Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No you don't have to pay them.  it is their scam which the Courts know about. There was a classic case a few years ago that decided that £100 was not a penalty because that company had a legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear of cars that overstayed etc because they were there to maximise the availability of car park spaces. As Starbucks was closed in your case, Met have no legitimate interest so their £100 charge IS a penalty. Therefore the case would be thrown out. if they took you to Court and you turned up in Court to defend yourself. So no you shouldn't pay.
    • Thank you as always. Okay, will contact Tesco and will ignore the appeal, and will let you know what happens. You guys are superheroes.
    • A former Tesla engineer is in a decade-long battle with the car company, owned by Elon Musk.View the full article
    • what isn't working out....one very small issue, the rest is going perfectly fine. stop doing your usually running around waving arms and screaming on my god oh my god...sorry too used to you LMM even if you cant hold down a new bank account all is not lost .  ive not seen any reports that monzo refuse people  so go with them. pers as i said id NOT be using any switch service, as there are debts you want to stop paying and get them defaulted BEFORE you ever think of poss might could should pay them. its only a handful of stuff like rent/ctax/ etc that you need DD for ive not used DD's in almost 30yrs now nor use Standing orders, i do it by BACS each month priority bills first (can take roof from over my head if not paid) there REST all get paid if/when i've had the money. 2 well 3 things id dump too or get cheaper. cable/sat tv - ££6PCM . which i will is internet/tv/landline ? from whom that is very expensive. mine is £27PCM for 100MPS Broadband etc all in. 3 tv licence... who cant tell you are watching live tv even if you dont.... mobile phone £27? - go over to giffgaff no contract and as cheap as £6PCM even with mobile data (but use your home wf-fi when indoors!!) no need to keep using @Username, everyone that posted gets an alert like you do if someone posts. dx  
    • Critall windows date back to the 1880s but their steel construction makes them vulnerable to damp.View the full article
  • 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

Can Elderbridge use an SPO granted to Firstplus in June 2008 to now evict us in 2017??


dcb1965
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2462 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

They want to Evict me,can you help.

 

Can someone please advise what I can do to stop Elderbridge (company that purchased from Barclays, all Firstplus accounts) evicting me from my house,

 

I have received a letter today from Elderbridge stating that they are instructing their solicitors (Eversheds) to ask the court to set a date for Elderbridge to take possession of my property.

 

What I want to know is if they can do this as the original repossession order was granted to Firstplus who have gone bust (and then taken on by Barclays as they were the bank that set up Firstplus)

 

 

Last year Barclays sold my outstanding account to Elderbridge,

does that mean that they automaticity have the right to use the suspended repossession order to start eviction process?

 

If yes how do I contact the courts to stop this eviction and make payments to this new company Elderbridge.

 

Account Balance £64,809.59

 

Arrears Balance £64,722.09

 

how can Firstplus, Barclays have let my arrears get so high and charge me 7.8% intrest,

I have asked all of the above to stop charging interest but have all refused.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes..they can BUT its say INSTRUCTED not WILL!!

 

 

I can instruct my dog to sit

if it does is another matter!

 

 

why are you £64k in arrears!!

 

 

tell us the history please

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

This will be more info than you have asked for but gives full story

 

Reason for the arrears:

 

 

 

  1. loan taken out Jan 2006
  2. wife left mid 2006, arrears started build up from Aug 2006
  3. left with son at school and daughter at collage
  4. lost job May 2007
  5. Claimed 6 month PPI, until got a low paying job
  6. managed for a while could not manage after 1st year
  7. arrears quickly built up to £10800 by 13 may 2008
  8. First-plus took me to court got repossession order that was suspended in June 2008
  9. agreed to pay additional + main payment
  10. I continued paying until I lost my job December 2008
  11. waited for the repossession order to be used never used
  12. Had some one interested in buying my house in February 2009
  13. called first-plus to ask for a settlement figure and was told that they would not agree to the sale as I was in negative equity and would not pay the loan off
  14. I then decided that if first-plus would not let me sell it I would not pay loan and force them to use the suspended repossession order, but they never used it and that is how the arrears have built up since 2009
  15. I did have a an offer for someone to buy my house in 2016 and once again went to Barclays (as by then first-plus gone) and solicitor for purchaser told him to pull out as Barclays stated that not only was the principle amount due but also £54,000 of arrears and advised that would leave me in negative equity and could not buy.
  16. Since then I have just waited for Elderbrige to get in touch so I could have my day in court and tell a judge what has happened and ask if it is legal for them to allow my arrears to become more than my principle loan amount (pig headed)

 

 

So I know face the fact that I will have to pay the outstanding amount and agree to a monthly charge of some £900.00 to stop the eviction, I was just hoping that Elderbridge had to go back to court to get another repossession order, if not I will not have my day in court and will have to start making the payments until I pop off this mortal coil

Link to post
Share on other sites

no that's brill.

don't take my word for things though!

 

 

have you checked they are now listed on LR?

 

 

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

yep land registry

if the charge is not in their name

stuff all they can do IMHO

what debt m'lud??

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...