Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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!??
    • Massive issues from Scottish Power I wonder if someone could advise next steps. Tennant moved out I changed the electric into my name I was out the country at the time so I hadn't been to the flat. During sign up process they tried to hijack my gas supply as well which I made it clear I didn't want duel fuel from them but they still went ahead with it. Phoned them up again. a few days later telling them to make sure they stopped it but they said too late ? had to get my current supplier to cancel it. Paid £50 online to ensure there was money covering standing charges etc eventually got to the flat no power. Phoned Scottish Power 40 minutes to get through they state I have a pay as you go meter and that they had set me up on a credit account so they need to send an engineer out which they will pass my details onto. Phone called from engineer asking questions , found out the float is vacant so not an emergency so I have to speak to Scottish Power again. Spoke with the original person from Scottish Power who admitted a mistake (I had told her it was vacant) and now states that it will take 4 weeks to get an appointment but if I want to raise a complaint they will contact me in 48 hours and it will be looked at quicker. Raised a complaint , complaints emailed me within 24 hours to say it will take 7 days till he speaks with me. All I want is power in the property would I be better switching over to EON who supply the gas surely they could sort it out quicker? One thing is for sure I will never bother with Scottish Power ever again.    
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3954 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

Hi, I need some help. I had one of these left by Peter Nonle Watt.

 

I had a CCJ in April for some outstanding rent on a business unit. I had no notification that bailiffs may be attending.

 

They want £3000 which I don't have.

 

What can I do about this??

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he;s a HCEO. I'll flag your thread for admin notice and to get it moved to the right forum.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I need some help. I had one of these left by Peter Nonle Watt.

 

I had a CCJ in April for some outstanding rent on a business unit. I had no notification that bailiffs may be attending.

 

They want £3000 which I don't have.

 

What can I do about this??

 

Is it possible you can start from the beginning so we can see what we are dealing with?

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible you can start from the beginning so we can see what we are dealing with?

 

Ok, I had a business unit three years ago which I vacated.

 

The landlord wanted to charge me money that I didn't agree with.

 

Up to this point I've been ignoring the request for payment.

 

He applied to the court for a CCJ which was granted in April. I'm only aware of this after checking my credit file.

 

I did have the blue Northampton forms, but chose to ignore those as well. (Stupidly)

 

I have had no correspondence from anybody, including the court. Today high court bailiffs turn up while we were out and levied on items outside the house.

 

I don't know what to do. Should I have had paperwork to say the court decided in the creditors favour?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you ignored the original paperwork from the Court your Creditor will have been awarded Judgment but you should have been informed of this by the Court. As for it now having been transferred for enforcement then unfortunately there is no requirement for anyone to inform you and the first you will know is when someone calls - which is what has happened.

 

In what capacity did you trade - sole trader, partnership, Ltd Co etc? Is the Writ in this name? You say they have levied on goods outside - can you list them exactly as described on the Notice of Seizure?

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You also state that the High Court Enforcement Officer "levied upon goods outside". Can you be a bit more specific...such as; did they levy upon a car, lorry, caravan etc. If so...do these items belong to you....are they on finance etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You also state that the High Court Enforcement Officer "levied upon goods outside". Can you be a bit more specific...such as; did they levy upon a car, lorry, caravan etc. If so...do these items belong to you....are they on finance etc.

 

I traded as sole trader.

 

They levied on two unroadworthy cars (restoration projects) in my drive, along with a trailer, set if alloy wheels and garden patio furniture. All of which I own. Along with "all other goods required to satisfy writ"

It also seems that I'm missing a page, as there are some numbered points, but these only start at point 5.

I just want to get this resolved. I don't know how/who to make an offer of payment by instalments

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to apply for a stay of execution to the writ N244 and also make a realistic offer by way of an N245

 

With both of these if you are on any benefits you need to check if you qualify for fee remission(see form ex160)

 

Take a look at the aforementioned forms and if you struggle to complete or understand them, then come back here and help will be at hand.

