Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Law Project are trying to force HMG to release details of how Sunak's hedge fund made large profits from Moderna. Government ordered to disclose Sunak’s hedge fund emails - Good Law Project GOODLAWPROJECT.ORG Good Law Project has won a battle with the Treasury after it tried to suppress emails between Rishi Sunak and the hedge fund he founded.  
    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • 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  
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2299 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

Hey there guys.....

 

I hope im posting in the right place and that maybe somebody can help me, im kinda going out my mind now.

 

I wont bore you with a full history but i will sumarize briefly,

 

January 2017 my wife and I where taken to court for non payment of council tax,

we was given a liability order and it was passed on to rundles enforcement agency for collection of payment.

We made a payment agreement with them but due to being made homeless and a situation beyond out control we never kept up with the payment.

 

In November 2017 rundles made contact again by sending us a "PRIOR NOTICE OF INTENDED PROCEEDINGS" letter,

we made contact and agreed to a weekly payment plan,

we made the first 3 weeks payments.

 

On December 18th we called them and asked if we could defer payment for 2 weeks as i was receiving no wages and start payment again on the 4th January, they told us we couldn't and it was tough luck.

 

Unfortunately we couldn't make the 2 payments like we told them but did do as we promised and made a payment last Thursday 4th january.

The day after my wife and I received a text from rundles asking us to contact their agent urgently and provided us with a mobile number for him,

 

we called immediately

he advised he was on annual leave until today (8th January) and to call back then.

We also contacted rundles head office but they would not talk to us as it had been passed to an agent and said we would need to call him monday.

 

We called the agent

he has said that unless we pay the full £426 by tomorrow (9th January) 12:00 he will have to come round and seize goods,

i advised him we dont have that money upfront but can reinstate the original weekly payment

he said no,

 

we told him that due to being in temporary emergency accommodation we don't have any of our own goods in the property that he could take.

He has said that if he cant get in or seize goods then we will be getting a commital referral tomorrow,

something like that,

he is using a lot of big confusing words and i dont know what to think.

 

Can anyone advise what my next steps should be

how to handle tomorrow,

is it possible my wife and I could be arrested tomorrow or is he trying to scare us?

 

If i contact my local council tomorrow is there anyway i could get them to stop this and take back debt?

 

Any advice at all would be great guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

of course you do know he is bluffing.

he cant force entry nor put anyone 'in prison'

 

best idea is ring the council concerned.

were they the ones that put you in the emergency home..do they know?

as this sounds like you are extremely vulnerable 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

 

We called the agent he has said that unless we pay the full £426 by tomorrow (9th January) 12:00 he will have to come round and seize goods.

I advised him we dont have that money upfront but can reinstate the original weekly payment he said no,

 

We told him that due to being in temporary emergency accommodation we don't have any of our own goods in the property that he could take.

 

He has said that if he cant get in or seize goods then we will be getting a commital referral tomorrow, something like that,

 

Can anyone advise what my next steps should be, how to handle tomorrow, is it possible my wife and I could be arrested tomorrow or is he trying to scare us?

 

If i contact my local council tomorrow is there anyway i could get them to stop this and take back debt?

 

What you were told is not right at all. Neither of you will be arrested and there will not be any committal referral. I will respond in more detail later this evening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical Rundles, Contact the council and a local councillor tell them that you are homeless and being threatened with prison for a Council Tax LO by a bailiff who is uttering threats of actions he cannot lawfully carry out.

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

As above,

 

See how may threads there have been in the last month, where the local councillor has stopped this dead in it's tracks. I always say contact the local head of the council too for good measure.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...