yes, but i'm worried about the insurer refusing to accept the decision ... which would mean more delay for me. and more worroed about the Ombudsman changing the current position (to pay my claim in full and compensation) ... which would mean waiting a long time again to take it through court.

yes, the claimant has to apply for an injunction from the court .... but this is all costs time and money .... which can be saved by the respondent simply accepting the ombudsman decision. good news from what i've read, the insurer cannot appeal against the ombudsman decision .... only take them to court with a judicial review .... the consumer still has to be paid (or whatever the ombudsman decided). once an ombudsman has made their final decision ... the court cannot make another decision on the case. i hope the current ombudsman decision stays .... the insurer is unlikely to want to spend much more money (£100k?) in a JR rather than pay my claim (under £15k). But then again companies like this have been known to throw money away rather than pay the consumer.

from what I know, it is up to the consumer to take court action to get the FOS decision enforced. at this stage the insurer might defend again. which means even though an FOS decision is legally binding on the firm, there's nothing much the consumer can do if they don't accept it. but i'm sure the FOS will try and help how they can but ultimately they cannot force the insurer to pay (even though it's legally binding). i don't get it ....

The difficulty for me is that the policy seems to have been setup in a way which is advantageous for the developer and insurer but I may have no recourse under it. It is something done for the benefit of the homeowner by other parties who have no intention of meeting their full obligations or enforcing it against one another. Even the barrister was surprised that these policies have got away with being set up in this way. When I bought the house, did the policy pass to me along with everything else from the property?

Maybe the policy can be assessed for fairness under UTCCR, even though the insurer says its not covered by that legislation. Nearly everything is excluded and no provisions are made for the sort of damage I have, i.e. with the developer not meeting requirements and the insurer not inspecting properly. This is unfair against me because it affects my home.

I'm thinking ahead .... Maybe the Ombudsman will find in my favour (third time) but the insurer may reject the decision (even though it's legally binding if i accept it). What then? Maybe the Ombudsman will change the previous two recommendations (unlikely but can happen). Then I would have to raise a claim. I've a new build house with extensive damp and black mould all over bedroom and landing ceilings and corners .... due to the developer not properly ventilating the internal roof space. There is a specific clause in the requirements for them to ensure this does not happen. The insurer accepts this defect is there and that it has resulted in the damage. They're just saying it's not covered. The developer has been negligent by not meeting the specific requirement. The insurer has been negligent by not surveying the house properly before issuing the policy so that the defect could have been noticed and rectified. Neither are bothered because it affects me, the homeowner, and not them. The insurer chairman has stated in the policy introduction (before the terms) that ALL properties are inspected by THEIR OWN surveyors. Now the insurer says this is always not the case and a few properties might be inspected from a batch and all are signed off as meeting the requirements. The requirements document has a page with a checklist for surveyors to inspect the internal roof area. So why was this not done?

Isn't CPR 31.14 not for small claims? This claim is for under £700 with statutory interest. £386 in charges and the rest interest. I'm asking if there is anything to use BEFORE issuing proceedings, as it may save time and expense?

I already have a copy of an 'agreement' (half page) and all my statements. This is what they offered to send for £1 and £10. But I want specific information relating to default charges (which I know they won't send). What does CPR say about requesting pre action information and does the other party HAVE to respond? If they don't then what's the point of these pre action protocols?

I need to issue a claim against the developer of my new build house because the insurer is unwilling to settle my claim. The insurer accepts there are defects which have resulted in the damages but dispute that this is major damage and hence not covered by the policy. The defects are a result of the developer not meeting the requirements of the insurer's policy. The insurer has then not surveyed the property properly and the defects were not seen before they issued the policy certificate. My claim is based on the fact that the developer should have built the home in a workmanlike manner and with proper care and attention. They should have met the requirements of the policy. The policy played a big part in my decision to buy the house as it was marketed heavily for 'peace of mind as to the quality of the new home'. The insurer says I have no contract with them and a barrister's opinions agree with this. It's because I bought the house from the developer and is is them who paid the insurer for the policy, i.e. I did not pay any consideration for the policy. My argument is that I paid for the policy as part of the house price but this is not accepted as a strong argument to sue the insurer. The damage will cost around £20,000 to rectify. My claim against the insurer has been ongoing for 3 years and 2 months and is currently at the FOS where the insurer has declined two decisions. The final decision is yet to come. The FOS has upheld my claim and asked them to pay for the repairs and some compensation. Before it went to the FOS, the insurer wasted 1 year and 9 months as they wouldn't accept my claim. The developer will not correspond me, even through my MP, and refuses to discuss anything to do with the house. They have said they have a 'substantial file' on my property and I need to see what information they hold before I issue my claim. An alternative could be to sue the insurer but as I said the barrister says I have a weak case against them even though they provided the policy and accept there are defects and damage as a result of the developer's failure to meet their requirements. Thanks.

