Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
  • 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
        • Like
      • 160 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

Co-op Current account/Personal Loan merged upon default.


Tim-S
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2977 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

Ouch written acknowledgment... This is a toughie here. If there has been written acknowledgement then it COULD restart the SB clock.

 

I'm not sure... Check with the FOS, ask them not to send this letter to LOWELL...

The first letter i sent to the FOS didn't include any written acknowledgement. I then emailed the FOS, i have not put in writing i had a current account with them. Only to the FOS over the phone.

 

Why wouldn't they send it though. Bit tricky. I looked at old statements provided by Lowell, and last payment is June 2009.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 11 months later...

So lowell have found me at my new address and started their standard letters shortly before xmas, and its like nothing has happened.

I'm ignoring the letters for a little while. Do i send them the "Letter to solicitors threatening legal action / in default of agreement request" letter?

I don't really want to inform them that the paperwork they supplied is for an old paid loan

 

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

October 2009: The co-op didn't receive an income and expenditure form from Payplan and sent you a letter giving notice of your account being terminated.

 

tough the debt they are chasing is now statute barred.

 

 

ignore them

please don't start the letter tennis again.

 

 

if they are stupid enough to issue a claim

the SB defence will kill it dead.

 

 

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

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

October 2009: The co-op didn't receive an income and expenditure form from Payplan and sent you a letter giving notice of your account being terminated.

 

tough the debt they are chasing is now statute barred.

 

 

ignore them

please don't start the letter tennis again.

 

 

if they are stupid enough to issue a claim

the SB defence will kill it dead.

 

 

dx

In the statement off FOS it said that further payment of £150 odd were covered by Wescott after the account being terminated. I looked at tmy bank statements online earlier, and the last payment to go to Wescott was May 2011.

 

Regarding that post, ive had a a read. The bit ive singled out is:

 

there is the possibility that the account-holder may be allowed to overdraw on the current account without a pre-arranged overdraft or exceed a pre-arranged overdraft limit, and

 

(b)if the account-holder did so, this would be a regulated consumer credit agreement.

 

So are we saying that them merging the loan with the O/D has created a whole new account?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it was merged.

 

I suspect as my link indicates it was 2 sep accounts, one a loan, one the bank account

co-op simply used the same numbers. with diff prefixes.

 

all of my paperwork points to that.

 

may 2011 leaves a bit of a gap to SB date

 

but if they were stupid enough to issue a claim

i'm sure we could counter it.

 

pers i'd keep quiet.

 

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

I don't think it was merged.

 

 

I suspect as my link indicates it was 2 sep accounts, one a loan, one the bank account

co-op simply used the same numbers. with diff prefixes.

 

 

all of my paperwork points to that.

 

 

may 2011 leaves a bit of a gap to SB date

 

 

but if they were stupid enough to issue a claim

i'm sure we could counter it.

 

 

pers i'd keep quiet.

 

 

dx

 

So what do you advise, just let the letters roll in and act if it gets serious?

They have issued no paperwork for the current account or that loan in question. Only old bank statements and a CCA for a loan that was paid in full.

IIRC its the same account number as the current account but with 2 extra digits on the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes that's correct

the co-op loans were the sortcode then account number then 2 extra digits

in the format below

 

sortcode [6] account number[8] then 2 random digits.

 

on the statements it shows...

 

sortcode

12-34-56

 

Account Number

12345678 12

 

on the left under your account name?

 

if so they are loan statements.

so they need a signed agreement to enforce

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

yes that's correct

the co-op loans were the sortcode then account number then 2 extra digits

in the format below

 

sortcode [6] account number[8] then 2 random digits.

 

on the statements it shows...

 

sortcode

12-34-56

 

Account Number

12345678 12

 

on the left under your account name?

 

if so they are loan statements.

so they need a signed agreement to enforce

No, the statements they served up were current account statements. Proper ones that you'd recieve in the post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so were the same format as above but didn't have the 2 extra digits after the account number

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

so were the same format as above but didn't have the 2 extra digits after the account number

Thats correct.

The statements they sent match the account number they want the money for, inc the 2 extra digits.

The credit agreement they sent however, the 2 extra numbers are different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so you must have had 2 personal loans then

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

so you must have had 2 personal loans then

I had several loans with them over the years (all repaid) however the final loan i couldn't repay due to loss of job.

Each of the the loans were the same account numbers as the current account plus 2 extra numbers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes we know all that

already told you several times

 

 

so the statement s are for one of your loans

so

they require a signed agreement.

to enforce it

 

 

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

  • 4 weeks later...

I will expect a letter from them tomorrow as they now seem to come every 2 weeks.

 

The credit application they sent, was for a loan that i've settled many years ago.

Do i let them know this?

 

I wrote to them in 2014 and let them know that the paperwork they sent had no relevance.

 

 

They went quiet for 18 months til now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

me thinks they are trying to instigate letter tennis and spoof you.

 

 

I think if this ever got near a court, it would be quite easy to prove what they are sendin

does not cover a current account.

which is wha their claim is for...

 

 

just the stupid dca trying to spoof you by providing 'some sort'

of paperwork in an attempt to dupe into thinking the loan agreement, also covers

the current account it was merged into and you thus now owe it.

 

 

pers i'd sit on your hands now

 

 

until/unless they issue a claimform.

 

 

sadly I think that the letter tennis that's already been entered into

has been the cause of this 2 years of ping pong.

 

 

might have been better to have done nowt

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...