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
  • 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
        • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Lantern (Formally Motormile) sent sar whats next?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1992 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

Good Afternoon,

 

I sent a SAR to Lantern (Formally Motormile) on the 28/09/2018 and I have today received the SAR pack back.

I'm looking for some advice on what to do next as I feel all these accounts could be statute barred.

I would like to give an overview of each account and what the SAR contains to see if anyone can offer some advice on what my next step should be.

 

Account 1

Value £1170

Account Start Date- 15.06.2012

Default Date- 29.06.2012

Payments made/acknowledged - NO

Contains

CCA - YES

Notice of Assignment- NO

 

Account 2

 

Value £200

Account Start Date- 30.11.2011

Default Date- Unknown

Payments made/acknowledged - NO

Contains;

CCA - YES

Notice of Assignment- NO

Chase Letters - 2

 

 

Account 3

 

Value £270.10

Account Start Date- 21.06.2012

Default Date- Unknown

Payments made/acknowledged - NO

Contains;

CCA – YES (Not signed by original creditor)

Notice of Assignment- NO

Chase Letters - 5

 

Account 4

 

Value £250.00

Account Start Date- 02.09.2011

Default Date- 07.12.2011

Payments made/acknowledged - NO

Contains;

CCA – NO

Notice of Assignment- NO

Chase Letters – NO

Statement of Account - YES

 

Other than 2011/2012 I’ve had no other issues and everything has now dropped off my credit files, I’d just like to put this to bed.

I would be grateful of any help you may be able to give.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you just confirm the dates again please. I see that account number one started by 15 June and yet by 29 June – only two weeks later you had defaulted. Is this correct?

 

Also in the others, you are unable to say if or when you made any payments. I think we need more help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies, those dates are taken from the SAR pack from Lantern.

 

With regards to the payments, I put down 'Payments made/acknowledged - NO' I haven't made any payments or acknowledged any of them, they don't have anything in the SAR that confirms otherwise either.

 

I've attached a snapshot of the SAR form.

 

Thanks

 

Capture.PNG

Edited by loudand
Link to post
Share on other sites

The debts are statute barred

Send them our sb letter for each one

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

… As above – but out of curiosity, are you saying that you you borrowed this money and didn't make a single payment on any of the accounts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

… As above – but out of curiosity, are you saying that you you borrowed this money and didn't make a single payment on any of the accounts?

 

Well without going into why I got into difficulty in 2011/12, I ended up with various debts for which I did pay back in full including 2 to Motormile, these were included within the SAR. I wasn't actually aware of the ones listed above until recently, I wasn't being chased, the letters they sent for 2 of the accounts above we're sent to a very old address the other 2 they haven't chased..

 

On the 27th September this year Lantern sent me a chase via email with 1 reference number which covers those 4 accounts, I then sent the SAR and we're now here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not thought about starting an irresponsible lending complaint again each lender

so you say you've cleared some dent with the fleecers at MMF?

 

as long as the debts you've stated above have had no payment in 6yrs ...then send the SB letter for each one.

 

they probably though they could try it on with those as well as they'd mugged you on the others when in all truth they probably didn't need paying at all.

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 have thought about however I've not explored it at all.

 

MMF caught me at a time when I had a mortgage offer, exchanged contracts on a new build and I awaiting completion date, I didn't want to run the risk so I paid them, in hindsight I should of looked deeper into it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well stop blindly replying to emails too!

its NOT a recognised form of communications for debts and is a very cheap way to threaten you.

 

any emails from people that try and fleece you out of money like a dca should be BLOCKED AND BOUNCED BACK.

 

make the write then you have a papertrail.

 

pers i'd be getting an IRL complaint running to back PDL lender you have used

could be worth £1000's if not in refunds but in write-offs too.

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

Update.

 

I posted out the SB letters last week (recorded) and I also emailed them copies as well. They have responded today saying that the debts are not statute barred as a payment was made on the account in October 2016.

 

In total I had 6 accounts with MMF all under different account numbers,

2 of them are settled,

the SAR shows this however it seems as though they have tried to 'wrap up' the 6 accounts under 1 reference number and they are saying that this 1 combined account isn't statute barred.

 

Surely they cannot combine multiple accounts into 1?!

 

I have written a letter stating that the accounts should be listed individually and they should notice that I sent them individual letters for each account number.

Link to post
Share on other sites

who were the original creditor?

did the loans refinance each other? i'e the next settled the previous?

 

you shouldn't be using email at all.

block and bounce theirs back writing ONLY.

 

you also shouldnt be writing back without checking here 1st its the correct thing to do.

its simply invites letter tennis when there is no need to re-state your case.

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 haven't sent the letter as yet.

 

The accounts were for different creditors. It seems they have only recently packaged them into 1 new reference number.

When I paid the 2 settled accounts they were under their own account numbers, the SAR shows 6 different account numbers.

I didn't include the 2 settled accounts within the SB letters.

 

MMF response was saying the 1 overall reference number couldn't be SB as I had paid some of it in 2016.

When I paid the settled accounts in 2016 this new overall account number didn't even exist!

Link to post
Share on other sites

shouldnt have paid them in the first place!!

you should have launched IRL complaints against the original creditors

go do that now.

 

No MMF cant lump everything into one account number with them

and then when you pay off 2 of the loans [you did SPECIFICALLY state which 2 account numbers and the original creditors name these payments were against?] claim it holds off SB on the others just because those accounts are part of your overall dealing with them.

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...