Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer and that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim and don't add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the members of suggested above – it should be the final version. court, that I would respectfully requestup but I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

Setting aside a charging order and default issued CCJ *** WON! ***


DT&FE
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5187 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

Folks

 

We could use your help and guidance. I'll keep it brief around 1997 took out a loan with Clydesdale for £3400 (payable a £122 per month = total of £4032) over 36 months, in 1999 wife gave up work due to pregnancy so we went on reduced payments (having paid around 24 months = £3136), then moved with work in 2001, wife could not get another job, went on with reduced payments and in 2003 a CCJ was issued on behalf of Clydesdale, I never had the chance to go to court and received no notice at the time that it was proceeding only received the final papers, stating I now owed £9255.05 !!

 

 

Tried to put some arguments forward, after the CCJ, to Clydesdale solicitors but to no avail and started monthly payments, which I stuck to (and even increased over time). Jan 2008 receive letter from solicitors to say make no more payments to them as the debt had been sold. Received a letter in Aug 2008 from MARLIN FINANCIAL SERVICES stating they were now looking after the account and demanding £13,989.75, contacted them and questioned the amount was prepared to continue with the now £60 a month, they said they would speak to their clients (Pheonix Recoveries (UK) Ltd) and get back to us. Nothing happened, until 19th July 2009 when we received court papers for an interim charging order hearing on 18/09/09.

 

 

Banged in a SubjectAccess Request (now I know more about these things)!

 

 

Received a letter from solicitors representing Marlin (Mortimer Clarke Solicitors) on 13/08/09 stating that the Final amount applied for will now be £7,265.05.

 

Yesterday received some of the documents requested, however no CCA, a log from the solicitors has an entry stating: "Received email from NAB today stating the actual balance that should have been assigned to Marlin should have been £5,632.46" (this is the fourth figure they have supplied me with they were as follows: 1) £13989.75 2) 9255.05 3) 7265.05 4) 5,632.46

 

Then it goes on to say that "due to the age of the account, they were unable to supply a copy of the original agreement"

 

Is it worthwhile me asking the Judge to review the original case? It was issued by 'default' because no defence was submitted. Also statements of the account show that every payment I have made has been ADDED to the balance not deducted from it. Another strange thing is the account transcript has things like CAB repayment agreement made (I never went to CAB), and debtor works offshore (I've never worked offshore in my life!!!) as entries. The payment record shows that prior to the original CCJ £1444.65 interest was applied on this occasion they have added another £429.

 

None of the letters supplied are original or on headed paper, one one document is a copy of an original and that is a letter from the court stating "Your application dated XXXXX has been placed before the District Judge who directs that your application to substitute a new claimant is dismissed as it fails to comply with the requirements of CPR 19.4.4 & supporting practise direction 19PD.2). What does this mean?

 

 

We get more correspondence yesterday stating that there has been a restriction placed on the property and that the amount due is now £5,572.46. Documents also state that this original CCJ was as a result of a defaulted credit card agreement.....I never had a credit card with Clydesdale.

 

HELP!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi DT&FE

 

 

None of the letters supplied are original or on headed paper, one one document is a copy of an original and that is a letter from the court stating "Your application dated XXXXX has been placed before the District Judge who directs that your application to substitute a new claimant is dismissed as it fails to comply with the requirements of CPR 19.4.4 & supporting practise direction 19PD.2). What does this mean?

 

 

Sorry I can't give you much help on this, but your statement above regarding Marlin/Mortimer Clarke having an application to be substituted as Claimant dismissed by the court because of the reason given rang a bell with me as it seems to be very similar to what happened to them in my case.

 

ATM I'm opposing an 'Application for an Attachment of Earnings Order' made by MC against a judgement debt obtained originally by HFC Bank Ltd. which Marlin/Phoenix have alleged has been assigned to them.

 

The grounds I am using to oppose this are mainly that no lawful assignment has taken place.

 

I have not SAR'ed MC or Marlin/Phoenix (as you probably know, they are members of the same 'gang'), but when I phoned the court recently I was told similar to what you have stated above, see my post here;

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/123971-ccj-set-aside-help-5.html#post2373183

 

What I'm getting at is, given the fact that the court has refused them permission to be substituted as Claimants, then surely they are also acting unlawfully in your case (i.e. they are not entitled to do what they are doing)?

 

I have basically made those allegations further back in my thread here (although the final submitted version was tweaked slightly), post #71;

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/123971-ccj-set-aside-help-4.html#post2324113

 

Cheers

Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Everyone

 

In my excitement at eventually finding the thread, I forgot to thank everyone (and you are too numerous to mention) for their advice, guidance and more importantly the support I needed to take on these people, I am ever grateful.

 

This new found confidence had allowed me to challenge them all, the war isn't won, but it is winning each individual battle and standing up for my LEGAL rights that has been has given me more and more confidence and one day I hope to be confident enough to GIVE advice and if I can claim anything back, DONATE.

 

A quote from the FOS, whilst raising a complaint (he he) "these DCAS are bullies, cheats and generally liars. If they found you hanging off a cliff by your fingernails they would ask you to make a payment before they helped. The more consumers that complain the more chance we have of dealing with the more notorious of them"

 

Once again folks THANKS

Edited by DT&FE
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...