Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I hope Lord Frost is OK. Islamists and the woke Left are uniting to topple the West ARCHIVE.PH archived 18 Apr 2024 19:12:37 UTC  
    • Ok you are in the clear. The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 for two reasons. The first is that in Section 9 [2][e]  says the PCN must "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges ". It does not say that even though it continues correctly with blurb about the driver. The other fault is that there is no parking period mentioned. Their ANPR cameras do show your arrival and departure times but as that at the very least includes driving from the entrance to the parking space then later leaving the parking space and driving to the exit. It also doesn't allow for finding a parking spot: manoeuvering into it avoiding parking on the lines: possibly having to stop to allow pedestrians/other cars to pass in front of you; returning the trolley after finishing shopping; loading children disabled people in and out of the car, etc etc.  All of that could easily add five, ten or even 15 minutes to your time which the ANPR cameras cannot take into account. So even if it was only two hours free time you could  still have been within the  time since there is a MINIMUM of 15 minutes Grace period when you leave the car park. However as they cannot even manage to get their PCN to comply with the Act you as keeper cannot be pursued. Only the driver is now liable and they do not know who was driving as you have not appealed and perhaps unwittingly given away who was driving. So you do not owe them a penny. No need to appeal. Let them waste their money pursuing you . 
    • If Labour are elected I hope they go after everyone who made huge amounts of money out of this, by loading the company with debt. The sad thing is that some pension schemes, including the universities one, USS, will lose money along with customers.
    • What's the reason for not wanting a smart meter? Personally I'm saving a pile on a tariff only available with one. Today electricity is 17.17p/kWh. If the meter is truly past its certification date the supplier is obliged to replace it. If you refuse to allow this then eventually they'll get warrant and do so by force. Certified life varies between models and generations, some only 10 or 15 years, some older types as long as 40 years or maybe even more. Your meter should have its certified start date marked somewhere so if you doubt the supplier you can look up the certified life and cross check.
    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
  • 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

When does the time limit for statute barring start?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6247 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 originally posted this in the welcome forum but have been advised it would be more appropriate here.

 

I look forward to any advice you can give me.

 

Thanks.

 

Hi Everyone

 

I'm finding this site really useful and have already contacted all my creditors (I had a traumatising experience of setting up and shortly afterwards folding a small business in 2000/1) under the CCA to see if I can avoid spending the rest of my life paying off these debts. Most of them have been sold on through several DCAs at this point.

 

I wonder if anyone can help me with this particular issue though.

 

What I am unclear about (amongst many other things) is that I have one debt with NatWest which we originally believed was the liability of the business. NatWest were informed that the business had been folded (it was a limited company but with reference to the previously mentioned debts, I took on a lot of personal borrowing to keep the thing going).

 

NatWest did nothing for three years and when I and my partner recieved the initial letter from them in 2004, I assumed they must be correct and I was liable and I contacted them with a payment plan. However my business partner asserted that the debt was not our personal liability. I therefore wrote and withdrew my offer. Eventually my partner accepted liability and has been paying a limited sum, monthly, since 2004. I have never made any payments and my only contact has been to refute liability other than my initial payment offer in 2004, which I subsequently withdrew.

 

I am contacted periodically by DCAs but write denying liability and so far have not been pursued any further.

 

Is it possible to consider this debt (for which I understand there is joint liablility) statute barred as far as I am personally concerned as I have never made any payments or will I remain liable for the life of the debt as my partner is making payments?

 

Do I have to wait until 6 years from 2004 when I made my erroneous offer?

 

Is my response to the DCAs denying liability considered to be 'contact' under section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980 and I therefore have to wait until six years has passed since the last of these?

 

I'd appreciate any advice you can give me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be six years from the date of accrual of the cause of action. This would be the point when action could have first been brought against you. This was confirmed by Reeves v Butcher [1891].

You will need to check WHO is personally liable for the debt? Is it in the business name? Any personal guarantees?

If you are jointly & several liable for the debt so long as payments are being made the 6 years would be reset for you everytime that payment is made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks sequenci - the loan was in the business name but Nat West say that we signed personal guarentees.

 

It was a joint loan so (from what you're saying) the fact that my business partner is making payments means that I can't claim it is statute barred even though I have never made a payment.

 

Is there any way of avoiding it because of the three year time lag before they took any action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it turns out that debt was a liability of the business and you did not act as guarantor then there is nothing they can do to enforce it.

 

If, however, it turns out that you are liable for the debt then I'm afraid the date you have to consider is that date that you or your business partner last made a payment to the account.

 

The Limitations Act 1980 only applies when no contact has been made between the creditor and debtor within the given time limit. The time limit begins when you last admitted owing the money or made a payment.

 

Edited - Just read your reply re. guaranteeing the loan, so it looks like you will be liable and you would still have to wait a full six years for it to become time barred. Sorry... :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks sequenci - the loan was in the business name but Nat West say that we signed personal guarentees.

 

 

The obviouse questrion is do you have a copy of the original agreement confrimng the terms of what you signed?

 

If not send them a CCA request to make sure you know what the terms were then people can advise accordingly.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Glenn UK.

 

I don't have a copy of the original agreement - Buchanan, Clark and Wells were the last contact that I had from a DCA in relation to this debt and they sent me a letter back saying they had closed the file and referring me to Credit Management Services, Telford but failed to supply me with their address. Incidentally they also failed to return my £1 postal order!

 

Should I now go ahead and contact Credit Management Services (whoever they are) even though I have never heard from them or should I go back to NatWest as the original creditor?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should I now go ahead and contact Credit Management Services

 

Nat west in house debt manaement services.

Ask for copies of the persoanl guarantees as proog that this debt should be paid by you or your partner personally.

Have you an yrecollection of siging a guarantee?

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly remember signing forms and I'm presuming that as my ex- business partner is making payments that she has accepted that she/we is/are liable. However, I've been in touch with her and advised her to register here and get some advice.

 

Incidentally do you have an address for Credit Management Services as I it appears I need to contact them.

 

If I contact them does this start the six years running as so far, as I've said, I have never made any payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

certainly remember signing forms and I'm presuming that as my ex- business partner is making payments that she has accepted that she/we is/are liable. However, I've been in touch with her and advised her to register here and get some advice.

 

Well if you signed a personal guarantedd then you are jointly liable.

 

Incidentally do you have an address for Credit Management Services as I it appears I need to contact them.

 

 

No but I beleive they are in Telford - call your local branch they may be able to help.

 

If I contact them does this start the six years running as so far, as I've said, I have never made any payments

 

Makes no difference your partner has been paying a joint debt therfore the six years starts from the last payment and then the next and so on.

You are joint and severally liable.

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The critical issue is to find out what you signed.

 

the bank wont tell you if you are not olbiged to pay the debt, they will continue to collect and chase both parties.

 

Send them the CCA request today!

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think it covers agreements made under the CCA, it may be that this agreement being related to a business wasn't covered.

 

However, the basis of the agreement seems to rely on the OP and his partners personal liability.

 

if the bank are to enforce the agreement then the OP needs to have sight of the T&C to enable him her to assert their rights.

 

It might also be worth simply asking for a copy of the original agreement as well.

 

ultimately if the lender refuse to supply the agreement then the debtor could refuse to pay and force court action, whereupon they will have to supply the agreement as evidence of their rights.

 

This of course is not a route i would suggest because there are obvious risks involved.

 

However, one cannot enforce a contract without evidence that the contract exists and what the terms were.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...