she cant go back to the same situation. We have sought legal advice and they have said it is bullying and we need to put in the original grievance; justify the lateness with the maternity leave and stress and make it clear that the problem must be resolved before the return to work. If it cannot be resolved a compromise must be reached. I am pants at letters but here is my best shot at it. Advise welcomed and needed!!!! Dear XXX, Please find enclosed a letter to invoke the grievance procedure. The reason for the time taken to bring this action is that my life has been very busy with the work related stress prior to my maternity leave having a negative effect on my well being and the birth of my child taking priority over my time. It is only now that I feel I have the strength and time to devote to this issue. As you are aware I feel I have been bullied by XXX for a considerable time. I have been on maternity leave which I had to take six weeks early and am now approaching the time where I am planning my return to work in January. This planning has brought the feelings of anxiety and worry about the bullying I was subjected to and I feel I cannot return to work under the same conditions. I request that the grievance procedure is put into effect with immediate action being taken to resolve this issue before my return to work or if the issue cannot be resolved I feel a settlement will need to be reached.

OK so I thought I would update this thread. My wife moved her maternity leave forward and is now off on maternity leave. She has informed them she will be off for 52 weeks and does intend to return to work after the birth of her baby but has deferred their maternity payment of 12 wks @ 1/2 pay in case she doesn't return to work (pretty standard stuff). This week her job was advertised externally but not as maternity cover but a full time permanent position! What does employment law say about this? It is highly unlikely that it is a new position as the dept is already at full staffing level and no one has said they are leaving!!

also the meetings she has had have got to the stage of them starting capability in the next 8 days or so so it is already at the stage that it might look like it is unfounded and being brought about to counteract their action. this is also mentioned in their protocol.

Well for now she has only raised the grievance for breach of contract and lack of information in their letter about the capability meeting and not following their own procedures. really she just wants out of the whole situation and is not strong enough to fight them. Off sick now due to the stress of it all and going to move her maternity leave forward.

That it might inflame the situation. I recon they dont want to deal with it. its so taboo dont you know. Mental illness and harassment in one grievance, how very dare you!!

Union are worried the grievance for harassment will make matters worse and have said it might not be a good idea bringing it up now!

Just spotted he has not followed school procedures on the 8 days notice for the capability hearing as he has omitted to detail the allegation or provide written evidence. he stated this will come in a further letter. We have replied to this stating the 8 days does not start until all details and evidence is complete!

Letter as follows Red bit are changed from original

Would this be it? 13 Right not to suffer unauthorised deductions. (1)An employer shall not make a deduction from wages of a worker employed by him unless— (a)the deduction is required or authorised to be made by virtue of a statutory provision or a relevant provision of the worker’s contract, or (b)the worker has previously signified in writing his agreement or consent to the making of the deduction. (2)In this section “relevant provision”, in relation to a worker’s contract, means a provision of the contract comprised— (a)in one or more written terms of the contract of which the employer has given the worker a copy on an occasion prior to the employer making the deduction in question, or (b)in one or more terms of the contract (whether express or implied and, if express, whether oral or in writing) the existence and effect, or combined effect, of which in relation to the worker the employer has notified to the worker in writing on such an occasion. (3)Where the total amount of wages paid on any occasion by an employer to a worker employed by him is less than the total amount of the wages properly payable by him to the worker on that occasion (after deductions), the amount of the deficiency shall be treated for the purposes of this Part as a deduction made by the employer from the worker’s wages on that occasion. (4)Subsection (3) does not apply in so far as the deficiency is attributable to an error of any description on the part of the employer affecting the computation by him of the gross amount of the wages properly payable by him to the worker on that occasion. (5)For the purposes of this section a relevant provision of a worker’s contract having effect by virtue of a variation of the contract does not operate to authorise the making of a deduction on account of any conduct of the worker, or any other event occurring, before the variation took effect. (6)For the purposes of this section an agreement or consent signified by a worker does not operate to authorise the making of a deduction on account of any conduct of the worker, or any other event occurring, before the agreement or consent was signified. (7)This section does not affect any other statutory provision by virtue of which a sum payable to a worker by his employer but not constituting “wages” within the meaning of this Part is not to be subject to a deduction at the instance of the employer.