Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Agree it is not a modification that needs to be disclosed to Insurers as changing the seats has not changed the risk.  
    • Frpm David Frost and Robert Jenrick: 'Conservatives must show we respect the votes in 2016 and 2019 and not give the Opposition the chance to undo the benefits of leaving the EU'   Sweep away the Brexit gloom – or Labour will unravel a huge gain ARCHIVE.PH archived 22 Apr 2024 05:47:50 UTC  
    • Please please help we were miss sold full fibre by EE July 22  Install couldn’t go ahead no equipment sent and no. Survey it was hell  foind out no full fibre in road so we had to go back to cooper no choice we involved. Ceo and they put in a man from customer resolution s  he was vile he told me I had to go to engineers  something very odd about the ex resolution s in bt basically they took my drive up said they Would put ducting in ready for full fibre we have got £ 40 for a hours upon hours phones stress and more told to go to ombudsman  then bill was £35 we called twice told it was that price as they had treated us appalling two weeks later all sky package gets pulled we call again our bill goes to 165 the next two weeks was hell trying to get yo bottom why it’s off our package it was all on in the end I spent a day on the phone  341 mins was the call anyway I got to the bottom it was this resolution man coveting up the other issue another deadlock  to cover it all up  they hide data  ee did so couldn’t get the miss sell in writing I have now only from sept  Basically now we tried getting full fibre and they have found my drive had to be taken up again which has sunk .  The engineer has placed the wrong ducting again under my drive and need s to be taken to again apparently and the pipe sticks up middle of the drive near gate not behind look so odd it’s a big as a drain pipe open to water and it’s below touching the electrical cables to hot tub . I was sent a letter from the ex resolution to say I had stopped the work  I haven’t  it’s so sadistic she covering up for her mate in that team as the orginal install he didn’t check it had been done correctly  I took to Twitter and posted on open reach they ignored me then after 3 calls of two weeks they sent a engineer bt ignored me ceo emails blocked tag on Twitter unanswered then we get someone from twitter send a engineer he written report to say it’s dangerous since we have  had a  letter to say our problem can not be resolved  then a email to say sorry we are leaving and we can’t get into our account Bt will not talk to us ofcom tells us nothing they can do Citzens advice said go to the police  we can’t go back to virgin due so mass issue with them only option is sky  but point is they make out we have canceled we haven’t we have this mess on our drive dangeous work we are in hell  it’s like she covering up for this collegue it’s all very odd I am disabled and they like played mentaly with me open reach say bt resolved the issue no they have not  I recon they have terminated us making our we have  to hide it from mgt  Help it’s hell I don’t sleep we have 29 may we have tried  calling they just ignore me  at first they are so lovely as they say I am then they go to nnamager and say we can’t say anything to you end call  Scared police are rubbish I need help even typing is so painfull  Thankyou  anyone hello be so grateful     
    • There's a thread somewhere about someone sending the baillifs against Wizzair that is quite hilarious. I would love to see someone do the same to Ryanair. Question is, should you be the one to take that role. You are entitled to the £220, if your flight was from the UK. If it was TO the UK I suppose it is more of a grey area... though the airlines I know have been using £220 as standard. Not that surprising for Ryanair, the worst cheapskates in the universe, to go for the lower amount, and if you forward this to the CEO he will probably have a jolly good laugh and give his accountants a verbal bonus. After all he's the one who said and I paraphrase "F*** our customers, they'll fly with us again anyway". While we would all love to see Ryanair get wooped in court again, I have to join my fellow posters in thinking it's not worth the hassle for (hypothetically) £7 and not sure it will expedite the payment either. It's already an achievement that you got them to accept to pay.
    • The US competition watchdog has taken legal action to stop Tapestry's $8.5bn takeover of rival Capri.View the full article
  • 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

Honours/Drydens claimform - old SLC Loans stayed - now n244 sj/strike out


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2630 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 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

as mentioned, you need to counter their wit statement.

eg their para 15, 26 etc, they say their terms rely on a notice (their def notice was december, the claim being issued in october just before the 6 yrs after the def notice). you need to argue bar (cause of action) goes from the missed payments prior to october (claim issue), not the def notice. and any other issues.

otherwise, no bar if J takes it from the def notice. and if theres no other points in defence...

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is re an app'n for summary judgment/strike out (as per Civil procedure Rule part 24 etc), and the current order is as per yr post #162, you have to submit 'amended evidence in opposition to their application' ..

you have to file and serve yr 'amended evidence' by the 15th. ie send last post today or tomorrow (registered next day delivery)

as was mentioned earlier on thread, If the statute bar time period (ie 6 years) is deemed to have started from the (default) notice (it seems that is what honours are arguing), ie in December 09, and the claim was issued in October 15, then it probably wld not be barred. You need to argue that it shld go from the last payment, which was before October 09.

ie arguing that there shld not be summy judgment etc as there is a 'real prospect of defending the claim/issue...' (CPR 24)

as previously asked, are there any other poss issues that cld poss also be mentioned in evidence. eg

proper execution of agreement

proof of issue/service of a (mostly) compliant default notice (they mentioned one being sent)

any unfairness

etc

if the J holds that it is not statute barred, and there are no other reasons/issues, then there may be summary judgment against.

give andy etc an urgent nudge also.

ps

you are looking to convince the J that there is a 'real prospect of defending the claim/issue'.

that it shld not be decided summarily, and shld go to trial/hearing. evidence?

statute - s5 Limitation Act says

'An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued'.

cause - you cld say is (accrued) from the last payment missed due after deferment expiry (non thereafter)

ie the breach, and not the notice that they allude to as such notice is procedural re the breach.

