Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I can only speak from personal experience. But a similar thing happened to me. Seriously dented door.  I made the other insurance pay. They regarded it as a write off. Took the money, replaced the door. Never heard anything more about it.    Except clearly someone sold my details to claims company, because I got loads of calls in bad English for a few month's 
    • The incident was 03rd March 2024 - and that was the only letter that I have received from MET 15th April 2024 The charge I paid was at the Stansted Airport exit gate (No real relevance now - I thought this charge was for that!!).   Here is the content of email to them (Yes I know I said I was the driver !!!!) as said above -  I thought this charge was for that!! "Stansted Airport" Dear “To whom it may concern” My name is ??  PCN:  ?? Veh Reg: Date of Incident: 03rd March 2024 I have just received a parking charge final reminder letter, dated 10th April 2024 - for an overstay.  This is the first to my knowledge of any overstay. I am aware that I am out of the 28 days, I don’t mean to be rude, this feels like it is a scam My movements on this day in question are, I pulled into what looked like a service station on my way to pick my daughter and family up from Stansted airport. The reason for me pulling into this area was to use a toilet, so I found Starbucks, and when into there, after the above, I then purchased a coffee. After which I then continued with my journey to pick my daughter up. (however after I sent this email I remember that Starbucks was closed so I then I walked over to Macdonalds) There was no signs about parking or any tickets machines to explains about the parking rules. Once at Stansted, I entered and then paid on exit.  So Im not show where I overstayed my welcome.. With gratitude    
    • Just to enlarge on Dave's great rundown of your case under Penalty. In the oft quoted case often seen on PCNs,  viz PE v Beavis while to Judges said there was a case for claiming that £100 was a penalty, this was overruled in this case because PE had a legitimate interest in keeping the car park free for other motorists which outweighed the penalty. Here there is no legitimate interest since the premises were closed. Therefore the charge is a penalty and the case should be thrown out for that reason alone.   The Appeals dept need informing about what and what isn't a valid PCN. Dummies. You should also mention that you were unable to pay by Iphone as there was no internet connection and there was a long  queue to pay on a very busy day . There was no facility for us to pay from the time of our arrival only the time from when we paid at the machine so we felt that was a bit of a scam since we were not parked until we paid. On top of that we had two children to load and unload in the car which should be taken into account since Consideration periods and Grace periods are minimum time. If you weren't the driver and PoFA isn't compliant you are off scot free since only the driver is liable and they are saying it was you. 
    • Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x
  • 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

Asset Link Capital (No1) Limited - First National(GE)


tiatia
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6238 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

Can someone help please with any info

 

1. Are asset related to FN or GE in anyway?

 

2. Received a letter 2 years ago - re assignment from Asset Link

 

"Sale of your debt"

"We, Asset Link Capital hereby give you notice or intimation that on //////////First National assigned to us the benefit of the debt that you owe them under an agreement. As a result of this assignment your debt is now owed to Asset Link. We have appointed Link Financial to administer and recover your debt on our behalf."

 

Question is this

 

I received a Schedule of Inhibition (charging order) from them last nov. The name on it for the pursuers is First National Bank. Asset is not mentioned in any way. Why is this when the debt has been sold?

 

3. We had had charges added to our account for a couple of unpaid direct debits (£40.00 a charge) before we went to court. If these charges were illegal, then would the amount that they took us to court for not be wrong?

 

Any help will be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi, is anyone abe to give me some advice or info as not only did I have charges on account before it went to court to begin with, i also believe the ppi was missold to me. If so, I,m trying to find out it if they took me to court for the wrong amount.

 

Any help appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone help please with any info

 

1. Are asset related to FN or GE in anyway?

 

2. Received a letter 2 years ago - re assignment from Asset Link

 

"Sale of your debt"

"We, Asset Link Capital hereby give you notice or intimation that on //////////First National assigned to us the benefit of the debt that you owe them under an agreement. As a result of this assignment your debt is now owed to Asset Link. We have appointed Link Financial to administer and recover your debt on our behalf."

 

Question is this

 

I received a Schedule of Inhibition (charging order) from them last nov. The name on it for the pursuers is First National Bank. Asset is not mentioned in any way. Why is this when the debt has been sold?

 

3. We had had charges added to our account for a couple of unpaid direct debits (£40.00 a charge) before we went to court. If these charges were illegal, then would the amount that they took us to court for not be wrong?

 

Any help will be appreciated.

