Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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

unpaid rent in student halls - HCEO fees


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5185 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

On 5th October 2009, a judgement for £1365.03 was made against me for unpaid rent in student halls. I was stupid to ignore all the court papers and I admit full liability for the debt.

 

I am now in contact and making payments to HCE, and after much research I would like to see if I am right.

 

I asked for a breakdown of the charges on my account which are as follows:

 

£1467.43 Judgement debt (Has jumped by £102.40 for some reason)

£101.75 Cost of Execution

£24.25 Accrued interest @ 0.26p a day

£546.37 Officers Fees

 

£2037.41 Total

 

I have made 3 payments in Nov,Dec and Jan of £100 each, but after reading Schedule 3 of the High Court Enforcement Act 2004, I belive these charges do not comply.

 

Before I go writing to HCE, could anyone give me any advice?

 

Am I correct to believe these charges are wrong?

 

Much thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5th October 2009, a judgement for £1365.03 was made against me for unpaid rent in student halls. I was stupid to ignore all the court papers and I admit full liability for the debt.

 

I am now in contact and making payments to HCE, and after much research I would like to see if I am right.

 

I asked for a breakdown of the charges on my account which are as follows:

 

£1467.43 Judgement debt (Has jumped by £102.40 for some reason)

£101.75 Cost of Execution

£24.25 Accrued interest @ 0.26p a day

£546.37 Officers Fees

 

£2037.41 Total

 

I have made 3 payments in Nov,Dec and Jan of £100 each, but after reading Schedule 3 of the High Court Enforcement Act 2004, I belive these charges do not comply.

 

Which charges do you dispute and for what reason(s)?

 

Before I go writing to HCE, could anyone give me any advice?

 

Am I correct to believe these charges are wrong?

 

Much thanks!

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The £546.37 Officers Fees, as the only costs I can see they are able to add are a maximum of £50 mileage, according to scheldule 3.

 

Also the increase of £102.40 in the judgement debt.

 

I had 1 visit back in November were a letter was hand deliveried as I was at work.

 

I rang the officers mobile immediatly to arrange payment by installments.

 

If the costs are fair, than I will accept. However I can't figure it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The charges will include fees under Regualtion 13, Fee 12, which is for miscellanious fees that are not provided for in the schedule.

 

These may include attendance, administration, set up, debtor services and financial management fees. Each HCEO tends to charge different amounts here as it is usually based on the costs of running an HCEO office. One with 50 staff will cost more to run than one with 10 staff.

 

Until you request a breakdown of the fees charged, you will not know how this is broken down.

 

Personally, the fees seem pretty average in the HCEO world.

 

However, these fees can be challenged by a detailed assessment in front of a Master (High Court) if you believe them to be incorrect.

 

PS - remember the fees have VAT, now at 17.5%, in them too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mean...

 

12. Miscellaneous

 

"For any matter not otherwise provided for, such sum as a Master, district judge or costs judge may allow upon application."

 

There has been no application for these cost though.

 

I did ask them for a breakdown, and the above is how I received it within the letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HCE will probably confirm - there does not have to be any application for these costs.

 

The HCEO can charge pretty much what he likes and if you object then it can go to a hearing for assessment but bear in mind the charges may well be allowed and you could leave yourself open to an application for costs by the HCEO.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

HCE will probably confirm - there does not have to be any application for these costs. The HCEO can charge pretty much what he likes and if you object then it can go to a hearing for assessment but bear in mind the charges may well be allowed and you could leave yourself open to an application for costs by the HCEO.PT

 

PT is correct. It is the defendant that can apply to have the fees assessed by a Master etc.

 

twonames, there is no mention of 'reasonable charges' in Fee 12. However, it would be foolish of an HCEO company to charge a fee they cannot justify. HCE Group are a large company that have several offices and many staff. The costs of running this will be reflected in their fees charged under Fee 12.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have seen, assesment hearings result in minimum success for the Debtor

 

I would think you are better off paying it all off and going to Small Claims, this way you dont have the risk of costs being awarded against you, as no costs are payable (other than minimal travel expenses, or if yoyu have behaved unreasonably - which in this case would be very hard for them to show)

 

 

I would agree with HCE (thats a first) that Fee 12 does not state the extra charges have to be reasonable, but I feel it is there by implication via the fact every other section of Sched 3 states "reasonable fees"

 

I do not agree, however, that such costs can be charged without a direct application being made prior to attempting to charge them - the statement

 

"For any matter not otherwise provided for, such sum as a Master, district judge or costs judge may allow upon application."

 

Seems pretty unambiguous to me

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think that high court enforcement companies have heard of a the benefits of scale, a large company should be able to offer FAR LOWER fees as they will have staff in indian call centres or many more low paid staff carrying out the admin. A single HCEO will however if working alone not having all of this back up and therfore his fees would be higher however if you are not happy follow this advice

 

See the thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs-sheriff-officers/219735-sherfarce-fraud-deception.html WON!!!!

 

This is normally how an HCEO operates he comes along with a WPA that most of us dont sign they will present you with a statement or letter that shows that they have levied and valued something (or not as in my case and one or 2 others) at this pont they have tried to charge you fees in the region of £1000 with more to come from subsequent visits and if you are daft enough to pay it then they get away with it unless you then start the process of pursuing them

by

1/Ask for a Statement of costs

2/ request a Subject access report

3/go through it with a fine tooth comb to find all the anomolies such as visits that havent happened levies that havent taken place, valuations that havent happened etc etc etc.