.... (like what i posted before).

they have highlighted terms, are there any terms in yr favour that can be highlighted?

execution - was the agreement properly executed, as required by the consumer credit act.

did you do a cca request, has that been satisfied?

although a default notice shouldn't be re bar period

- they say they sent one,

you said you dont recall receiving one.

put them to proof that one was issued and sent.

their logs shld show whether one was sent or not.

if deemed issued/sent, to show that it was compliant.

anything else?

 

just some poss issues IMO, seeing as you are nearing yr deadline

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ford

 

Thanks ford, i didnt see from andyorch, and im a bit stuck at the moment.

 

should i write what you wrote above in my statement

 

Yes i did CCA request, i didnt receive anything apart from the bundle given to me by the dj

 

Please if there is anyone around to help,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmmm, good morning all

 

I received a letter from court which read as....

 

Upon it appearing to the court that the defendant (whose evidence was filed late) had not secured a copy of the statement of xxxxxx filled in support of the application.

 

it is ordered thaat

 

1. Defendant have permission to file at court and serve on the claimant's solicitors amended evidence in opposition to the application by 4pm on 15 Feb 2016

 

2.The claimant has permission to file and serve evidence in reply by 29 Feb 2016

 

3.Hearing adjourned to first open date after 35 days. Time estimate 1 hour

 

4.Costs in the application

 

 

Just bumping this as it requires attention and submitting by tomorrow.

 

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

In the XXXXXXXXX county courticon Claim no. XXXXXXXX

 

Between :

 

XXXXXXXXX Claimant

And

XXXXXXXXX

Defendant

 

Second Witness Statement of Confusedoldstudent in response to the Claimants application for Summary Judgment CPR 24

 

I Confusedoldstudent of (insert address) WILL STATE AS FOLLOWS:

 

1.I am the defendant in this case and state the following in support of my defence dated xxxxxxx in response to a claim made by the claimant dated xx October 2012 and in objection to the claimants application for Summary Judgment dated xxxxxx. The claim has been stayed since xxxxxxxx.

 

2.The Claimants and the Courts attention is drawn to CPR 23.7.(2)

 

" (2) If a copy of the application notice is to be served by the court, the applicant must, when he files the application notice, file a copy of any written evidence in support.

(3) When a copy of an application notice is served it must be accompanied by –

(a) a copy of any written evidence in support; and

(b) a copy of any draft order which the applicant has attached to his application.

 

The Claimant failed to comply with the above and I was only served copies on the day of the hearing

 

3. My defence

 

The Claimant's claim was issued on (xx October 2012).

 

The Claimant defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation acticon 1980. If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

 

The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £x or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

 

4.I will contend that this Student loan was entered into in 1997 and therefore old style or ‘mortgage’ student loans which are Consumer Credit Agreements pursuant to the CCA1974.

 

The claimant contends and confirmed in writing that that the default notice was issued 19th December 2006.

The termination notice was not issued until 21st June 2007.Therefore the debt was and is not statute barred.

 

5.It is my contention statute - s5 limitation Act states..

 

'An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued'.

 

The cause -(accrued) from the last payment missed due date after deferment expiry (non thereafter) ie the breach, and not the notice that the Claimant alludes to as such notice is procedural re the breach.A Claimant can not elongate the passage of time by relying on the later termination notice date,cause of action will run from the Default Notice date.

 

The claim was issued October 2012, the loan was taken in 1997 with no payment or acknowledgment ever made in a period of 15 years prior to the claim.

 

6.Originally administered by the Student Loans Company (SLC), these loans are repaid at a fixed monthly amount over a period of between five and seven years. Interest rates are based on the retail prices index (RPI) rate of inflation. Crucially, graduates can defer repayments if they earn less than £28,775 a year. The loans are written off 25 years after graduation or when the borrower turns 50, whichever happens first.

 

7. In any event it is denied that I was ever served a Default Notice served under Section 87 (1) on 16/12/2006

It is further denied that I was ever served Notice of Assignment from Student Loans (SLC) to the Claimant pursuant to sec 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925

 

8. In the circumstances the court is invited to conclude that there are reasonable grounds to suppose that I will be able to successfully defend the Claimant’s claim at trial and that the Claimant’s application for summary judgment against me should be dismissed pursuant to CPR 24 PD 5.1 (2 or 3)

 

I believe the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true

 

 

signature xxxxxxxx

 

Dated.xxxxxxx

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

It is ordered that

 

1. Defendant have permission to file at court and serve on the claimant's solicitors amended evidence in opposition to the application by 4pm on 15 Feb 2016

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

confused

still with us?

and, if J accepts is barred or otherwise no sum judgment, then likewise can ask for their claim to be dismissed/struck out with costs.

i see in yr statement para 5 you said is from the def notice. bar wld need to be argued prior to that as the claim was issued in october, no payments after deferment expiry august.?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

:thumb:

 

out of interest. re post #147 did you (cag) have a look at the case i linked there. do you et al agree with it (its para 38 on etc).

i dont know if there has been any recent domestic higher authority (rather than county), but that reasoning seems to make sense to me. and worth arguing?

ah ok, above post has been moved here.

any update confusedoldstudent?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah ok, above post has been moved here.

 

any update confusedoldstudent?

 

Yes Ford...trying to unhijack the other thread:-)

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

I will try to have a look later....when Im quiet :-)

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Honours/Drydens claimform - old SLC Loans
  • dx100uk changed the title to Honours/Drydens claimform - old SLC Loans stayed - now n244 sj/strike out
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...