Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. 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. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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 2281 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

Hi

 

I'm pulling my hair out with an ongoing council tax issue or issue's' rather !

 

I recently received 8 letters from my local council about old council tax bills dating as far back as 2008! The bills are for a number of different properties (I've moved around a lot)

A couple of them are final small bills that I've missed after moving out, another is for a shared property where I paid my share and unfortunately someone else didn't and another is for two months after I moved out of a property.

 

In 2012, my car was seized unfairly (I used it for self employment at the time and the bailiff used very dodgy means to remove it) to cover a £217 bill, the car was worth £3k and sold for £700, only £200 of that went to the council. On the day he took it, I rang the council while he was there to offer payment of the £217 and they refused to accept it.

 

After receiving the letters recently, i have raised an issue (not an official complaint yet) to say that I do not owe them said council tax, number 1 because they took a £3k car and got nothing for it even though I offered payment and the bailiffs took so much for illegal fees at the time and also because the other property was shared and they can chase the other person on the bill. I can also provide evidence of moving out of the other property.

 

I have been going back and forth with the council for a couple of weeks now who are refusing to listen to me and keep repeating that I am liable for all properties and accounts. The total outstanding is nearly £2000. They refuse to acknowledge that they did anything wrong in taking my car and actually said if I had offered to pay the bailiff or the council they would've much rather have accepted it, which is rubbish!

 

When I received the letters, I contacted them immediately and asked that any further bailiff action was placed on hold while they investigated my points but the council ignored me and I have received numerous letters from THREE different bailiff agencies adding on further fees so the outstanding now totals £3,200!!! Its insane.

 

My time to make an arrangement was up with one agency so I have had to agree to make payments of £400 a month to clear the £1,400 that they hold otherwise they would've visited my property. Another agency have given me 7 days.

 

How is this OK? They have already taken a car which they should not have done ( I complained at the time and obviously my complaint was not upheld!)

 

There are other people named on two of the bills yet they aren't being pursued.

 

I have provided evidence of not living in one property in the time they claim but they have ignored it.

 

I read something about a liability order only lasting 12 months?

 

Is there anything I can do? I would even be willing to just take the council tax arrears on the chin and pay the council, but I cannot afford to pay £1,200 on top of that in bailiff fees!

 

help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I'm pulling my hair out with an ongoing council tax issue or issue's' rather !

 

I recently received 8 letters from my local council about old council tax bills dating as far back as 2008! The bills are for a number of different properties (I've moved around a lot).

 

A couple of them are final small bills that I've missed after moving out, another is for a shared property where I paid my share and unfortunately someone else didn't and another is for two months after I moved out of a property.

 

In 2012, my car was seized unfairly (I used it for self employment at the time and the bailiff used very dodgy means to remove it) to cover a £217 bill, the car was worth £3k and sold for £700, only £200 of that went to the council. On the day he took it, I rang the council while he was there to offer payment of the £217 and they refused to accept it.

 

How is this OK? They have already taken a car which they should not have done ( I complained at the time and obviously my complaint was not upheld!

 

When your complaint was rejected by the local authority in 2012, did you ask for the complaint to be considered as a Stage Two complaint or alternatively, did you raise your complaint with the Local Government Ombudsman?

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you offered to pay the council in 2012, did the offer include what you owed to the bailiff in fees up until that point.

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,

 

I took it to a stage 2 yes and it was rejected again. They completely ignored all of my points and at that point I didn't feel like I would get anywhere with the ombudsman either.

 

The bailiff used a police officer to get in to my home, told the police that there had been a disturbance which was untrue, I didn't even answer the door or speak to him. The officer came to my door and told me I HAD to open the door, which I now know is of course not true. I was obviously scared at the time so listened to the police officer. The bailiff then removed a number of items, including toys that belonged to my son, and placed them all on my front drive, obviously as a way of embarrassing me in to paying, then eventually took my car. At every point, I said I would pay what was owed but he ignored me. The bailiff was also aggressive and threatened to forcefully take my phone off me in front of the officer, yet she did nothing. I complained to the police and the council at the time and got an apology off the police but nothing off the council who are still maintaining that they followed procedure and if I have an issue with the fees that were taken from the sale of my car, then I have to complain to Marstons. I did this at the time and it was ignored. The whole thing became so stressful that I left it there. lost my car and my means of work transportation.

 

To now face the same 'arrears' when I went through all of that, is just disgusting. At the time, I think, If I remember correctly that I offered to pay the full amount to the council and they just wouldnt accept it and said I HAD to deal with the bailiff who at that point had probably added on attendance fees, removal fees etc etc which I couldn't afford. I remember at the time that I checked what they could legally charge me for letters, attending etc etc and the fees were way above that.

 

Also, on two of the outstanding bills, two other people are named, yet the council are not pursuing them.

 

It's just bullying to be honest!

 

What I also have an issue with, is that for each outstanding account, even though 4 are with marstons, 4 with another agency and 1 with another, they have added on separate fees for each account rather than one fee!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, on two of the outstanding bills, two other people are named, yet the council are not pursuing them.

 

There is no requirement for them to do so. In any case they cannot do so anyway whilst they are using enforcement action against you for the same debt.

 

 

What I also have an issue with, is that for each outstanding account, even though 4 are with marstons, 4 with another agency and 1 with another, they have added on separate fees for each account rather than one fee!

You will see the initial fee with each liability order for the £75 whereas charging of the £235 for each case depends on the situation regarding each enforcement agent and what cases they had and when.

 

Have you obtained a statement from the enforcement agents for each account to show when and where fees and payments have been applied to the outstanding balances ?

 

Simply stating that the fees are illegal will not get you anywhere, you need to be able to specifically challenge why they are wrong in your view.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the old rules the fees would have been taken off any payment in full before anything came off the outstanding tax bill, so unless you offered full payment of all sums due the council would not accept.

 

Any issues about the amount due on the LO should have been addressed before it was issued, if it was issued against you only, then I am afraid the bailiff is quite correct in enforcing it against you. Those issues should have been addressed before.

 

Unfortunately goods sold at auction rarely fetch a third of what they would be worth.

Any breach in the distress procedure should also have been addressed at the time.

I cant think you will get any joy out of a complaint made now in regards to those. The rules then were different than they are now unfortunately.

 

If I were you I would concentrate on what they are asking for now, on the various accounts. Do you have a list of all LOs issued and outstanding sums remaining under them. If not I would construct one.

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

Crossed posts ss, fully agree.

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...