Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Now living in Russia but Thames Credit bothering family


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5639 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 there,

 

I received a few letters from BCW this year but now Thames Credit have taken up the case. This is a dinosaur debt from the early 1990's. It was a small credit card debt but the amount has massively increased. This makes the matter seem very unreasonable and even usurious to me.

 

The letters have upset my elderly relatives and Thames Credit have now said they will send out a representative to my old address or start County Court action against me. There are no current CCJs against me.

 

So, enough is enough.

 

This debt has got to be noncollectable! It must be a "statute barred" matter by now. They must have lost the legal right to collect the money because I haven't acknowledged it for 14-15 years or so.

 

I am going to put a stop to them charging interest in a bogus way and harassing my folks by sending Letter M (Limitation Act 1980 Section 5).

 

I know what to expect but I have one question:

 

If I send the letter they will know of my address here in Russia. I have a sensitive job here and it would be trouble for me if they could contact me face to face.

 

On one hand it would be really funny to see a debt collector turning up here but what repercussions can you see might happen if I sent Letter M? Do they have overseas representatives? What might go wrong?

 

Thank you.

 

InfoMan.

 

PS If Thames are reading this and thinking about coming, please wrap up warm because it is below zero already.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, Thames have absolutely zero chance of contacting you and enforcing anything in Russia. At a recent court case here in my home town, the UK customs were trying to get some simple information from Russia for over 2 years.

To say there is a spirit of non co-operation would be an understatement.

 

If it as you say, send a stat barred letter and if you wish to communicate, you can do so via a web based e-mail address such as Hotmail or alternatively, have your relatives forward all communications on to you via a "Care Of" address.

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. A language barrier can be big time frustration but this is one of the few times it can be a big plus! And I didn't realize I can send Letter M by email. That would be great. I thought it had to be by recorded post.

 

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi Infoman,

I was in a similar situation to you see my thread here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/131026-dca-sending-letters-me.html#post1380365

 

please feel free to use my letters i sent to a couple of other DCA's that stopped them sending letters to my sisters house.:D

 

hope this helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

Recorded post is the best option and you could always get someone back home to send it but you can also send E-mails and get it flagged up when they read it.

I would imagine if you are in Russia now that sending it recorded post without giving the game away would be difficult although by giving them an address it might avoid them trying the sneaky trick os sending Court Papers to a Last Known Address in an attempt to get a judgement by default.

Would your employers know what was going on if you used your Russian residential address...I don't see how they could find out unless you gave Thames details of who you were working for.

  • Haha 1

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OFT Guidance is explicit on this one.

 

2.14 (b) continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they

will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to

harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of

Justice Act 1970.

 

As the alleged debt is statute barred twice over at least, you have nothing to lose here.

 

Contact Thames and demand a copy of their complaints procedure which they are obliged to send. Make a formal complaint demanding that your data be removed from their system, and a full apology made for the harassment you have been subjected to. If they do not satisfy this, you may be able to go to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

Report this to the OFT, and also the Trading Standards local to Thames.

 

Make a complaint to the Information Commissioner's office about them processing your data.

 

The only thing that is not clear from your initial post is whether these letters have been sent to Russia or to your relatives. If the address they have been sending the letters to is in England, then just use that as the address as they have it already. If they do try to get a judgment by default, your relatives will receive the court papers and a defence can be submitted.

 

SH

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...