Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for that "read me", It's a lot to digest, lots of legal procedure. There was one thing that I was going to mention to you,  but in one of the conversations in that thread it was mentioned that there may be spies on the Forum,  this is something that I've read quite some time ago in a previous thread. What I had in mind was to wait for the thirty days after their reply to my CCA request and then send the unenforceable letter. I was hoping that an absence of signature could be the Silver Bullet but it seems that there are lot of layers to peel on this Onion.  
    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • 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 to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try 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 amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. 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!!  
  • 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

Another Sigma Claim Form - M+S card


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3562 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

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Sigma are unaware what happens if a defence is entered in response....well they are aware its costs money to proceed but is it worth it on debt that they have paid peanuts for and are just chancing thie luck on issuing a Summons.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

This stolen unashamedly from CitizenB – it certainly applies to Sigma, in my view.

 

In Barton Henderson Rasen v Merrett [1993] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 540 Saville J said that it is an abuse of the

court’s process to issue proceedings with no intention of taking the case any further. In

contentious matters the courts exist for the purpose of determining claims. Therefore, starting

a claim with no intention of pursuing it is not using the court’s processes for the purposes

for which they were designed. ‘Parking’ proceedings in an attempt to achieve a settlement

with other defendants justified striking out with indemnity costs in Sodeca SA v NE Investments

Inc. [2002] EWHC 1700 (QB), LTL 27/8/2002.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes DB or otherwise chancing their luck that no defence will be submitted...perfect quotation for the basis of a SO.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

‘Parking’ proceedings in an attempt to achieve a settlement

with other defendants justified striking out with indemnity costs in Sodeca SA v NE Investments

Inc. [2002] EWHC 1700 (QB), LTL 27/8/2002

 

See above!

 

 

I think I understand Donkey.

 

What is the normal time scale between submitting defence and hearing something back? Is a month reason enough to believe they are parking?

 

Forgive me if I am asking ridiculous questions to which the answers are obvious.

 

My partner thought the delay might be due to the big pile they had on the desk.:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have 28 days to inform the court that they wish to proceed, at which point AQs will be issued. Failure to respond means the claim is automatically stayed, but the claimant can apply to have the stay lifted at a future date.

 

What Sigma appear to be doing is chucking out claim forms like confetti as a debt collection tool, which could be proven to be an abuse of process IF they do not litigate further on any contested claims. This would be prima facie evidence for use in a strike out application, based on the above para, as Andy says.

 

Worth a complaint to the OFT and the SRA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but the claimant can apply to have the stay lifted at a future date.

 

Ooh Donkey do they have to pay for the application to have the stay lifted - please say yes!!!

 

I for one will not be making an application to strike out. As has been said on previous threads the longer they leave their stay it must give us an advantageous point with the Judge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This received on Cosalt's thread from Skemdosser

 

 

Hi all been meaning to get on here the past couple of days-I have just received a N279 Notice of Discontinuance from HL. Got a wasted costs application to think about now...

 

 

My my, what do they have up their sleeve I wonder!!

 

HH

Link to post
Share on other sites

They’re crumbling...

 

As I said ages ago, their modus operandi is a simple case of economics. For every one person who comes on CAG, and defends, there are probably 99 who pay up or get a CCJ. CAG is but a flea bite on their arse, sadly.

 

And yes, they would have to apply via N244 to lift the stay, and pay a fee,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Can i just give all sigma M&S peeps a shout ...and all those who recd letter addressed to the wrong person (albeit with the correct acct details !).

 

PLEASE check your credit record with the agencies ( or a least callcredit - try noodle for a free account), as Sigma have recorded under "known by another name/alias", the name of the lady they addressed my orig letters too ... (noted they didn't get the partial claim papers name wrong though !)

 

Anyhoo, I can only assume they've done this with everyone who suffered their "system error", even though its a fault from their end ... and I assume the lady whom recd her letter addressed to me, has her recorded alias as my name ... what a mess !!

 

Anyhoo, you may want to have a check and raise a query withthem .... I've done this, waiting for them to get back to me.

 

There are a few other errors in my record, whether this is just Callcredit being carp or what I dont' know, but I've raised 4 errors in total ... so make sure you have a thorough read and spot any probs !!!

 

Here's the link to join ... https://www.noddle.co.uk/

 

Or try the normal sources/free trial periods ...

 

Thought this was worth a heads up to everyone ...

 

Abs x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

My credit file did show up this other person's name, when I disputed this with Noddle saying this person does not live there, Sigma amended it to show my name including my middle name - never used it in anything. This was in the bit where it says "also known as/alias". Statute barred this year so Sigma:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...