Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
I'm following letter template route advising CEL to take matter up with driver and not registered keeper but have had their response to my first letter which questions the whole idea about resisting payment!
Their response makes reference to a judgement taken in 1998 Combined Parking Solutions v Stephen James Thomas) where the Judge ruled that "on the balance of probabilities, the Registered Keeper was the driver and even if this was not the case - he took a dim view of the Registered Keepr's attitude for not providing the driver's details to enable the matter to be resolved at the earliest opportunity".
They continue to ask for payment and also threaten county court action with added costs and interest and fees to the claim should i fail to pay.
Is there any specific response suitable to counter this?
Thanks,
MCIBUK
You've received their standard template letter full of irrelevant rubbish.
There's no purpose being drawn into a dialogue with them. They're not going to stop sending you junkmail even if you send them the best legal letter in the world.
You need to ignore them from now on.
Of course they will threaten you with court and escalating costs. This is a mail [problem] and the whole point of them sending letters is to scare you into paying.
eCar Insurance overpayment - £325
Settled in full - 15/09/08 NatWest Student A/C bank charges - £260
Settled under hardship scheme - 08/06/09 Natwest Business A/C bank charges - £60
Settled in full as GOGW - 20/04/09 Santander Consumer Finance late payment fees - £60
Part settled for £48 - 01/03/08 Peugeot Finance late payment fees - £50
Settled in full before county court hearing - 01/09/09 Peugeot Finance overpayment of £247
Settled in full - 01/12/08 Valley Leisure - complaint about collections agent
£160 part refund of gym membership in compensation - 01/02/09 HFC Bank - complaint about payment deducted from my account on wrong date
GOGW £10 - 01/05/09
My Bad. Out of interest, was it the weakness in the defence that resulted in the judgement?
TFT
09/07/09 Business Studies BA(Hons) 2:1
eCar Insurance overpayment - £325
Settled in full - 15/09/08 NatWest Student A/C bank charges - £260
Settled under hardship scheme - 08/06/09 Natwest Business A/C bank charges - £60
Settled in full as GOGW - 20/04/09 Santander Consumer Finance late payment fees - £60
Part settled for £48 - 01/03/08 Peugeot Finance late payment fees - £50
Settled in full before county court hearing - 01/09/09 Peugeot Finance overpayment of £247
Settled in full - 01/12/08 Valley Leisure - complaint about collections agent
£160 part refund of gym membership in compensation - 01/02/09 HFC Bank - complaint about payment deducted from my account on wrong date
GOGW £10 - 01/05/09
As it's a small claims judgement (not a 'landmark case'), it cannot set precedent. Hence why PPCs have continued to lose prior and since.
Of course, we're only talking about a handful of cases a year. There's no money in taking people to court for £60 / £100. This was merely an ego trip for Michael Perkins.
Thanks to all replies - i'm certainly going to hold firm - i just can't decide if i should respond to their current or any future letters.
Their letter does indeed state 1998 as the date of trial but Rochdale news shows it to be 2008!
civil enforcement ltd
action with added costs and interest
Reply With Quote
Business Studies BA(Hons) 2:1
Originally Posted by the_freedom_trail
