Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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

JBW visit today Council Tax debacle posts


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2933 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 OB but this is all FMoTL baloney.

 

You are aware that these conditions can be curtailed if the actions are compatible with the law and requirements of a democratic society, There are also we must remember the rights of the creditors, Particularly when rights to enjoyment to goods etc. is considered.

 

The exemptions to HRA only apply if the pertinent laws and guidelines are applied correctly so human rights issues may come into play in cases breach.

However courts give bailiffs a huge leeway,

 

In short if the bailiff is misbehaving you are better using the prescribe statutory remedies rather than pursuing an action under human rights if indeed you even can.[/quote

 

 

Actually the only baloney here Dodgeball is what you continually post in CAG on the debt forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not this argument again ! People have different opinions and no argument changes minds, so not sure what the point is.

 

Buttercup is mostly right. People don't have to deal with Enforcement Agents, unless it relates to a criminal fine, where they can force entry. If people want to pay what is affordable directly to those they owe money to, there is nothing stopping them, as payment cannot be refused. For council tax liabilities, those threatened with enforcement can seek help of Magistrates, where councils are trying to get a LO to farm out for enforcement.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry OB but this is all FMoTL baloney.

 

You are aware that these conditions can be curtailed if the actions are compatible with the law and requirements of a democratic society, There are also we must remember the rights of the creditors, Particularly when rights to enjoyment to goods etc. is considered.

 

The exemptions to HRA only apply if the pertinent laws and guidelines are applied correctly so human rights issues may come into play in cases breach.

However courts give bailiffs a huge leeway,

 

In short if the bailiff is misbehaving you are better using the prescribe statutory remedies rather than pursuing an action under human rights if indeed you even can.[/quote

 

 

Actually the only baloney here Dodgeball is what you continually post in CAG on the debt forums.[/QUOte]

 

Hi MARK

 

Charming as usual, anything intelligent to say, go on break a habit of a lifetime.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

And I am not going to disagree with what you say, neil_tp.

 

Do me a favour that is no endorsement of either of you.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry OB but this is all FMoTL baloney.

 

You are aware that these conditions can be curtailed if the actions are compatible with the law and requirements of a democratic society, There are also we must remember the rights of the creditors, Particularly when rights to enjoyment to goods etc. is considered.

 

The exemptions to HRA only apply if the pertinent laws and guidelines are applied correctly so human rights issues may come into play in cases breach.

However courts give bailiffs a huge leeway,

 

In short if the bailiff is misbehaving you are better using the prescribe statutory remedies rather than pursuing an action under human rights if indeed you even can.[/quote

 

 

Actually the only baloney here Dodgeball is what you continually post in CAG on the debt forums.

 

Hi Mark

 

Just been looking t you posting history on here, you seem to just make one or maybe two posts of abuse towards me or intelligent posters on here then vanish. Is this that inferiority complex playing up again, I think it is.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

The subject matter was regarding council tax, do keep up at the back!

 

Council tax is a civil debt brain box. :)

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hi Mark

 

Just been looking t you posting history on here, you seem to just make one or maybe two posts of abuse towards me or intelligent posters on here then vanish. Is this that inferiority complex playing up again, I think it is.

 

 

Some points for you,

 

1 Been on CAG since 2007, way before you I might add.

2 I don't spend nearly 24 hrs a day on CAG

3 From your posts it just costs posters more money!

4 Nearly everything you post in the debt forums is wrong :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Some points for you,

 

1 Been on CAG since 2007, way before you I might add.

2 I don't spend nearly 24 hrs a day on CAG

3 From your posts it just costs posters more money!

4 Nearly everything you post in the debt forums is wrong :(

 

I dont know a lot of intelligent and knowledgeable people think my points are correct anyway:

 

perhaps if you were to give incidents of my posts which is wrong ? and your alternative theory of course.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I dont know a lot of intelligent and knowledgeable people think my points are correct anyway:

 

perhaps if you were to give incidents of my posts which is wrong ? and your alternative theory of course.

 

Actually i was posting on here in 2006 :)

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

You just wait til the EA returns the Debt to the LA, then nothing is owed to the EA company. Of course alot of authority's do not pass any money on either anyway. That's the great thing about FOI requests.

 

Must dash going outside in the nice weather!

