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

claim form Cabot/Mortimer - old Yorkshire Bank OD 'debt'


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2444 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

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

you'll need a fairly good reason to now set aside.

otherwise, if you can't pay the judgment amount (500?), then could try for an instalment order according to your means. an instalment order on 500 should be attainable eg 10/mth over 5 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So whats the N244 application for and whens that dated ?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought so ...you did have 7 days to set this aside and submit a defence...given that the order is dated 10th August....7 days is to day...what day did you receive the court order ?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought so ...you did have 7 days to set this aside and submit a defence...given that the order is dated 10th August....7 days is to day...what day did you receive the court order ?

i got all those documents on the 11th August, yesterday, and the postage stamp on the envelope is dated the 10th

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah ok, you've got a bit of time to object (with reasons) to the judgment order then.

 

It would have to be sharpish Ford and of course a valid reason and defence ?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have to be sharpish Ford and of course a valid reason and defence ?

:thumb: thats what i meant.

 

also to take into account the application fee (if applicable) and any poss hearing costs against should it be unsuccessful, compared to the judgment amount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously not that bothered logged off after my post.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously not that bothered logged off after my post.

:)

maybe why a defence wasn't submitted in the first place.

luckily (in the sense that it gives the OP another outside chance) the claimant also wasnt too bothered at the time as it was left stayed rather than default judgment requested at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so something like:

 

 

Defence

 

1. Paragraph 1,I accept that I have in the past held a current account with Lloyds Bank Plc. I have not serviced this account since xxxxxx due to the punitive charges and interest being applied which made the account untenable and impossible to facilitate. The amount claimed is far in excess of any agreed overdraft limit with Lloyds Bank. I deny that the account exceeded an agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds and claim that this is a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. It is therefore denied that I am indebted for any alleged outstanding residue.

 

2.Paragraph 2 is denied as the original creditor has failed to serve a Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and the Claimant is put to strict proof to evidence any breach.

 

3. Paragraph 3 is denied I have never been served a Notices of Assignment in accordance with s.136 Law of Property Act 1925.

 

4. As per Civil Procedurelink3.gif Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

Therefore the claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.

 

(a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, which this claim is based on.

(b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.

© Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account and;.

(d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.

(e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

(f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.

 

5. On receipt of this claim I immediately requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request, which was received by the Claimant on the xxxxxxxx. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. Therefore the claimant in their non compliance to my requests have frustrated my attempts to clarify their claim and against pre action protocol should be considered when the question of costs arise.

 

7.By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

  • Confused 1

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

thank you all so extraordinarily much for taking the time and effort to respond - it's really appreciated

 

apologies for the delayed response. this issue couldn't have come at a busier time for me but i really do want to try and make an attempt to fight this if that's doable and if there's a chance of being successful. not sure of what my chances may be though. and yes, i do have to consider the possibility of losing this and the increase in costs. is there an idea of how high the added costs could be?

 

dx100uk, that's perfect and really kind of you in drafting that - thank you :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

just nicked from another thread

obv you'll need to adapt it to your players/debt and their poc para numbers.

 

 

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

Set a sides require a hearing..you can claim the fee back and your costs if the application is successful.

 

Dont forget to draft an order to attach to the N244

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks andy. smile.gif

 

i've been looking through examples of draft orders to get some ideas etc.

it prompted me to dig around through my own documents

 

 

i found correspondence from mortimer clarke solicitors a year after my cpr 31.14 request in 2014 that provides photocopies of

my NoA,

letter from yorkshire bank advising of the assigment,

facility letters

and other letters from YB

and a signed application form to open a bank account from 2008.

 

 

i'm pretty sure now that this overdraft debt is now statute barred because i also had a loan from YB which was more than a couple of grand and it was that that i was making nominal payments to, the last payment of which was in 2012.

i made two separate threads and they might possibly have been merged.

 

none of the photocopied documents list when my last payment was made.

i'd obviously need that to strengthen my case.

 

 

i know first i have to get this set aside and having come across the claimants response to my cpr 31.14 as well as a without prejudice offers some time later which i ignored, this really doesn't help my case does it? :(

i'm thinking i should have acknowledged them.

 

 

that said,

i definitely didn't receive court documents about the stay being lifted in july this year because i would have disputed that. most of the letters i was sent from YB informing me that i was over the overdraft limit was a result of charges from the bank that levied excessive charges.

i thought them unfair and so i stopped paying them hence why i'm pretty sure this debt is now statute barred

 

i already applied for help with fees the other day and have been provided a reference.

i'd really appreciate hearing what anyone thinks of my n244 claim now and how it's looking for me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As the claim was issued – 14/08/14 and you think your last payment to your loan from this account was 2012...then Im not sure how you can consider it to be statute barred functions ?

 

" I made nominal payment of a £1 towards this debt back in 2012 but nothing since."

 

The claim stopped the clock with regards to limitations

 

 

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

i know andy - i'm sorry this is my mix-up and confusion

 

i think the nominal payments was made towards the YB loan (of more than a couple grand) back in 2012 and not this YB overdraft (initially a little over 500) which is what is being pursued in the courts.

the two are certainly separate and i got them mixed up.

 

i'll contact my former bank asap to confirm when the last payment was made to YB and to what account.

 

i only opened the account to set up standing orders for nominal payments of two debts so there isn't reams of statements to go through. still, it couldn't have been SB in 2014 so i wouldn't be able to use the SB defence now right years later after the stay?

does a stay lift limitations indefinitely then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The issuance of the court claim suspends time running with regards to limitations and the stay holds it until its either set a side or discontinued/withdrawn then the clocks restarts

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks, andy - really appreciated and i'll be sure to make a donation to this fantastic site for all help provided

 

i'm not sure there's a good defence or chance of success for the set aside at this point.

 

 

i was thinking of trying to negotiate paying a settlement but i think it has to be full amount now right?

can't afford that and the original amount when the debt was transferred to cabot was on the lower end of 500

- it's now more than 650 demanded.

 

 

there's a difference between the original court claim in 2014 and what's on the default judgement 2017 by about 20 quid. any idea what that is?

should i expect the amount to keep rising if i can't get this settled straightaway?

 

 

i'm really beating myself up over this because it's ultimately my fault for not being vigilant and on top of things.

i treated this like any other dca but the circumstances are not the same!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only assume the differing sums will be section 69 Interest added to the judgment (8%) up until judgment.You can make application to vary the forthwith payment to monthly by submitting the N245 (See Legal Library fee is £50)

 

Downside is the CCJ will be registered and remain on your CRAs for 6 years.....paying it in full by the date stated will remove it completely.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well a court can award anything up to 8% on top of a judgment...may be 3 in this instance

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...