Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
  • 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

Payplan and WagedayAdvance - got another loan out after DMP


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3829 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

Sorry DN=default notice.

 

I have reported it and asked admin to remove it, if you go into edit just remove the attachment . I hope you don't hate your name as much as I hate it, I use the 3 letter version instead

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I want to see what wording they use. SPecifically what parts of it breach OFT guidance so we can send them a nice complaint to put the debt into deadlock and get the FOS involved, as well as a complaint through the BCCA.

 

It wouldnt be the wisest of moves for them to try and take "further action" whatever that is meant to be if you have your back covered.

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

Sadly renegade I think it is pretty standard DN however it is bad because of the dates and not allowing time for remedy

 

I would go on the additional charges and refusal to accept payplan. No doubt Swanleyboy was bullied into setting up an unaffordable payment plan, lets hope there are some records that can be used to show that

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe be. But id still like to see what they have said. Especially since they arent taking the debtors financial circumstances into consideration. Plus theyre threatening this, that and the other.

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

There we go. Hopefully no personal stuff now.

 

So you are clear - I did make an arrangement to pay £50 which I did for a few months but it was too much. I then decided to bite the bullet and all Payplan who then added them to my DMP - that I have had for 10 years.

 

Just need to know how/where to go from now.

 

Really appreciate the time and effort you are taking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Me again

You sound a lot like me, even down to the name

 

What you need to do is send a CCA request to each of your creditors. One for each account. You have held these for a long time so I am guessing that they were all taken out prior to 2007. There is a fair chance that some if not all the agreements will either be unenforceable or they will not be able to find them.

 

The other option if you have no assets is BR. If you are working it costs about £700 if you are on benefits £525. Of course as a bankrupt there are some jobs you can not do...anything within the financial industry for a start. I can suggest options but can only tell you my experience

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Fletch,

 

I am not going BR. I have a decent job. Simply got myself into s**t and trying to sort it out. I can afford life but only just.

 

If a CCA request comes back as they can't find the info then what? You simply stop paying them? All my debt is with Payplan now - other than WDA.

 

There will be a time that I can pay off my debt - and hopefully not too far in the future so I am not going fro an IVA, BR etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Fletch,

 

I am not going down the BR route. I have assets. I have a job. I can just about pay bills. Everything now with Payplan other than WDA.

 

If I send a CCA request and it comes back that they cannot find it etc - what then? You just stop paying?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If a CCA request comes back that is either incomplete or they can not find one you stop paying. After 6 years the debt becomes statute barred and can not be chased. I imagine that all your defaults (apart from the PDL's ) have come off your credit file and can not be added.

In my case I have about 45K and although I have no job and no assets I haven't paid a penny in 18 months. A couple came back saying they couldn't find the agreement, a few came back that did not contain all the prescribed terms and as such can never be put right and some have come back with incomplete details (now they can be put right by getting it right, but I ain't telling what they have doe wrong)

 

One example is a credit card where they reduced the interest to 0 but because the default was bad the termination was bad so they should have sent me the varied terms that put the interest rate to 0. I know its a technicality but so what.

 

I have learnt a lot from various people on various forums and had a lot of support. I am not allowed to PM because i was a bit naughty in the past but that is behind me now

 

I am not sure what funds you are planning to use to pay off your debts, just when the time comes make reduced offers , or at least i would if I were you.

 

 

Oh when you stop paying, I didn't just stop but I sent letters saying this is unenforceable because it is ......or it is UE because you have not complied with my S78 request. Fair bit of letter ping pong for a while then it calmed down, just the odd one now

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just waiting for that letter to be posted, then ill write you up a nice letter to send them.

 

Edit: Gimme a few :)

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

At a glance, theyre saying they are adding on unenforceable charges. It also looks more like a story than an actual default notice :|

 

Also, why the hell are they talking about asking a court for more time to pay? Breach of OFT guidance right there for misleading information.

 

One other question. WOuld this default notice have been served if they didnt add on the charges and interest that accrued purely because they refuse to negotiate a repayment plan with you?

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

Renegade

I believe the line you are calling a breach of OFT guidelines is actually a line that needs to be included. It is on every DN that I have had and boy have I had a few. OFT1002 S6.2 I would upload the attachment but I can't.

