Waste Dumped in Communal Bin Store - Tenant Denying Was Him

[strath44]

no idea what coding system they use but its 100% possible with things like this.............

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/RFID-ID-Card-Cloner-Cop...

[craigjm]

I think I would ask them to issue you a new set of previously unused fobs

[tommyboy1972]

romeogolf said:

The management co have said that it's "not possible" to clone fobs - 100% false -

OP I live in a modern block of flats with fob access to lobby and underground car park. First thing I done when I received the keys was go to Timpsons (the shoe repair and key cutters) and have them make 2 copies of the fobs as spares, cost me £15 for two fobs that look and act exactly the same as originals. Whether these look the same on MC logs I have no idea.

[silentbrown]

tommyboy1972 said:

OP I live in a modern block of flats with fob access to lobby and underground car park. First thing I done when I received the keys was go to Timpsons (the shoe repair and key cutters) and have them make 2 copies of the fobs as spares, cost me £15 for two fobs that look and act exactly the same as originals.

There are different flavours of access fobs. The older 125KHz ones are easily clonable. Newer flavours probably less so.

OP, assuming you have a fob why not take it to Timpsons and ask them.?.

[romeogolf]

craigjm said:

I think I would ask them to issue you a new set of previously unused fobs

I did and they told me they could only do this if I paid for them, even if I returned the existing ones. They maintain that the fobs cannot be duplicated.

Email from Management Co. said:

R,

These fobs are not able to be duplicated, and all fobs have to be programmed through ourselves and the entry phone company.

If you wish to pay for the new fobs, I am happy to order them for you

Kind regards,
G

[MJNewton]

Given the planned 'without prejudice' caveat with your payment are you going to follow-up and sue them?

[Lemming Train]

MJNewton said:

Given the planned 'without prejudice' caveat with your payment are you going to follow-up and sue them?

Of course he isn't. All mouth and no trousers.

[Moonflower]

Bent over quicker than a Pattaya hooker

[DonkeyApple]

OP. You’ve gone down the right route. It’s a business and superlightr explained how it works with good clarity.

Chances are that even if the agent had clear cut fob or cctv usage you could find that they have not complied correctly with privacy laws. Etc. And you could probably really irritate them with various privacy/data related angles. But it won’t change the fact that they don’t care and that some not very bright, highly transient employee is there to just waste your time deliberately.

You are right to persist with this as their own evidence seems to counter their own argument. But by settling and noting that you have done so because of the aggressive threats you are in the better position now as you have totally disarmed their standard operating procedure. Their system of stalling and fluffing is reliant on the leaseholder not making that payment. Without that extremely powerful Sword of Damocles you have levelled the playing field considerably and can now think straight and take your time.

Those who are of the belief that you shouldn’t pay and that you should go into punchy punchy mode while leaving the agent fully armed and fully prepped simply don’t understand how to fight these types of entities and in fact the system the agents use relies heavily on people doing the opposite of what you are doing.

[Lemming Train]

DonkeyApple said:

OP. You’ve gone down the right route. It’s a business and superlightr explained how it works with good clarity.

Chances are that even if the agent had clear cut fob or cctv usage you could find that they have not complied correctly with privacy laws. Etc. And you could probably really irritate them with various privacy/data related angles. But it won’t change the fact that they don’t care and that some not very bright, highly transient employee is there to just waste your time deliberately.

You are right to persist with this as their own evidence seems to counter their own argument. But by settling and noting that you have done so because of the aggressive threats you are in the better position now as you have totally disarmed their standard operating procedure. Their system of stalling and fluffing is reliant on the leaseholder not making that payment. Without that extremely powerful Sword of Damocles you have levelled the playing field considerably and can now think straight and take your time.

Those who are of the belief that you shouldn’t pay and that you should go into punchy punchy mode while leaving the agent fully armed and fully prepped simply don’t understand how to fight these types of entities and in fact the system the agents use relies heavily on people doing the opposite of what you are doing.

He isn't fighting anything so your argument is nonsense. He's paid the obscene and completely made up figure that they demanded and the owners of the MC will be laughing their arses off at having such a push-over for a leaseholder. At the most he might write a couple more strongly worded emails, all of which will be treated with the same disdain as the first one and promptly filed in the round basket whilst they laugh some more. He threw away any "fight" he had the moment he logged into his bank account and sent them £264.

Edited by Lemming Train on Sunday 28th April 14:12

[Moonflower]

Exactly .

[romeogolf]

Lemming Train said:

He isn't fighting anything so your argument is nonsense. He's paid the obscene and completely made up figure that they demanded and the owners of the MC will be laughing their arses off at having such a push-over for a leaseholder. At the most he might write a couple more strongly worded emails, all of which will be treated with the same disdain as the first one and promptly filed in the round basket whilst they laugh some more. He threw away any "fight" he had the moment he logged into his bank account and sent them £264.

Edited by Lemming Train on Sunday 28th April 14:12

I don't actually want to engage in conversation with you or Moonflower because you're both being very keyboard-warrior about this without actually having any legal or practical advice. That said, I'm following their complaints procedure as they outline on their own website which is a two-step process allowing them to respond to my complaint initially. If unhappy I can escalate it with them once more, following which I am able to take my claim to the Property Ombudsman.

