Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Appealing a CCJ and subsequent Charging order - IG Index vs me


ssnichani
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5662 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Below is brief history of my case.

This maybe slightly off topic as it is not the conventional creditor but a credit account with a spread bet company.

I opened an account online with IG Index in 2006. This was then upgraded to a credit account and for this there is one e-mail correspondence from them confirming that the credit limit is and another supposedly from me confirming that I was happy with the credit limit. There is no signed credit agreement nor were there any prescribed terms of a credit agreement in the email correspondence. While I do not recollect this I have had suspicious activity in my e-mail account (emails getting deleted) which was reported to yahoo who could not help.

Later on things went horribly wrong and IG closed my positions in a huge loss of tens of thousands of pounds. Immediately they started sending threatening letters followed up by threatening letters from their solicitors asking me to allow a voluntary charge on the property giving me three days time for this. The solicitors then followed this up with a county court claim "saying I made a written application to open the account and in doing so accepted the terms and conditions of the account". With threats and intimidation from the solicitors I was led to admit the claim. At the time I answered the allocation questionnaire there was an option to stay the matter for a month in order to try and resolve it privately. I checked that option of a stay of one month. In spite of that I had a judgement without any hearing and this was then immediately followed by a charging order and the charge registered on my property. I went through a redetermination process and had a hearing for the redetermination and the charging order but at that time when I was disputing the judgement, I was told that the hearing was for redetermination and charging order only and month payment was fixed along with a charging order on my property.

By this time all this had taken it toll on my and I was in a state of depression.

Having recovered from my past now, I sent a SAR to IG Index recently and received a big pack from them by special delivery containing screen prints of my account information. There were some account notes with references to phone calls, saying spoke to client and the client is happy with the account etc.

I then replied back re-iterated my request for ALL DATA including any phone conversations etc. In response to that I have a letter stating they do not index their calls by client and it would mean going into a vast quantity of storage media to retrieve the information which would cost them thousands of pounds. Why should this matter to me as to how much they have to spend in order to satisfy my perfectly lawful SAR?

I would like to appeal the CCJ, i.e. set aside the judgment and the following are the reasons I feel why this should be set aside.

1. Although a request for a one month stay was made in the allocation questionnaire this was not taken in consideration and the judgement a judgement was made without a hearing. Not only did this not give me a chance to SAR IG at that stage and get some sound advice on the contrary it led me to submit to the threats and intimidation of IG and their solicitors.

2. On doing the SAR recently the following facts have come to light:

a. Although in the claim form they have stated that I made a written application and in doing so accepted the terms of the account, I had not made a written application nor recollect accepting any terms.

b. As it stands it appears there seems to be just a couple of e-mail correspondence regarding upgrading the account to a credit account with allegedly one email from me stating that I was happy with the credit limit.

c. Although there is a credit limit in this e-mail there are no other prescribed terms whatsoever and as it stands it was not even signed by me nor do I recollect the alleged email correspondence accepting the credit limit.

d. The SAR request is not complete as requested for reason mentioned above.

Can you helpful people here help me in preparing a case for the judgement to be set aside and then battle the IG Index claim after that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Early on in your post you say this:

 

'The solicitors then followed this up with a county court claim "saying I made a written application to open the account and in doing so accepted the terms and conditions of the account". With threats and intimidation from the solicitors I was led to admit the claim.'

 

Later, you say you returned an Allocation Questionnaire.

 

Those two pieces of information indicate to me that you perhaps filed a part admission and a defence to the other part. Would I be right? If so, what happened to the part of the claim that was disputed? If I'm wrong, was the whole of the claim admitted or was it entirely disputed? If entirely disputed, how was the claim finally decided, by which I mean, was it at a trial, or at some other kind of hearing?

 

Answering these questions will assist in deciding what further rights you may have.

 

x20

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time due to threats and intimidation from the company and their solicitors claiming that if I were to not co-operate then they could fore a sale of my house, I actually admitted the claim. I do remeber that I disputed the amount (which was the interest they had added). The judjement initially was for the amount I admitted but soon followed with a correction to add interest and costs.

Edited by ssnichani
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have one letter from their solicitor stating that their client would like a charge on the house and then can discuss installments and requested a response in 3 days failing which they would take legal action.

 

Other than that this was mostly dealt over by phone. They also said we could make me bankrupt and get the money that way. Again this was over the phone. Which is why I have requested them to provide me with all data including phone calls under the SAR.

 

The claim was for an amount plus interest. At the time I admitted the amount but disputed the interest. I did not withdraw my dispute on the interest part. The judgment initially came at the full amount without the interest. But following the judgment they were then allowed to add interest and costs back on which is what I was told in subsequent redetermination/charging order hearing.

 

As I have never been in such a situation before at the time I was depressed and also did not get any good advice. I did not even read that they were stating that I made a written application and thereby agreed to be bound by the terms and conditions nor did I request for a copy of the alleged written application. Moreover the one month stay that I had requested through the allocation questionnaire to try and get some advice and resolve the matter did not materialize as the judgment was given without any stay and without even a hearing.

Edited by ssnichani
Link to post
Share on other sites

The trouble with setting aside a judgment in these circumstances is that the judgment was obtained on an admission. That is, an admission in the case. A somewhat worse situation than for example, an open admission pre-litigation. Plus, it would seem the judgment on the admission was entered some time ago.

 

To set aside a judgment on an admission and this old is an uphill struggle. The grounds you have put forward would not in an ordinary case on a contract be overwhelmingly sure-fire, let alone a case where judgment had been entered on an admission years earlier.

 

Then I thought like this. As a matter of public policy, Parliament generally seeks to strike a blance on one hand to permit responsible gambling and on the other to control gambling where necessary to protect citizens from overreaching themselves and so forth.

 

If the admission was of an obligation arising from an event which in fact the law prohibited or sought to control or make unenforceable owing to public policy consderations there may be a chance if an application could be dressed up in the right garb. I would anticipate that a court would not be slow to set aside a money judgment where it could be shown that the money claim arose from, for example, the price for bringing an illegal immigrant into the country.

 

Just a thought, no more than that. You might want to do a bit of research yourself on this topic and get back to us when you think you may have something to go on.

 

x20

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...