my own Countdown

[Aberdeenplotter]

right guys, 11.00 am tomorrow so fingers crossed, legs crossed, everything elsed crossed and I'm still not trusting to luck.

Out of interest, those of you who followed Alex Mullin's battle with Eastleigh Council will remember he came out on top in court. However, the Council appealed and won the appeal. That dispute is moving upwards though because Alex Mullins has been granted judicial review. A date is awaited for that.

my main arguments are centred on section 6(1) Allotments(Scotland)Act 1892 and The unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 both of which provide that unconfirmed regulations and unfair terms be treated as either having no force or not being binding on me so there is no need to set anything aside or reduce decisions in my case. Judicial Review is therefore not the road I need to go down.

I hope Alex Mullins wins his case. It's really important to you guys down south as it relies on the Harwood case as precedent..

[Aberdeenplotter]

Thanks Kenny. Believe it or not, this comes back to the European Convention of Human Rights and the right of every individual to be heard in connection with any matter affecting them. It was that convention that spawned the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations1999. It is very powerfullegislation heavily slanted in favour of the consumer. We were totally excluded from the process and if the Council's rent increase clause permits that I should be safe. The Council's Solicitor has argued Iwasn't entitled to have any say in the matter so their clause doesn't just have the potential to be used unfairly, it has been used unfairly. Just the small matter of convincing the Sheriff Principal.

[snohare]

I don't wish you luck Frank, I wish you the justice you deserve...
Officialdom - they fairly believe in putting folk on roller coaster rides, don't they - and not much in the way of safety harnesses !

[Aberdeenplotter]

I do agree with the sentiment. Aberdeen Council has recently made a submission to the consultation process for a proposed Community Empowerment and Renewal billon the subject of allotments. The point of their submission? They would like the law changed to make things clearer. As an example, they say what exactly is a regulation relating to the management of allotments. What is the main argument about in the Court Action? You don't need to be a genius to guess.

They could have taken Counsel's opinion to find out. Instead they put a poor allotment holder through the wringer in a Court Action.

[Potstubsdustbins]

Hope so mate it would be nice if you could just get back to enjoying your plot without all the hassle.

Still think a toecap might be appropriate in the circumstances though.

PS after you have won.

Colin

[Aberdeenplotter]

nah Pottie, argument is lost when it comes to that. I'm happy to use the law. Anyone with the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations on their side has the dice loaded in their favour to start with. A term doesn't need to be unfair or have been used unfairly to be considered unfair. It simply needs to have the potential to be used unfairly. In my situation, several terms have been used unfairly. Hopefully Monday will see an end to it

[Potstubsdustbins]

AP put your big boots on and kick em where it hurts the most.

I can lend you some steel toecaps should you wish.


Colin

[SarzWix]

Lots of positive thoughts from here x

[Bigmallly]

May the force be with you............

[Aberdeenplotter]

we all behind you

Lottie, therehas been unbelievable support from this Forum and I cannot overstate how much that has buoyed me when things have looked bleak. I was deflated after the last Court Hearing, no doubt about that but within a matter of hours I had established the answers which I now think will sort this out.

I feel the force

[Thelma Sanders]

I hope all goes to plan for you

[lottie dolly]

well wishes for the day ,we all behind you

[vikkib]

Hope it goes well AP - finger's crossed! : )

[veggiechicken]

As ever I wish you success, for you and for the sake of all others who find themselves in a similar iniquitous position but don't have the spirit to fight it. Go forth Ap and sock it to 'em

[Aberdeenplotter]

Countdown resumed.


Back in Court to deal with appeal before the Sheriff Principal on Monday morning at 11.00am.

Grounds of appeal lodged were on the grounds that the Sheriff has refused to consider some of my arguments (he has said this but hasn't specified which ones although there are at least two not mentioned in his judgement which are important and relevant) and that he has misinterpreted the law relevant to my case.

I mentioned the other day a provision in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 that hold terms that allow a supplier to increase the price under the contract without allowing representation from the consumer to be unfair. That strikes down the landlords entitlement to increase rent. That argument alone should see me ok. The Council has even argued in Court that I was not entitled to have any say about the matter.

Additionally, I have done further research on the Regulations aspect which clarifies matters and I think wholly vindicates my arguments. Not setting these in here just in case this is being monitored

The most important argument is the one I have all along thought of as my get out of jail free card.

A landlord in Scotland is bound to give a tenant a minimum of 14 days notice if it intends terminating a lease in respect of a breach of a financial contractual obligation and the opportunity to remedy the breach within that period. No such notice was issued to me. Aberdeen Council has argued that the legislation that imposes that obligation is later than the Allotments legislation that allows a local authority to recover possession of an allotment because the Allotments legislation is specific to allotments and the later legislation is a general provision. Guess what? The earlier allotments legislation also provides that a local authority may take proceedings for recovery "in like manner as between any other landlord and tenant" so Local authorities are already bound by the general provision. If I am forced to escape only via that argument, at least I escape having to pay costs but otherwise it just means the Council can have another go if I still refuse to pay rent.


I have my arguments thought out. Just need to marshall them on paper.

Watch this space and wish me well. Remember no good luck messages. Good luck doesn't come into it.