4/ complain to the police about fraud if levies or WPA not done (happycontrails /Nintendo templates are great)

5/Wait for the police to tell you its a civil mater and then send 2nd letter to the police telling them its not and that the chief constable would be included in any action( this usualy gets them to look at it a bit more seriously)

6/ complain to the HCEO that the fees are not as set out in regulation and send a letter before action

7/If as in my case you were daft enough to pay all the fees they asked for as you didnt know the law File a claim in the county court for the refund of the incorrect fees and............

8/wait for HCEO to run to the high court in an interpleader(fee assesment) hearing put in front of a master(judge) so that they can agree what should have been charged

 

They do not have control of the hearing and the master does have to comply with the law SF HAVE to provide evidence of costs and visits etc this is the key to winning:wink:

 

The fees that they try to get away with is miscellaneous fees under regulation 12 and this is where you need to be prepared to ask them for evidence of costs:wink:

Another little ruse that have used is that they apply to assess the original statement of costs and then get a clever cost clerk to make figures on another sheet addup to it and the master might fall for it to a certain degree

oh BTW he (cost clerk) quietly forgets the original money they asked for included valuations and visits that didnt happen so they dont show on sheet no 2 but the sums are still the same!!!!

 

Therefore the Subject Access Request is vital

 

If you need help in the high court I am more than willing to help you as a litigants friend

HCEO are easy to beat in the high court and the more I get to know the the more confident I am knowing exactly what they are allowed to charge and the tactics they use to throw you off track.

 

They are very skilled at what they do and you need to be wary of those tactics

In my case they are hiding behind a no further action against the HCEO that the master ordered but this is not good enough to stop me from continuing to pile on the pressure

 

All of the above of course is assuming that you are the victim of an officer of the the crown(HCEo)overcharging you and we all know that he/she wouldnt do that to you dont we??:rolleyes:

 

I dont know how to beat them by not paying other than sh..t..g yourself at every knock on the door, and waiting for them to get bored

 

I was lucky I had started a new job and had been paid so I got rid of the agro first and then started to turn on them

 

If you need help then post up and ask it is on here for you dont be afraid of them

The boot can be on the other foot !!!!

 

onlyme and many many more the number of cases is growing daily!!!!

Edited by ohitsonlyme
Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think that high court enforcement companies have heard of a the benefits of scale, a large company should be able to offer FAR LOWER fees as they will have staff in indian call centres or many more low paid staff carrying out the admin. A single HCEO will however if working alone not having all of this back up and therfore his fees would be higher however if you are not happy follow this advice

 

See the thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs-sheriff-officers/219735-sherfarce-fraud-deception.html WON!!!!

 

This is normally how an HCEO operates he comes along with a WPA that most of us dont sign they will present you with a statement or letter that shows that they have levied and valued something (or not as in my case and one or 2 others) at this pont they have tried to charge you fees in the region of £1000 with more to come from subsequent visits and if you are daft enough to pay it then they get away with it unless you then start the process of pursuing them

by

1/Ask for a Statement of costs

2/ request a Subject access report

3/go through it with a fine tooth comb to find all the anomolies such as visits that havent happened levies that havent taken place, valuations that havent happened etc etc etc.

4/ complain to the police about fraud if levies or WPA not done (happycontrails /Nintendo templates are great)

5/Wait for the police to tell you its a civil mater and then send 2nd letter to the police telling them its not and that the chief constable would be included in any action( this usualy gets them to look at it a bit more seriously)

6/ complain to the HCEO that the fees are not as set out in regulation and send a letter before action

7/If as in my case you were daft enough to pay all the fees they asked for as you didnt know the law File a claim in the county court for the refund of the incorrect fees and............

8/wait for HCEO to run to the high court in an interpleader(fee assesment) hearing put in front of a master(judge) so that they can agree what should have been charged

 

They do not have control of the hearing and the master does have to comply with the law SF HAVE to provide evidence of costs and visits etc this is the key to winning:wink:

 

The fees that they try to get away with is miscellaneous fees under regulation 12 and this is where you need to be prepared to ask them for evidence of costs:wink:

Another little ruse that have used is that they apply to assess the original statement of costs and then get a clever cost clerk to make figures on another sheet addup to it and the master might fall for it to a certain degree

oh BTW he (cost clerk) quietly forgets the original money they asked for included valuations and visits that didnt happen so they dont show on sheet no 2 but the sums are still the same!!!!

 

Therefore the Subject Access Request is vital

 

If you need help in the high court I am more than willing to help you as a litigants friend

HCEO are easy to beat in the high court and the more I get to know the the more confident I am knowing exactly what they are allowed to charge and the tactics they use to throw you off track.

 

They are very skilled at what they do and you need to be wary of those tactics

In my case they are hiding behind a no further action against the HCEO that the master ordered but this is not good enough to stop me from continuing to pile on the pressure

This protection only stands if the HCEO has done nothing wrong

I have an order in my hands that states even if the HCEO has been given this protection you can still sue him.

 

All of the above of course is assuming that you are the victim of an officer of the the crown(HCEo)overcharging you and we all know that he/she wouldnt do that to you dont we??:rolleyes:

 

I dont know how to beat them by not paying other than sh..t..g yourself at every knock on the door, and waiting for them to get bored

 

I was lucky I had started a new job and had been paid so I got rid of the agro first and then started to turn on them

 

If you need help then post up and ask it is on here for you dont be afraid of them

The boot can be on the other foot !!!!

 

onlyme and many many more the number of cases is growing daily!!!!

 

LFB

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...