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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3945 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...