Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi dx It's with Step Change. Yes that is the balance outstanding plus interest.
    • Hi All, I don't want to keep asking unnecessary and daft questions but as I read up on on stuff to prepare my defence and tthink about my witness statement, I am perusing the following: The BPA Code of practice states under 13. Consideration and Grace Periods: 13.1 The driver must have the chance to consider the Terms and Conditions before entering into the ‘parking contract’ with you. If, having had that opportunity, the driver decides not to park but chooses to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable consideration period to leave, before the driver can be bound by your parking contract. The amount of time in these instances will vary dependant on site size and type but it must be a minimum of 5 minutes. 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place.   Let's say a motorist spends a minimum of 5 minutes to decide, then decides to park, that 5 minutes now doesn't apply? That doesn't make sense to me. So now that a motorist has parked after consideration, thus commencing the parking period, the decision time doesn't apply and parking time commenced when? .... on entry to the car park? This, as far as I can see is not stated in the [Withdrawn] Government document which says: The Code also makes clear that the consideration period ends at the point when the driver has parked and is therefore considered to have accepted the terms and conditions, which could be within the five-minute allowance. Doesn't say anything about it not applying if a parking event takes place.   [Withdrawn] Private Parking Code of Practice: explanatory document – how was it developed and what will it change? - GOV.UK WWW.GOV.UK So, according to the BPA, if a motorist inadvertently overstayed by 12 minutes for example, they have the 10 minute grace period but because they decided to park, they don't have the 5 minute consideration period because they decided to park and have overstayed by 2 minutes? Sorry if there's something I'm missing here.  
    • there are several threads here already whereby the judge in such cases only made an order to pay the required sum, the registering of a criminal record is at their discretion or not. dx  
    • Maybe by the time VDL has agreements with other countries in the EU [she could be asking next month], the Tories won't have much time left in office.
  • 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

Welcome secured loans/charge - sold to Alpha/Prime -repo received - ***Claim Dismissed***


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1686 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

Its a separate order with regards to the claimants application only ...not a general order with regards to the claim.

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

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Thank you.

 

I’ve been on the phone to the court today with regards to the general order and the outcome of last hearing. Posts 1249/50/52.

 

I’m rather bemused to the courts response today

 

This is what I was told

 

Nothing on system about further orders for me or claimant

 

No date set for next hearing which I was told before would be on the 30th April for 3 hours

 

Closest date available from now is 15th June

 

Judge will not be there as is retiring. I explained the judge said he would coming back to finish the ongoing saga off as he’s been involved from onset.

 

Nothing at all on system about anything further .

 

I am baffled as to where everything stands now.

 

The judge was firm on the orders and I wrote them all down.

 

The reason the judge didn’t dismiss repo last time is cos the claimant solictors said they would appeal it.

 

He explained what would happen then it would possibly go to the higher track.

 

He didn’t want that he wanted to get everything sorted in this track that’s why he give the orders to the claimant

Link to post
Share on other sites

new order above

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

the DJ wants to investigate the freezing of interest or not? around 2015 - go look at your documentation and work out why.

he also wants to see their basic arguments with regard to if they intend to reduce what they claim you should pay per month [as theres no PPI element now in it] OR are they going to say that because of the removal of PPI the monthly figure they have quoted will settle the loan earlier than its stated term..

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 brought it up that their figures were wrong.

 

As if their monthly payments were times by the months they say are outstanding. Means they are charging interest which previous owners reduced to 0%. Back in 2015.

 

The judge sent me home to get this doc. Was in the comms log after

no payments.

 

Their arguement was I still owed the monthly payments even with the 8 grand chunk

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you know what it means why say you dont??

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

But I’m confused Cos the repossession was almost over and done with.

 

What I was told on the day has changed totally date wise.

 

Therefore I’m constantly going over things and frying my brain.

 

I’m also concerned now that the original dj isn’t going to be the one dealing with it all.

 

Plus it’s set 3 hours and that’s a long time

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I know I’ve got about a month before I recieve anything from prime .

 

But I feel like I should be doing something or putting something together. Cos I know with them serving on me 7 days before and 2 days with the bundle I’m going to struggle with the shortness of time to put things together and get looked at here.