 

Yes and thereby you illustrate the extent and accuracy of you knowledge, enjoy the sun.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its Pote then apologies to mark, i thought even you were not that hopelessly misinformed.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we stop this personal bickering between you two,

it is getting boring.

 

You both have different points of view, just accept it and move on.

 

You both could be correct or both wrong , it is all down to interpretation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nh its not. Anyway he keeps popping up and insulting people he deserves what he gets, perhaps he should try making some sensible points and argue like an adult.

In the mean time if you are bored i suggest you go and entertain yourself elsewhere.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a perfect example.....people need to realise that they have a perfect lawful right to make the local authority/council accept their payments for their council tax. This may well be not the full amount - but this does not matter. They can pay what they can, even as little as a £1.00 per week if they are in so much need themselves, and the council have to accept this. The council will purport to have all sorts of powers and authority....take you to court - which yes, is in a court - but it is in a side room with a council person!! Plus they get you to agree to pay alot more than you can afford!! I personally would insist on seeing the magistrate - i did ask this once and they were ALL horrified!! Then they send bailiffs now called enforcement agents - debt collectors to me and you! - they have no powers - UNLESS YOU LET THEM!! LOCK YOUR DOORS AND WINDOWS - DO NOT ANSWER THE DOOR TO THEM - THEY WILL ONLY PUT THEIR FOOT IN THE DOOR AND JAM IT OPEN AND TRY AND WEAR YOU DOWN - DO NOT DO IT!!!!

 

COUNCIL TAX 'BAILIFFS/ENFORCEMENT 'OFFICERS' - WHICH ARE ACTUALLY JUMPED UP DEBT COLLECTORS WITH NO EDUCATION WHATSOEVER!!! THEY HAVE NO POWERS TO PUSH PAST YOU OR FORCE ENTRY - YOU CAN REASONABLY FORCE THEM BACK IF THEY TRY - BUT THEY WONT AS THEY HAVE A LICENCE TO PROTECT....

 

DONT GET ANGRY - GET EVEN

 

I PERSONALLY THINK THEY HAVE HAD THEIR DAY - WE ARE ALL TOO WISE NOW AND THANKS TO WEBSITES AND THAT SHOW - CANT PAY - TAKE IT AWAY - IT SHOWS US ALL HOW TO PLAY THE IDIOTS...

 

 

Do not entertain them!!!

 

Go back to your local council - pay them what you can - they cannot refuse this payment! Set up your own arrangement directly with the council. Feck the bailiff!!!

 

i accept no liability for anything said above.

 

i agree old bill!

 

THE FACTS ARE THAT ALL AND I MEAN ALL LOCAL AUTHORITIES - COUNCILS - HAVE TO - HAVE TO!! DEAL WITH YOU DIRECTLY.

 

THEY CANNOT REFUSE.

 

THEY SIMPLY CANNOT REFUSE!

 

IT IS THIS SIMPLE - THIS IS NOW APRIL 2016 - THEY CANNOT REFUSE YOU!!!!!

 

IGNORE THE SEE YOU NEXT TUESDAYS AT THE DOOR

 

KEEP YOUR DOORS LOCKED

 

DO NOT ANSWER THEM

 

DO NOT EVER SPEAK TO THOSE ****! THEY ARE PUT AT LEAST £400 ON YOUR BILL!!!

 

THEIR MUMS WILL AND ARE TOTALLY ASHAMED OF THEM!! DONT FORGET THAT.

 

THEY CANNOT BREAK IN.

 

IGNORE THEM WHEN THEY KNOCK!!!!

 

YOUR HOME IS STILL YOUR CASTLE!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

but i think very, very freely indeed

 

x

 

Surprise to me that you are capable of thought at all :)

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

It won't happen. Once the LA have their money the LO has been paid. There won't be any other method because the LO is paid. Just hope capital Con stays on CAG to update.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The £235 is disputed anyway.

 

Only by you and the OP, importantly not by the LA or the EA.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your guessing now & assuming. Lets agree to disagree and let CC d ecide, which he has.

 

Nope dont guess or assume, you guess if you like, it is all in the TCE.:-)

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the EA can't be wrong and neither can the LA?

 

Childish gibberish

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

What by disagreeing with DB, or stating that capital con shouldn't pay the £235?

 

I can show all the supporting legislation and previous cases , all you seem to do is state your belief. Which is fine , but not when you ae advising others.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...