I am thinking of taking a few credit card banks to court because my complaint to each has not been settled as the bank is unwilling to offer a refund to me. I have been requesting information such as breakdown, agreement, assignment etc under CPR but the bank in each case will not send anything and I get the standard 'your complaint has not been upheld' letters again and again. Should I issue proceedings but tell the court I need information from the bank before I can fully particularise my claim? Or can I ask the court to make an order for the bank to provide me with the requested information? Thanks

They chased my friend in June this year when the tenant ran. Maybe they were chasing the tenant for his bills but my friend had/has no way of knowing this. There's no need to raise a complaint now, too late for that since there is court action. I don't think the Ombudsman gets involved once it has been taken to court. Once they back off or lose in court, my friend will ask for costs and compensation for harassment etc.

They're deeming the contract from start of supply date and the claim period is 2 years, during the tenancy. The lease said tenant is responsible for all their own bills and the supplier has been shown the tenancy agreement. They're suing my friend as owner of the property under a deemed contract. They're misrepresenting the invoices by reprinting them in his name and address with an account number as 'TEMP'. I'm aware that there can only be a deemed contract while the property was unoccupied and not while the supplier has their own agreement with the tenant. If the property was unoccupied at any time during the claim period there was hardly any usage. All the debt they're claiming is from the tenant's use, minus the odd standing charge while property was un-tenanted. They HAVE taken it to court and are not backing off. They seem to think the deemed contract is enough for them and the landlord has to pay his tenant's bills. This must be bad news for every landlord because where's the protection for them? There's been a few tenant's and they were no Ltd companies. They have been chased by my friend but just don't bother responding to anything. One of them has started the business again elsewhere under another name.

Good luck with that but in my case the FOS said charges are fair as the bank had given them an estimate of costs (£35). They wouldn't ask for an actual breakdown of each charge.

It's the first time it's happened for me with any bank for refunds. Last time, Amex paid gross interest. They're taking off tax at the higher rate of 50% when I'm not a higher rate taxpayer. They're also telling me that it's because higher rate taxpayers have to declare this interest.

I declare all interest in my annual return and would prefer this rather than the bank pay it. I've been doing this since I made my claims over the past few years.

from what I know the tenant went with the supplier when they moved in.

I'm trying to help a friend with a case. He has been taken to court by the electricity company who supplied his property. They are suing him personally and at his home address. The property they supplied is a shop which he tenanted out. The tenant did a runner and left rent and bills to pay, one of which was for the electricity. He has supplied the tenancy agreement to the power company but they don't care. The balance they're suing for is around £5,500 plus interest plus fixed sum, all at business rates. Their particulars of claim stated that the defendant (my friend) had an agreement with them for the supply of the electricity. We asked for documentation of this in our defence plus other paperwork but they seem unable to supply this (obviously because there is nothing). They've now asked for permission to amend the particulars and their case is now based on a "deemed" contract with my friend, as owner of the property. We haven't yet given this permission and are thinking of denying. If they do change it, we will have to submit a new defence as well. They've provided a planning application as proof that my friend owns the property and all the invoices are now in his name. I'm assuming all invoices were previously in the tenant's name and have been changed for this case. Having looked at the terms and conditions, they seem unfair in that the deemed contract can be used even when the defendant has not received the services or agreed to them or anything else that they choose. I'm assuming there will be a good defence to this case because otherwise it would mean all landlords are liable for their tenant's bills and this cannot be fair. Also, we're not sure if they're suing him as a consumer (which he is) or a business but they seem to be using business terminology as if this was a business to business contract. My friend has a main job and this is just a property he owns and rented out. Being a landlord is not his main job and he cannot afford to pay for bills like these. Any advice?

Yes, i know they have to pay me by cheque. The point I was trying to make is that they're again trying to go back on their 'word' to send me a cheque and because i've had this from them before I made sure they put the cheque method in writing. But this doesn't seem to bother them and the FOS would be on their side. If they want to pay to my loan account then the FOS will agree with them, i know this from previous experience. I know they have to pay me the interest they charged on PPI but they don't seem to understand this. They put the consumer into a very difficult position because if I refuse, i'll have to wait a very long time at the FOS. And i might not even get anything like before.