 

Any advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You won't be expect to counter anything new with only 2 days notice

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...

Right here goes Prime are back in the room..

throwing more questions up now .

. dx I’ve sent you docs.

 

Paragraph 3

 

Loan agreement entered into 29th August.

But welcome did not advance any sum of £27.971.82 it appears to be a rewrite of previous loan 661 that was settled on 29/08/2008 for £27,971.82 then rewritten to 984 for the exact same amount with £2307.70 PPI and £235.00 acceptance fee added thus totalling £30,514.52

 

The contractual monthly installments were paid from sept 2008 to Feb 2009 £1388.94

 

Further payments from this date till May 2015 over and above the contractual monthly installments were paid

 

From March 2009 until Dec 2010 25 payments of £250 were made totalling £6250

 

From jan 2011 or March 2011 3 payments of £333 were made totalling £933

 

From April 2011 till April 2012 14 payments of £270 totalling £3780

 

From May 2012 till Nov 2014 32 payments of 270 £8640

 

From Dec 2014 till May 2015 6 payments of £278 £1668

 

Which means £22,659,94 has been paid

 

Paragraph 4

 

Claimant purchased debt from welcome 26 June 2016. So any arrears with them could only be accrued after the date they purchased this debt which would be July 2016. Therefor the if there are arrears would be 22 months at £231.49 = £5092.78 or would it be from date of deed of variation in sept 2016?

 

Paragraph 7

 

Outstanding balance £26.152.32 correct at of 13 Dec 2015 still standing at the same on 13 jan 2017.

 

113 months at 231.49 =£26,157.24

 

Paragraph 8

 

Outstanding balance at today’s date 18th May £19,672.83 arrrears Total £8,268.08

both incorrect.

 

Should be £26.152.32 - 8163.29 balance should stand at £17,989.03

Arrears £8,268.08? where are they getting this figure. Look at statement it says £6574.28 Arrears.

 

Statement There is also a remaining balance here of £19,672.83 which includes charges and solictors costs totalling £1683.80 which they have added on which I don’t think they should have dates 11/12/2017, 20 and 22/1/18, 15/3/18. If you remove these it brings the balance down to £17,989.03

 

Arrears for 22 months July 2016 should be 5092.78

Arrears 19 months from sept 2016 (deed of variation date) to now £4398.31 neither are near £8,268.08

 

But if the fees of £1683.80 are added to arrears on statement of £6574.28 this totals £8,258.08 £10 out!! SAR amount £10 debited on 17/08/2017

 

184 payments of 44.94 = £8,268.96

 

72 payments of £276.43 = £19,902.96

 

None of this is working out

Lightfoots Witness Statement 18th Ma redactedy.pdf

Edited by dx100uk
redacted upload attached
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve only put the last 3 pages on there as you have the rest from before. It’s only really the last 2 pages are different

 

I think they are trying to make the arrears look higher than they are the judges argument previous was how are there arrears when the ppi refund of 8163.29 Means that I’m well in front and not in any arrears. Last time they did court I think arrears were almost 5 grand

 

Surely they can not claim arrears that were owed to Welcome between May 2015 and sept 2016 where the deed of variation took place as their own?

 

Would that then mean that the arrears with them would start at the first missed payment Oct 2016 since they became owners and the deed was complete. However they did not start writing until Dec 2016 and then issued court originally in March 2017

 

Dx I haven’t sent you the full statement only the last 3 pages as the rest are the same as the old statements they’ve sent throughout. They just keep adding and removing stuff on the last few pages which you’ve put in post 1289.

 

What do I need to be doing now? I’ve got 2 weeks

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

Each is individual

So no templates

Use search cag box of top red toolbar

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

Ive done that I’m having issues finding them.

 

More so skeleton arguement. Do I need to be putting legal refs in to.

 

I’m getting worried now as time is passing by and getting shorter. I’m no wiser now than I was when trying to write a defence

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

You might have more success if you post up details of the claim and where you're at with it.

 

BOOM>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?467097-Welcome-secured-loans-charge-sold-to-Alpha-Prime-repo-received-bal-all-penalties-PPI-MIF-LIFE-PPI-or-IR-help

 

:lol:

 

i'll see you in about a week

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

best man for the job...…...

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...