 

I'm not entirely sure what it is you're asking..But you must understand that none of these charges are ILLEGAL, they are UNLAWFUL and there's a big difference...I know you can get a CCJ set aside if the CCJ amount is made up mostly (if not all) of charges, I know nothing about charging orders though..Sit tight as I'm sure someone here can answer that for you soon enough

Just hate every DCA out there

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can probably claim the charges back if unlawful

 

First National seem to regularly obtain charging orders and then sell them on to Asset Link which does seem a bit strange

 

Is there any equity on your property?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there

 

Asset Link is the company that GE/First National use when they sell bad debts. One of my accounts was passed to them but I am currently disputing it because the agreement was not executed properly and it has no authority from me to sell the debt or to pass it to a DCA.

 

If Asset Link own the debt then it should be them that holds the charging order against your house, not First National as they have sold the debt.

 

Have you been keeping in touch with Asset Link? What is the general run of events leading up to the situation you are in now?

 

Look forward to hearing from you

Gemspan

Link to post
Share on other sites

FN had a decree against us.

 

It was still with First Nat and in 2005 I received a charge for payment of money from Fn solictors. I phoned up and set up a monthly amount. One month later received a letter re sale of the debt.

 

I began looking into it and reading up and a lot of things came to light that we did not know at the time we went to court.

 

I am disputing the amount of the debt gemspan for several reasons. I wrote to them in last march disputing the amount. I sent a full letter detailing why with copies of all documentation and they refused to enter into discussion stating

 

"it should be noted that only the benefit of the debt has been assigned to this company. Further, to now raise such queries with respect of the terms and conditions of the original agreement, some 9 years after its inception is not accepted."

After a few letters i phoned once and offered approx 30% in full and final. They refused and sent me a payment book and an amount to settle.

As far as I am concerned this account is still in dispute.

In Nov a charging order was served on us in the name of First National.

 

I don,t understand the assignment bit, should i be dealing with GE. We do intend to fight this and are quite prepared to go to court under the Unfair Relationships Act when it comes into force.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tiatia

 

I think I would speak to Trading Standards about this. If the debt is in dispute then a schedule of inhibition should not have been placed on your house. Have you sent them a CCA and asked for a copy of the original agreement? Have you sent a SAR letter to them asking for all the correspondence they have in relation to your dealings with them? If not, I would do that now. Send off both and include a cheque for £11. This will give you a breakdown of exactly what is happening on the account and when the inhibition was placed on your house.

 

How much is the debt for? Have you been paying the debt or have you entered into an agreement with them. What is the background? Sorry to ask so many questions, Im honestly not prying; I just cant understand how they can suddenly place this on your house without getting a CCJ etc.,

 

Look forward to hearing from you

Annie

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had a copy of the credit agreement sent.

They got a decree(ccj in 2000).

 

The charge for payment came in 2005 as payments were not up to date due to personal problems.

 

We came to an agreement to pay their solicitors and everything was fine.

 

Then we received a letter from Asset saying they had bought the debt and the same solictors wrote and told us although the debt had been sold to continue paying to the solicitors.

We did then we got letters teling us to pay to Link so we did.

 

Then we woud get a letter from the solicitors saying we hadn,t paid.

 

Eventually we got a letter from the solicitors saying we were to pay only to Link.

it was at this point I began going over all my documents and reading up.

 

We wrote to Asset to dispute the debt because of the amount for many reasons.

We stopped payments .

 

As previously stated I have a letter stating its not accepted.

I rewrote to head of disputes.

I was given a contact name.

I offered him approx 30% of the debt.

He refused.

I said I would be taking it further.

 

My last letter was in July stating here is the settlement figure and payin book.

Then nothing but they put a scedule of inhibition(CHARGING ORDER) out on the house at the end of the year.

This came in the name of First Nat.

 

I have heard nothing from Asset since last July.

We contacted TS who were useless, i have read better advice on here.

 

I am now unsure who to contact as to the dispute with the debt - Asset or GE.

 

I have not sent anyone a sar yet, but luckily I have kept all documention and most correspondence since the beginning .

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Tiatia

 

As you have a CCJ then the reason they have placed the inhibition on the house is because you have not kept to the payment terms of the CCJ. They are legally entitled to do this.

 

If you feel that most of the debt is made up of charges then I would apply to the court to have the CCJ overturned. If the charges only make up a small part of the debt then I would write to GE/FN and ask them to remove this amount from the balance outstanding.

 

I dont know how easy it would be to get a decree overturned if only a small amount was charges. Also, the statute of limitations in Scotland is 5 years and I dont know of anybody who has successfully claimed beyond that date. If the CCJ was placed in 2000 then I really dont know how you would stand. Try posting something on the Scottish forum as the peeps on there are more in tune with Scottish Law.

 

I would just ask the question. Can I get the CCJ overturned as part is made up of charges. CCJ dates back to 2000.

 

I hope this helps

Kind regards

Annie

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...