• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Unfair charge issued by company- what rights do I have as a consumer?

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Unfair charge issued by company- what rights do I have as a consumer?

    Hi,


    I'm hoping someone can help with this charge/debt that has been issued to me by Shurgaurd, I believe, incorrectly.

    I rented a storage space from them on the 9th Feb. They have an introductory offer of the first month for £1, which I paid. I then gave them notice I wanted to end the contract on the 14th Feb and had stopped using the storage by 7th March. All was good until a month ago I received letter from debt collecting agency, Intrum asking for 49 Eur. There was no indication of what the charge was for, just that it related to Shurguard.

    I emailed Shurguard to ask what it was about and received no response.

    A month later I received another letter from Intrum saying they are going to start legal proceedings against me. This was only the second letter from them. I emailed them to ask what the charge was for a week ago and have not heard back.

    I then emailed Shurguard again and this time received a response. They said I sent them notice too early and that the notice expired 15 days after I sent it. The charge is for storage from 28th Feb (when the notice 'expired') to 9th March.

    The terms of the contract state:

    Unless otherwise agreed under the special conditions, all storage contracts are in principle for an initial minimum period of 1 month. After this initial minimum 1 month period, the contract will continue for an indefinite period and can be cancelled any time in writing by either party at will, by giving a minimum written notice of 15 days.

    It seems clear to me that I did what was required and that they misunderstand what notice is and how it works. Not to mention that they are contradicting the term stating the intial term is one month minimum.

    It doesn't make sense to say I issued the notice too early and it expired, does it? Is my reading correct here?

    I'm not going to pay the charge and my main concern is this gets reported and affects my credit score. Is it possible that can happen with what is, seemingly, an unfair charge?
    Secondly, what should I do, contact trading standards?
    Lastly, does the fact that I received no letter concerning the charge in the first place from Shurguard, no reponse to my initial email asking them what it was for and only two letters from Intrum by which time they've jumped straight to threatening legal proceedings constitute harassment under the harassment act of 1997?

    I've already contacted both the local branch and the main office and they say the same thing. I will write a formal letter of complaint but just wondering what advice you might have.

    Thank you
    Tags: None

  • #2
    They appear to be relying on the words "after this initial minimum 1 month period", wheareas you have highlighted the words "anytime". There is some ambiguity, and you may ask the court to apply the 'contra preferentem' rule, which basically means that the benefit of any doubt goes against the party who drafted the clause.

    Tell them this.

    Harassment? No.
    Lawyer (solicitor) - retired from practice, now supervising solicitor in a university law clinic. I do not advise by private message.

    Litigants in Person should download and read the Judiciary's handbook for litigants in person: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/..._in_Person.pdf

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by atticus View Post
      They appear to be relying on the words "after this initial minimum 1 month period", wheareas you have highlighted the words "anytime". There is some ambiguity, and you may ask the court to apply the 'contra preferentem' rule, which basically means that the benefit of any doubt goes against the party who drafted the clause.

      Tell them this.

      Harassment? No.
      Thanks. I'm fairly confident if it went to court, it would be easy to make them look silly.

      What about the issue of credit agencies and credit score? Would it need to go to court before this can happen? That's my main concern.

      Comment

      View our Terms and Conditions

      LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

      If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


      If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
      Working...
      X