Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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

Electricity meter clock and register errors


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4817 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

I have had two Horstmann S123 multi tariff electricity meters replaced this year due to faulty operation.

 

The most obvious problems were clock errors. The first meter was over two hours out and the second meter was over 1 hour out when compared to the GMT radio time signal. The meters should be aligned to GMT during the winter period. This means that a lot of off peak usage would be recorded as peak usage as one tends to program high energy usage for off peak times. The energy supplier has offered an adjustment, but I am not entirely happy about how this is calculated.

 

I also believe that the first meter was either subject to storm damage due to very local lightning strikes shortly after it was installed or had an inherently faulty register/memory. The register/memory, that records the number of units of electricity used, began reading much higher than usual after this storm event. A check meter was installed in February last year to monitor the erroneous meter. I made regular comparison readings during the time the check meter was installed and these showed the erroneous meter suffered from variable errors in the number of electricity units recorded over this period that were outside the allowed meter accuracy limits defined by OFCOM. Strangely the electricity supplier is denying this although they are admitting the clock errors exist.

 

The house has thermal insulation that exceeds current building regulations and although the heating uses an electric central heating boiler, it should be very economical to heat due to this high level of insulation. This is not reflected in the size of the bills being presented for the period the first meter was in use.

 

Has anyone had problems with their electricity meter accuracy, either clock errors, or wildly varying recorded consumption of electricity that bears no relation to actual use of electricity.

 

I have discussed the clock error issue with the electricity supplier and they have admitted that they have been having clock errors with meters but so far will not give any details about these errors and their frequency in writing. I wonder why? It may be that there are many meters showing problems with clock errors, which could be very embarrassing considering that the meters are supposedly certified as accurate. I believe that a large proportion of meters may be running incorrectly and it could be a good idea to check the time on your meter clock to ensure it is operating correctly. If you find that you have a clock error you will have been overcharged for some of your off peak usage.

 

Please report your findings on this thread.

 

AfonScimitar

Edited by AfonScimitar
Title should have been in bold
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you mean OFGEM not OFCOM, you can get at least 6 years worth of data from the supplier, so you can compare usage from various periods. You can also get the meter inspected independantly with the suppliers permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello rebel11,

 

You are correct I did mean OFGEM.

 

I have already requested all data held on the account since it was opened in 1997 by means of a SAR via Special Delivery on 11/01/11, which was delivered on 14/01/11. The energy supplier has until 23rd February to supply the data.

 

Historical usage comparison is tricky as the supply was first instigated on 09/07/07 to enable the house to be renovated. At this time the house had no electrical wiring as it had been gutted previously to enable ground-up renovation. Unfortunately the mortgage funds were delayed due to technicalities and the renovation subcontractors did not start work on the house until September 2007 after the funds were released. Residence did not begin until 5th December, as the house was not habitable until then. The old mechanical mechanism meter was for economy 7 and economy 10 was required for the under floor heating system so the new solid-state (integrated circuit) Horstmann S123 meter was fitted on 29/04/08. The early bills were estimated and they were so close to actual that they were paid without adjustment. Following a bad local thunderstorm the meter began to read much higher than previously and several telephone communications were made with the supplier’s customer service department concerning a much higher bill than usual. None of the customer services operatives were technically competent and all tried to override anything I said with their customer complaint script sheet. I did finally get through to someone who had the authority to adjust bills and this resulted in cancellation of a fairly high bill. When further higher bills arrived they were disputed until I eventually requested that the meter be checked for accuracy. The check meter was installed on 08/02/10 and removed on 29/06/10 along with the faulty meter. During the check period I took readings of both meters and found discrepancies between them. The supplier is denying this as they have a different set of figures for start and finish for this period. With access to these meters being no longer available, it is my word against theirs and, as the law stands firmly behind utility providers, I am doubtful that I can contest this, as would be the case on a level legal playing field. This is why I have asked for others who have had similar experiences to let me know on this thread, as it will help my case and theirs too should battle commence.

 

The first meter was removed on 29/06/10 when the second meter was fitted. I requested in writing that the old meter was retained for evidence and independent testing on 13/07/10. This communication was completely ignored. I have repeated this request several times by telephone and in writing with no further action on their part to verify retention of the meter until very recently. I consider this meter to be a crucial piece of evidence should the dispute escalate further. I have disputed the amount on the bills that were presented through the period that the faulty meter was in operation. I have also requested that the check meter and the second (replacement) meter that has been found to have a faulty clock be retained as evidence. It would appear that meters are not retained until disputes are settled, but are sent for exchange from the manufacturer at their earliest convenience thus removing any evidence of malfunction from scrutiny.

 

 

AfonScimitar

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello mattlamb,

This is somewhat worrying as the meter clock accuracy is important to ensure correct tariff billing. This means that there will be many people with dual tariff meters billed incorrectly.

I have been looking briefly for information about clock accuracy regulations but I have not found anything so far. Do you know the limits of accuracy allowed for the clock?

AfonScimitar

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...