I am gathering evidence (an email from the manufacturer of the access system in use which states the fobs we hold are easy to copy/duplicate as an example) - and have sought advice from a property lawyer I am acquainted with, the leasehold advisory service, and a property manager for another company who I also know separately from this issue. I've been fortunate that in addition to the replies here, having spoken about this with friends a lot of people know people who can help and have put me in touch with them.

So, no, I'm not a push-over and can assure you this will be fought.

[Lemming Train]

romeogolf said:

I don't actually want to engage in conversation with you or Moonflower because you're both being very keyboard-warrior about this without actually having any legal or practical advice. That said, I'm following their complaints procedure as they outline on their own website which is a two-step process allowing them to respond to my complaint initially. If unhappy I can escalate it with them once more, following which I am able to take my claim to the Property Ombudsman.

Keep dreaming chap.

romeogolf said:

So, no, I'm not a push-over and can assure you this will be fought.

No. You'll still be £264 out of pocket at the end of all your strongly worded emails and claim with the "Property Ombudsman".

Edited by Lemming Train on Monday 29th April 09:46

[bad company]

romeogolf said:

I don't actually want to engage in conversation with you or Moonflower because you're both being very keyboard-warrior about this without actually having any legal or practical advice. That said, I'm following their complaints procedure as they outline on their own website which is a two-step process allowing them to respond to my complaint initially. If unhappy I can escalate it with them once more, following which I am able to take my claim to the Property Ombudsman.

I am gathering evidence (an email from the manufacturer of the access system in use which states the fobs we hold are easy to copy/duplicate as an example) - and have sought advice from a property lawyer I am acquainted with, the leasehold advisory service, and a property manager for another company who I also know separately from this issue. I've been fortunate that in addition to the replies here, having spoken about this with friends a lot of people know people who can help and have put me in touch with them.

So, no, I'm not a push-over and can assure you this will be fought.

That’s more like it. I’d have gone through the process without paying them first though.

Good luck and keep going.

[DonkeyApple]

Indeed. The intimidation tactic is to remove your time to think straight and gather evidence. Send the money with the correct statement that you are not agreeing to the liability, you do not agree and that it is because of their aggressive intimidation. Then go to work at your own pace to ensure they have to credit your account. You’ve pretty much disarmed them of their bully boy tactics and the playing field is now level in terms of the law.

[romeogolf]

bad company said:

That’s more like it. I’d have gone through the process without paying them first though.

Good luck and keep going.

Thank you. It was tempting to ignore the charge, but as Donkey Apple has said, by paying it I've disarmed them and they no longer have ammunition (the fees/interest) against me. They also ignored my last email to them for 48 hours before I made the payment, but then replied within 25 minutes when notified of the payment - So I was further supported in my belief that their decision would be to ignore me and just add late charges.

Slowly, slowly, catchy monkey and all that.

[xjay1337]

Lemming Train said:

He isn't fighting anything so your argument is nonsense. He's paid the obscene and completely made up figure that they demanded and the owners of the MC will be laughing their arses off at having such a push-over for a leaseholder. At the most he might write a couple more strongly worded emails, all of which will be treated with the same disdain as the first one and promptly filed in the round basket whilst they laugh some more. He threw away any "fight" he had the moment he logged into his bank account and sent them £264.

Edited by Lemming Train on Sunday 28th April 14:12

Sadly I agree with this.
You can go through the process but you don't pay them first.

When you have a parking fine you don't pay them and then claim it back, do you???

[BrabusMog]

romeogolf said:

Thank you. It was tempting to ignore the charge, but as Donkey Apple has said, by paying it I've disarmed them and they no longer have ammunition (the fees/interest) against me. They also ignored my last email to them for 48 hours before I made the payment, but then replied within 25 minutes when notified of the payment - So I was further supported in my belief that their decision would be to ignore me and just add late charges.

Slowly, slowly, catchy monkey and all that.

Keep us updated.

I was in two minds as to how this should be dealt with but, as has been said, giving payment without prejudice will wrong foot these shysters and you can now tie them up in knots if you have enough time / care enough.

[romeogolf]

You know when you receive a reply to an something and you just think, "did you even read my email?"

Property Management Co's reply to my complaint said:

Dear R

This matter has now been passed to me. I have reviewed the footage and the time logs. Everything appears to be in order and the charge stands. The reason for the charge as agreed with the Directors of (block) is to allow (PMC) to reduce the burden on the other leaseholders who have to foot the bill for such behaviour. I understand your frustration but I think your best course of action is to go to your tenant with the clear evidence provided and recharge them for their antisocial behaviour.

I’m sure that you would object if you as a leaseholder you were charged through the service charge for other leaseholders who’s tenants behaved in such a manner.

I am happy to send you a link shortly to all of the footage if it would assist you in approaching you tenants.

Kind regards,
T

I'll see how much better the footage is when they send it and then reply. They seem to be oblivious to the fact that, as I keep saying, those people in the footage are not my tenants - And that their fob record seems to make no sense. I want them to respond to each of the points I raised in the original complaint.

[bad company]

romeogolf said:

I'll see how much better the footage is when they send it and then reply. They seem to be oblivious to the fact that, as I keep saying, those people in the footage are not my tenants - And that their fob record seems to make no sense. I want them to respond to each of the points I raised in the original complaint.

Have they agreed to send you the footage?