 

6.2 The requirements are set out in the Consumer Credit (Enforcement,

Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983.49 In particular, the

default notice must indicate:50

• the nature of the alleged breach of the agreement

• the action needed to remedy the breach or to compensate the

creditor, and the date by which this must be done

• the consequences of failure to comply with the notice

• the action intended to be taken by the creditor in the event of noncompliance

• the procedures relating to the recovery of goods under a hirepurchase

or conditional sale agreement

• a statement indicating the debtor's right to apply to the court for a

time order, giving more time to repay the debt

• prescribed wording regarding sources of help or advice.

 

I am not sure that the charges for debt collection are unenforceable, all OFT664 Rev says on the matter is in 3.1 that they should not be inappropriate or unfair, obviously subjective but my opinion would be that £25 was neither unless of course you can tell me differently.

3.1 This chapter identifies matters that the OFT considers to be unfair or

improper business practices for the purposes of section 25(2A)(e) of

the Act. These are set out under the following sub-headings:

• Communication: businesses should communicate in a clear,

accurate and transparent manner

• False representation of authority and/or legal position:

businesses should accurately and truthfully represent their

authority/status and the correct legal position with regard to

debts and the debt recovery process

• Physical/psychological harassment: businesses should not

engage in physical or psychological harassment of debtors, or

relevant third parties

• Deceptive and/or unfair methods: businesses should be truthful

and fair in their dealings with debtors and others

• Charging for debt recovery: charges should not be levied

inappropriately or unfairly

Debt collection visits: those visiting debtors must not act in a

threatening or unclear manner

Statute barred debt: businesses should not use unfair methods

(including misrepresenting the legal position) if seeking to

recover statute barred debt

• Data accuracy: businesses should have appropriate processes in

place with a view to ensuring that customer data is accurate

and take reasonable steps to ensure that it is adequate, with a

view to only the actual debtor and valid debts being pursued for

repayment.

OFT664Rev

 

I still believe that the best course of action is using the fact they will not recognise payplan and the possible bullying to gain a repayment plan that was unaffordable and inappropriate considering the OP is paying under £200 on 60K of debt

Edited by fletch70
Adding OFT guidelines

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be included but coupled with the rest of it, it is a breach. They state it BEFORE any consequences are noted, which is where the violation happens. They shoudlnt even mention asking courts for more time to pay if it hasnt gone anywhere near one or they havent even won the case.

 

We've seen a few PDL's use it and successfully challenged the DN a number of times. Each case is on its own merits though.

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

Well I have to say that if I were writing a DN and using the guidelines as shown above it would be included. I agree that some PDL's do indeed issue invalid DN's (minicredit being one) and this one is bad because of the dates . Have the successful challenges been on that particular point or generally non compliant DN's?

 

I really do not know how else to interpret the OFT guidelines

6.2 The requirements are set out in the Consumer Credit (Enforcement,

Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983.49 In particular, the

default notice must indicate:50

• the nature of the alleged breach of the agreement

• the action needed to remedy the breach or to compensate the

creditor, and the date by which this must be done

• the consequences of failure to comply with the notice

• the action intended to be taken by the creditor in the event of noncompliance

• the procedures relating to the recovery of goods under a hirepurchase

or conditional sale agreement

• a statement indicating the debtor's right to apply to the court for a

time order, giving more time to repay the debt

• prescribed wording regarding sources of help or advice.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1983/1561/schedule/2/crossheading/time-order/made

Edited by fletch70
Link to legislation

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw that, but surely it should be " IF we are granted a judgement then you have the right to apply to the court for a time order".

 

The way they have worded it makes it sound like an order has already been granted against the debtor.

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

That actually does sound very strange. Why put that if no court order has been applied for?

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 Swanleyboy

 

Sorry if things got a bit sidetracked. In my opinion the way forward is to argue about any excess charges and also OFT guidelines about using 3rd parties

Can I ask a few saliant points

1. How much did you originally owe ( the amount that would have been needed to pay off the whole debt on the day it became due)

2.How much have you paid off either yourself or through payplan

3. How was the figure of £50 arrived at, did you make that as an initial offer or was that what they said they needed as a minimum

4. Did you ever send in an I&E . I assume that Payplan have done one for you which is how they settled on the figure you pay them

 

From that you can make a factual complaint that has validity and will de difficult for them to argue with (although knowing them , they will argue)

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...