Thanks everyone for your comments and guidance, it's much appreciated. I agree it could be something suspicious - I certainly think it's worth reporting to the fraud bods. I did check the IMEI with the police and it wasn't recorded as being stolen with them, though that might not be the whole story. I hope it wasn't stolen as one shouldn't send stolen goods through the post! I suppose it's just as likely that someone sold an unwanted upgrade to one of the 'recycling' companies or on ebay and later decided to list it as lost with the phone network to claim another....so actually the supplier could have been scammed. Thanks again!

Hi everyone I've tried finding the solution to this one both in the ever-useful CAG forums as well as on various websites and consumer rights guides with no success as yet. Apologies if I'm covering old ground though. Long explanation begins.... I recently bought a mobile phone (sim-free) via an online website. I'm not new to online tomfoolery so I made sure I paid by credit card for a bit of extra protection. The phone was sold to me as being unlocked, new and unused. The phone was actually provided by one of the 'marketplace' sellers via that site, a Ltd company based in the UK. The first handset arrived, in a sealed box and appeared to be new. However when I put my SIM card in it transpired that the phone was blocked. I checked this with CheckMend which confirmed it was listed as being 'lost or stolen'. I emailed the supplier who apologised profusely, asked me to return it and they would send a new phone and cover my return postage. I did so. However I forgot to put the charging cable in the box. A new phone arrived a couple of days later, but the box had been opened and the charging cable removed. I contacted the supplier who assured me the box had only been opened to check the phone was in working order (no mention of accessories being removed). The phone worked and appeared new again so I accepted it. Less than a week later, that phone became blocked. Checks with CheckMend and the network that blocked it confirmed the phone was NOT new, I was not the first person to use it (it had been registered to someone else before I placed the original order) and that I could not unblock the phone. I contacted the supplier again who again apologised profusely and asked me to return it. She claimed she had a new supplier and this had never happened before. Although I was of course pretty vexed at this point I begrudgingly agreed that they could send one last replacement phone. I returned the locked handset. At this point, delays began as well as accusations that I had blocked the phone myself, was trying to steal the 'expensive' accessories etc. The supplier had received the second phone but couldn't send another immediately, then claimed that without every part of the phone (they wanted the original box and charger) they couldn't do anything. I retracted my request for another replacement and asked for a full refund as I was not able to wait for another replacement. I was told this could only happen if I sent back the box and charger, which I did. The last items were sent in a signed-for package two weeks ago. It has not arrived - either undelivered and waiting at the sorting office or genuinely lost in the post. So....my questions are: 1. Should I pursue a Section 75 claim at this stage or do I need to find out where the box and charger have ended up? 2. In the case of a faulty item, do all components need to be returned? I worked in retail previously and we would accept faulty items within period even without all attachments, original box etc. I don't understand how the lack of a box can affect my statutory rights. Thanks in advance for any help you can give me

Thanks Andy I found the NoD - I was actually scanned a copy of it as well as being sent it hard copy. It's a Discontinuation in full, not just an agreement. All for charging for my wasted costs as you suggest - but how can I get their legal costs dropped from my bill? The account in full has been passed to a new company, with itemised bill listing the legal costs. Thanks again

Thanks Andy, much appreciated. Assume I can contact the court in question and confirm the discontinuation? I've a letter from the claimant confirming that they were going to file for discontinuance. If this is indeed the case, how would I reject the costs? I've done so in writing several times but the new company (to whom the account has been passed) believe them to be legitimate costs despite my protestations!

Hello all I've done a number of searches but can't find the answer to my question, apologies if I've missed it! Some time ago, I received a CC claim stating that I owed certain fees. I don't dispute this but wrote a robust report detailing the fact that I had had no bill nor statement claiming the monies (something substantiated by the claimant's own submission to court!) and that I had not been advised of the outstanding amount despite being in regular contact with the firm involved. The claim continued for some time and was allocated. I was asked to submit evidence by X date. I sent my evidence next-day-delivery to arrive on X date (as the claimant have been proven to have been a little creative with documentation in the past!!). The claimant submitted no evidence whatsoever. I received a call from the claimant's solicitors stating that he was unaware of the evidence I had, had been given no evidence from the claimant to submit and that on his advice they were dropping the case. However I've been slapped with £700+ of legal fees for the claimant's solicitor! It has been added to my existing bill and I am being told I must pay. To complicate matters, the claimant have been replaced with a new company and the new firm have been given all the accounts, so to them this is a legitimate debt and they have no knowledge of previous correspondence and are refusing to accept my explanation. Is this right? If a claimant submits a vexatious claim and then drop it, should the defendant pay all costs? If so, why is this? Thanks in advance!