 

Applying for the stay has to be your priority and if your local County Court is classed as a district registry then you can file your application there in person and explain it is urgent, if not then you will need to send to the High Court as given on the writ.

 

The N245 is pretty straight forward and you will need to complete an income and expenditure sheet to show your offer is the maximum amount affordable to you. When doing this always remember you are allowed to have a 'life' so only ever offer what you can comfortably afford and will be able to sustain payment to.

Edited by wonkeydonkey
Link to post
Share on other sites

Following the above and if successful all enforcement is halted and unless you fail at a future date to make a payment on time the matter is under your control.

 

I would suggest you write to the HCEO company concerned and advise them of your set aside application but remember until such time as the stay is rubber stamped they are entitled to continue with enforcement, if they return while everything is being processed then it will be frowned on by the courts if they fail to take everything into consideration.

 

It will also pay you to rquest a full breakdown of the fees applied to the writ (in writing) and then post them up here so we can see if they are'questionable' as if often the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It also seems that I'm missing a page, as there are some numbered points, but these only start at point 5.

 

Usually it is page one of a three part form 55 (2 x NoS and the WPA) that has the amount owed which includes points 1 to 4. As you know the amount owed I would presume you have points 1 to 4 also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your help

 

Breakdown of the Total Levy

 

Judgement Debt - £1853.95

Judgement Costs - £0

Execution Costs - £60

Interest 8% to 1/5/13 - £27.23 @ £0.41 per day from 1/5/13

Sheriff's Fees - £822.76

VAT - £164.55

TOTAL - £2928.49

 

Sheriff's Fees seem pretty damn high to me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to any High Court Enforcement Officer who may be reading this reply but I personally consider that "Sheriff fees" of £822 on a debt os £1853 is steep.

 

i totally agree with you... WD will vouch that we had similar amounts to a similar debt.........not right at all they make things ten times worse in my eyes as people who cant afford the debt certainly cant afford the debt with there "steep" fees added.......... and i for 1 would not say sorry if my comment is read by any but i think they are the lowest of the low

 

and in fact after checking they added £1300 for a debt of just £695.....making it £2100 pound near enough ....rant over

Link to post
Share on other sites

Distress as a remedy is problematic, as if the debtor cannot afford to repay the original debt, there is no chance they can afford it after the fees have doubled or tripled it.

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 OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still to be convinced that HCEO's are any more different than any other type of Bailiff particularly with regard to the fees they charge.

 

 

i agree PT they like to think they are different because they have "special" powers so they say ...the words "high court" give them super powers so they think...but when it comes down to it they are not much different and they charge ridiculous amounts of money that most dont have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What worries me about HCEO's is the frequent way in which an officer attending the premises of a debtor levies upon 5 or 6 random cars and, when questioned try to rely upon the old "chestnut" of Observer v Gordon which was even dismissed by the Ombudsman in the case of council tax. In so many cases that I have seen the officers knows perfectly well that the vehicles in question are nothing to do with the debtor and to my mind "levies" in any event so as to ensure that he can charge such high fees.

 

The case of Observer v Gordon has long since been overtaken by the appeal case of DSI Foods where the owner of a High Court company ( Shergroup Ltd) attempted to claim protection from the court for a significant PERSONAL claim when her officers went to the WRONG address. Despite being shown evidence that the goods in the premises were nothing to do with the debtor, the officers "seized goods" and in doing so.....barged their way into a "secure area" of the premises and contaminated a a significant amount of food ( the company have contracts with various airlines to provide in flight meals for passengers). The officers only left after the company's accountant was forced to pay the debt from his personal credit card.

 

The Judge made it clear that the officers must NOT assume that all goods on the premises belong to company "A" and instead, they MUST ensure that they read any documents shown to them and take into consideration what is being told to them VERBALLY by the owner of the goods.

 

The owner of Shergroup LOST the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...