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.   
  • 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

Egg are so far 43 days late with my CCA request


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2331 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 CCA'ed Egg on the 9th of July but to this day I have not received anything, that's 43 days since my request.

 

I sent the Letter 1st class recorded but via Royal Mail tracking, no information indicating the letter was delivered so I put in a claim with Royal Mail for a refund.

 

They have returned to me with proof that the Postal Order which was sent with the CCA request, has been Banked!.

 

Please can some one update what to do next.

 

Many Thanks

 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

I CCA'ed Egg on the 9th of July but to this day I have not received anything, that's 43 days since my request.

 

I sent the Letter 1st class recorded but via Royal Mail tracking, no information indicating the letter was delivered so I put in a claim with Royal Mail for a refund.

 

They have returned to me with proof that the Postal Order which was sent with the CCA request, has been Banked!.

 

Please can some one update what to do next.

 

Many Thanks

 

Mark

 

Well Egg have now broken the law because:

 

a) they've not responded to your CCA request

 

b) have cashed a postal order which was not meant for payment on the account

 

c) have not supplied a signed CCA which means the debt is not enforceable so they should never have cashed the postal order.

 

I think these is a follow up letter you can use?

:!: Activ Kapital 2009 - £316 debt cancelled due to no credit agreement

 

:!: TNC Legal Collections (Swinton) - £61 written off due to complaint being upheld with the FOS

 

:D Be Happy and treat people exactly how you would like to be treated

 

:mad: Don't let people take advantage of you and stand up for your rights and beliefs

 

:p You only live once so don't take things so seriously

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm still waiting for my CCA request to be honoured, the follow up letter time scale of 14 working days has once again expired on the 12th Sept 09. The follow up letter was also not showing as delivered on Royal Mail track and Trace, but the orginal request was not showing as delivered either but royal mail confirmed postal order was banked so I have made a compensation claim with royal mail to see what they say about the delivery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Egg have now broken the law because:

 

a) they've not responded to your CCA request

 

b) have cashed a postal order which was not meant for payment on the account

 

c) have not supplied a signed CCA which means the debt is not enforceable so they should never have cashed the postal order.

 

I think these is a follow up letter you can use?

 

 

Incorrect, Incorrect, Incorrect.

 

There is no law that has been broken.

They have simply failed to produce a valid CCA in reply to your request within the time limits.

 

A simple Letter that cerbs has posted you, should be sent to them via recorded delivery, this then places the account in dispute and demands that they do not pursue any futher collection activity on your 'alleged' account, including marking your credit file adversley.

 

Katpuss, not responding to a CCA request is not against the law, who has said the postal order was cashed against the account?? Even if it was, again this is not against the law, and cashing a postal order and failing to supply a CCA is still not against the law!

 

I trust you mean well, but there are those who might take your advice as gospel and end up in a worse position through bad advice, unless of course you have documented evidence and links to your advice??

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for my CCA request to be honoured, the follow up letter time scale of 14 working days has once again expired on the 12th Sept 09. The follow up letter was also not showing as delivered on Royal Mail track and Trace, but the orginal request was not showing as delivered either but royal mail confirmed postal order was banked so I have made a compensation claim with royal mail to see what they say about the delivery.

 

So long as you have sent them the Account in dispute letter that Cerbs linked above then you do not have to do anything further.

 

The fact that you have sent all your correspondence via RD, whether it shows up or not is proof of sending, so do not worry, this is thirty more times DCA's go to tthe trouble of sending out their threatogrammes.

 

You've sent them correspondence via RD, got proof, and I assume you have a copy of what you have sent them?

 

Place the account in dispute, and wait until they either provide you with a 'legally valid CCA' or close their files.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 8 years later...

Please can someone give me some advice.

 

Received "Letter Of Claim" from Howard Cohen Solicitors today who have been instructed by Hoist Portfolio Holding Ltd, who purchased an ex Barclaycard acc.

 

Im sure this account is Statute Barred as no payments have been made to the account or acknowledgement of the debt in the last 8 years.

 

Only problem I had was about 2 years ago when Barclays took out £700 from another account and applied it to this account, but I got them to overturn this and move the funds back to the original account.

 

I dont know what to do, pls can anyone help

 

many thanks in advance

 

M

Link to post
Share on other sites

10/10 for getting that money back!!!

 

If its now sb'd (as that payment/reversal doesn't count) send our SB letter

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

had to remove your images

can yo pop your images into one pdf please and attach them.

read upload

 

posting images from hosting sites directly viewable in the msg box forces people that do not have fast internet to slow

and those on mobiles to p'haps waste their bandwidth and money.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

great thanks

yes that's a PAP letter

 

when was you last payment?

 

this is what you do

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?481827-The-Pre-Action-Protocol-for-Debt-Claims-is-made-by-the-Master-of-the-Rolls-as-Head-of-Civil-Justice.-1st-Oct-2017

particularly the last posts

 

obv don't request docs they have already supplied

 

reviewing the old merged thread here

I suspect this is now statute barred

you can send them our statute barred letter

in the debt collection section of our library.

 

as for your response form:

 

tick d

I dispute this debt because ...it is statute barred,

 

tick box 8

 

I have enclosed the following documents.. FCA Conc Statute barred letter

 

do not sign the letter print your name only

 

you don't need to provide proof of SB, that's upto them to disprove.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

nope

nope

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please can someone give me some advice.

 

Received "letter of claim" from Howard Cohen Solicitors today who have been instructed by Hoist Portfolio Holding Ltd, who purchased an ex Egg/Barclaycard acc.

 

History...

16/6/2009 Received “Default Notice”

7/7/2009 I sent letter to Egg requesting the CCA

8/8/2009 I sent letter to Egg requesting if I could make token payments to the account and they accepted

20/8/2009 I sent letter to Egg informing them they have entered default for not providing CCA, I sent another letter stating this on 6/10/2009, a follow up letter on 19/10/2009 as no response.

15/10/2009 Letter from Egg stating what they sent constituted as a copy of the executed agreement (which I never received)

1//2/2010 Received another “Default Notice”

2/3/2010 Egg card terminated

4/4/2010 Finally received a response for the CCA request but only received, which seems to be an agreement/terms of conditions with my name and address printed on and pages of terms and conditions. The signed agreement was not included.

4/2/2012 Received letter from Barclaycard stating they are taking over Egg

22/7/2013 Received letter from Barclaycard informing they have passed acc to Robinson Way for collection

26/7/2013 Received letter from Robinson Way requesting payment

29/7/2013 Sent letter to Robinson Way requesting the account be returned to Barclays for resolution

25/2/2015 Barclays transferred £700 from another account to this account to set off against the balance but after speaking to them on phone they reversed the payment.

9/8/17 Received letter from Barclaycard informing me the acc has been transferred to Hoist Portfolio Holding Ltd who are the new owners

10/8/17 letter from Robinson Way stating their client (Hoist Portfolio) have instructed them to agree with me a payment plan

25/9/17 Letter (Pre-Legal) from Robinson Way stating the acc meets their criteria to be considered legal account and if no payment plan is agreed they will instruct Howard Cohen & Co Solicitors.

28/11/17 “Letter of Claim” received from Howard Cohen & Co Solicitors informing me their intention to issue proceedings in the County Court

 

Should I send the PAP form from this group stating acc in dispute as no signed agreement has been received when the CCA was originally requested?

 

many thanks in advance

 

Mark

 

(sorry for the confusion with the other thread)

jpg2pdf.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...