Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

akinika


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3920 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 this is my first time on site. i have sent a standard letter to this firm akinika asking for them to send me how they have authority to come after me for a debit they say i have with HMRC.this is the letter i got back. having viewed the above account we advise you that the HMRC, are acting on behalf of Her Majesty's government,and are not bound by the consumer credit act 1974.

 

the act regulates the way which consumer credit licensees carry on business.for example,there are rules on advertising,pre-contract disclosures,credit agreements and post-contractual information. please forward your propoals for settlement of the account.we are being advised by our client HMRC.

 

 

this is after they had sent me a letter saying they wanted full and final payment of the debt. please can someone advise me if they can say this and send my postal order back,if so can i send them a letter asking if i can have a full and final settlement amount.and only have to pay a reduced amount.because the company that this relates to is now wound up by me,and i am now only paye.and i have not got any spare cash to pay them in one go

thanks in advance davestan

Edited by citizenB
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi welcome to CAG,

 

The HMRC along with other Government departments are authorised to use 3rd party debt collection agency to collect taxes, loans and underpayments.

 

Yes they can do the this and are correct this is NOT a consumer credit debt and has nothing to do with the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

 

This is NOT like a loan account this is I presume unpaid income tax or VAT and it will not go away, and is very much a priority debt.

 

This company you have wound up was it a limited company, sole trader??

 

They can indeed demand full payment immediately TAX DEBTS are not usually negotiable apart from the HMRC may allow time to pay, they have the alternative to seek a county court judgement for the debt.

 

You are obviously fully aware that the debt is owed and I would suggest that you seek dialogue with HMRC direct or through Akinita, possibly you make want to seek qualified advice locally on tax matters.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes it was a limited company. so can i ask for a full and final payment on this debt,or will i have to pay full amount,this was all from 2009

The age of the debt does not matter for the tax debt, one cannot speculate on the HMRCs decision on a reduced offer.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to say what tax this relates to.

 

Is it Corporation Tax?

 

Is it tax deductions from employees/directors which have not been paid over?

 

If they are tax debts in the name of the company and the directors have not acted improperly then these tax debts usually die with the company.

 

If it is your personal tax then the situation is different so you need to be specific in letting the forum know exactly what taxes these are.

 

Also, did you ever let HMRC know that the company had ceased trading?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

HMRC is the client and it is for corporation tax

 

Ok good.

 

and i have been told i cannot fold the company at company house while i have debts from this company

 

While you may not be able to dissolve the company it doesn't alter the fact that the company has (I assume) ceased trading.

 

As I said, providing there has been no improper behaviour by the directors then the corporation tax liability is a liability of the company and not the director(s) personally.

 

Are there any assets in the company?

 

Did you advise any creditors that the company ceased trading?

 

Who are these tax letters addressed to? You personally or the company?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In which case I would write to HMRC telling them that the company ceased trading on whatever date a date and copy the collection agents in on the letter.

 

Include in the letter the reasons for the cessation and that the company has no assets or other liabilities.

 

If you haven't told the company's bankers that trading has ceased then I would also let them know as well.

 

HMRC should take the view that this is not worth chasing or they may issue a winding up petition for the company but of they chose the latter then you can cross that bridge when you come to it. It sounds scary but it isn't.

 

As I say, if you (as a director of the company) acted properly with regard to the company's affairs then you are not liable for this corporation tax.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

company ceased trading over 3 years ago told the bank about this over 2 years ago no money gone into this account for over 3 years so will write to akinika do not know the address for HMRC only got letters off debt company about all this lot

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...