I received an offer of a refund of PPI and statutory interest and sent them the signed settlement. When discussing the refund, I asked them to include in the offer letter that they're going to send me a cheque and they did this. The cheque was authorised by a senior manager who's dealing with my ongoing default claim (they owe me at least £100). It's been 6 weeks now and they promised a cheque within 28 days. For the past few weeks i've been told it's in the "current batch" to be processed within a week. I rang them again and was told again that's it's in the "current batch" but queried this. I was finally able to talk to someone at the PPI team and was then told that the delay was because they were looking to pay the refund towards a HFC loan I have with them (separate to the credit card account which was closed in June 2004). I got annoyed at this because this is a totally separate matter and the offer was only accepted because they offered a cheque. Because i've had problems with them before, I made sure they wrote the payment method on their offer letter. Some years ago, I made a claim for a refund of default charges and they offered to send me a cheque but when they received my acceptance they wanted to pay this towards a write off of the credit card when i'd settled it in June 2004. I passed it to the FOS who agreed with the bank but in total their offer minus write off left me with £100. I didn't accept this and the claim is ongoing. This time they wanted to pay the refund towards the loan. They're offering PPI plus interest at statutory rate but no refund of the interest they charged on PPI premiums. I had a long chat with them yesterday but they don't seem to understand that FOS guidelines state they MUST refund me PPI and associated interest to put me in the same position of not having been charged and the statutory interest is for borrowing the money. They kept on saying that with the interest you're getting more than we charged you (as interest). It's about £60 i'm losing now but i've told them i'll "write off" this amount but will add it to my ongoing claim in the same way the bank has done by resurrecting their "write off". They don't seem to have changed a bit !!!

I've just been offered a PPI refund by Amex but they're paying interest net of tax. They want me to reclaim this from HMRC if i need to. This is the first time i've come across this and i don't see any guidelines for this from the FOS. I should be able to deal with my own tax affairs. They're also not offering the interest they charged on PPI premiums. Any advice?

Seems like it. In my case they said the estimate provided enough evidence of the cost of all future charges.

I had a CCJ and charging order (got my misleading me) from a DCA.The CCJ was from July 2005 and charging order from Nov 2005. I didn't get an understanding judge and the DCA did not bring a copy of the agreement or want to discuss repayment options as we were meant to do. Their rep said he's there only for the CCJ (and then charging order). Following judgement, the DCA did not accept my instalment offer and have not enforced the CCJ to date. During a short period, they did threaten to enforce the charging order unless I took a loan to repay them. They introduced a lender and I went through the process to see what it would cost. It would have cost me £2,500 more than the money I was repaying, thus putting me further into debt. Following judgement, the DCA maintained a default and CCJ for around £1,200 more than the order. This was queried with their solicitor who admitted the figure was wrong. But the DCA never changing the amount and they continue to use this wrong amount. I've now had a letter from them that they intend to enforce the judgement and charging order by a warrant of execution if I don't pay. The amount they're asking is still £1,200 over the CCJ and the judgement debt contains unfair default charges and mis-sold PPI of around £2,000 in total. Where do I stand with this as the CCJ is over 6 years and the charging order will be soon?

Yes, absolutely, most of these are useless. But if you bought the house 10 years ago and there were previous owners, your guarantee (probably) has run out. The guarantee runs from first purchase of a new build house. You should've gone to them before and reported an fault with your electrical wiring, for which the developer was responsible as it must have needed building regulations approval. And get those tyres checked and put a claim in for "not fit for purpose" if needed.

it's gone to appeal now so let's see what they say.

Yes, i know, but his reason was that since we, as a family, had waited many months for this sentence to be handed down, there was no way he was going to allow us to miss it over a small thing like parking, which is why he went outside and asked the attendant not to ticket our cars. He then later asked him to withdraw the tickets but they'd been issued so we can only appeal now. Hindsight is a good thing. Maybe the police officer thinks he should have been more assertive with the attendant and we certainly think we should have got a 3 hour ticket. What we did not expect is the sentencing to last so long as it was only a matter of the judge giving the sentence. We did not expect it to last over an hour with full statements by the defence and prosecutor. At the last hearing, we were out in 10 mins.