Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
a jacuzzi with Bananarama. I have not lived in Bolton since 1986
Posts
6,823
noomill v Student Loan Company ***WON***
Just posted my Small Claim application off to the court.
I've added a little twist to the usual Particulars of Claim to bring a little bit of discomfort to the boss dude.
6). The Applicant asks the Court to order that the Chief Executive Officer of the Respondent, Student Loans Company Limited, do write to the Applicant within 14 days, concurring that in levying these disproportionate charges, the Student Loans Company Limited erred in law and confirm future arrears letters to all customers of the Student Loans Company Limited will be charged at no more than the actual cost to the Student Loans Company Limited, as required by Statute, Case law and consumer directives.
Don't no anything about student loans, but the penalty charges are the same in every complaint on this site. So in my opinion that looks pretty impressive. Good luck
a jacuzzi with Bananarama. I have not lived in Bolton since 1986
Posts
6,823
Re: noomill v Student Loan Company
Same applies to all cases of penalty charges.
The SLC gives the impression of having some permission from the OFT, HM Government, the Bishop of Wakefield and possibly even divine sanction from the gods of Imperial Rome for charging £20 a letter.
Ive been told in as many that "We can charge wot we want 'cos the Government says so"
Not even the spivs and scallies at Barclay's are arrogant enough to claim to have governmental and divine sanction for thier charges!
** OK, they dont really claim support from the Bishop of Wakefield **
**The Imperial gods of Rome are unavailable for comment at this time**
Nice post noonmill. These people live with their heads up their botties.How arrogant is that to think they can act above the law of the country. Cos big govvy says so. Complete and utter k**p.
6). The Applicant asks the Court to order that the Chief Executive Officer of the Respondent, Student Loans Company Limited, do write to the Applicant within 14 days, concurring that in levying these disproportionate charges, the Student Loans Company Limited erred in law and confirm future arrears letters to all customers of the Student Loans Company Limited will be charged at no more than the actual cost to the Student Loans Company Limited, as required by Statute, Case law and consumer directives.
Just posted my Small Claim application off to the court.
I've added a little twist to the usual Particulars of Claim to bring a little bit of discomfort to the boss dude.
6). The Applicant asks the Court to order that the Chief Executive Officer of the Respondent, Student Loans Company Limited, do write to the Applicant within 14 days, concurring that in levying these disproportionate charges, the Student Loans Company Limited erred in law and confirm future arrears letters to all customers of the Student Loans Company Limited will be charged at no more than the actual cost to the Student Loans Company Limited, as required by Statute, Case law and consumer directives.
I love this forum!
Am I sick for wanting the SLC to send me another unlawful penalty charge letter?!
a jacuzzi with Bananarama. I have not lived in Bolton since 1986
Posts
6,823
Re: noomill v Student Loan Company
*thinks*
If the judge DOES order the CEO to confirm that he believes the SLC erred in law, in writing, getting SLC charges refunded will simply be matter of telling them to cough up!
a jacuzzi with Bananarama. I have not lived in Bolton since 1986
Posts
6,823
Re: noomill v Student Loan Company
Thanks CAGisforme!
I guess we're all fed up with these muppets and its time to put them in their box. I havent seen an SLC thread go as far as that, so I'm guessing they dont put up a lot of resistance against a determined adversary.
I'll keep updating with whatever drivel they come up with, but I'm happy to see them in Court over this, I'll be suprised and delighted if they ever get there though.
Its not a huge amount of charges, and as Ive just successfully dealt with Morgan Stanley International Bank, I'm now far more confident to deal with financial fly by nights than I was at the start, when SLC and others were harrasing me on the phone for money I didn't owe.
So as far as the Student Loans Company Ltd is concerned- its game on.
And hey, SLC dont try your "we didnt get your court papers" whinge with the Northern Ireland courts. They post EVERYTHING across the Water by Special Delivery, so they can track the delivery on the Net and get a signature of the muppet who signs for it.
a jacuzzi with Bananarama. I have not lived in Bolton since 1986
Posts
6,823
Re: noomill v Student Loan Company
Not a pep from Student Loans this week, but I got a "Pay your arrears within 14 days - or Smith Lawson and Co will start hassling you" letter, last week, presumably before my own legal papers landed with a thud on their desk.
I'm just waiting to have enough on the credit card to do my mcol. I will be including your addition to the poc in mine, if you don't mind- then we can have Mr Seymour-Jackson running from court to court, making special appearances.
SLC only have 13 days to respond to my small claim.
I'll make a prediction: they'll repay their debt in exactly 12.99 days.
There may be a "slight" delay before you get your money back - SLC reckon if they post something on day 12, you'll have it on day 13. They have an unjustified confidence in "business post", their mail provider. Don't be afraid to fax through court papers - that should sharpen their collective mind.
noomill v Student Loan Company ***WON***
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by noomill060