Oh definitely. I just stored it somewhere safe so that it wouldn't get damaged or lost. This doesn't appear to be any of the places I've looked.... still, I'll be turning the place upside down at the weekend!

Thanks again Andy. It does indeed mention S146/147 but not S20 or L&T. I still can't find my original lease but will redouble my efforts. I'm hoping that pointing out that 'Company X' 1. didn't send me any bills whatsoever, 2. weren't actually the managing agent (written proof of this enclosed with my defence) and 3. haven't even included bills or accounts in their claim particulars (!) will be enough to get it pushed back and perhaps give me a bit of time to find my lease and dig for more dirt!

Thanks for the advice - I did think this was the case, having been the claimant at County Court before. The claim particulars tell me that they sent two letters over the two years (in Oct and Nov of 2009) - I don't think this is adequate for letters and NBAs - is there a guideline? Also of note is that the management fees are payable in advance - if as they claim they didn't write to me until Oct 2009, then they weren't sticking to the particulars of the lease anyway!

I didn't realise I had 12 years for an LVT! Useful info. Can I start an LVT without the bills/invoices/accounts info? It seems a difficult way to get the info I want!

Looks like you have a pretty solid defence there too! I don't mind the debt being passed from one to the other - as long as somewhere along the line there's an invoice and accounts which are accurate. Simple request I strongly suspect that they've sent a lot of these, hoping people will crap themselves and automatically pay out...hopefully I can get to the bottom of it all though! Thank you again for taking the time to help me - I'll let you know how I get on.

Thanks again Andy - and I definitely know the TTAS website well - you're not 'that' Andy I presume? ;-) Oddly enough, the reason I was chasing them up for a bill/accounts was for the very reason of taking them to LVT - so when they didn't reply I was disappointed but not surprised. I live in a maisonette, the thing they do for me is pay the building insurance as far as I can see - the landscaping/graffitti removal/cleaning of communal areas/property maintenance is absolutely nonexistant! Thanks again - I'll try and get everything together tomorrow. The claimant (freeholder), Company X and my actual managing agent for the time are ALL based at the same address in London. Company X dissolved in June 2010. Should I mention all of this? Would it harm my defence to do so? I'd rather disclose all in the hope that it goes in my favour.

Thank you yet again for all your help. I'm just digging out my lease - I put it in safe storage many moons ago....*ahem* The fees are approx £300-400 per year, though going up every year of course! And you're right, I've no idea how long the contracts are for - though each company does a little over a year. Yes again, you're right...it's Solitaire group. The 'company X' listed on the claim form dissolved in mid-2006 so I don't know how they can be listed as the company agent for the duration of the time (and are still spoken about in present tense). I've never received anything from any of them. The claim form states that 2 letters were sent in Feb 2010 - nothing mentioned in 2009 at all. I'll check your links, dig out my lease and be back - thanks again.

Thank you very much - what would I have to ask them for? 'Company X' look to be another subsidiary of the company we (and hundreds of others) have had many, many problems with - hence so many outstanding CCJs - will the really toe the line?

Andy, thank you very much for your help - that's great. I hope you don't mind me asking your opinion on this! The LEASE website has been most helpful indeed (thanks again) - and I have comments on all of the following. Should I send all of this with my claim form defence, do you think? service charge payers must be consulted before the landlord commences qualifying works, other than under a long-term agreement, which will cost any leaseholder more than £250, or enters into a long-term contract worth more than £100 for any leaseholder in any accounting year (a 'qualifying long-term agreement'). Does this include appointment of a new managing agent? This has taken place each year with no consultation. demands for payment must be served within time limits (18 months), and new legislation, which came into force on 1/10/07, requires a summary of the leaseholder's rights and obligations to accompany such demands. I've not received any bill whatsoever, and have never had this summary with any paperwork sent to me by the other managing agent. the landlord must account for all annual expenditure through a summary of relevant costs following a written request from a leaseholder or secretary of the Recognised Tenants' Association. After the summary is provided a leaseholder or secretary of the Recognised Tenants' Association can inspect the relevant documents. I've requested this in writing (though perhaps foolishly didn't go so far as to request by recorded delivery!) and have still not been provided with this information - surely the claim form would have been the ideal time to present this? One final note: the claim is for 01/01/2009- 31/12/2009 and 01/01/2010-31/01/2010, but the company alleged to be the managing agent were dissolved in June 2010 - is this relevant? Thank you again.