Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
    • Steam is still needed in many industries, but much of it is still made with fossil fuels.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

STA International Demand OUBSA Debt


LL78
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2254 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

In October 2016 I took out a loan online from the sister company of the O University (OU), OUSBA for close to 7.5K (for 2 modules). The repayments were 500 a month.

 

After a few months my circumstances changed and I was unable to make those repayments.

I arranged with OUSBA to pay a token payment of 60 a month until my circumstances changed.

 

My circumstances became increasingly worse.

I had and still have a lot of trouble with the OU - namely they refused to grade my end of year work because it was submitted a couple of days past the deadline.

 

However, this was due to malfunctioning software provided by the OU.

I have been appealing this decision (and other issues that I have had with the OU) for the last 6 months.

It has meant that I do not receive my degree.

It has been extremely stressful and has impacted negatively on my health as well as resulting in a loss of earnings.

 

Given all this I was unable to make one of the token repayments at the beginning of November, but paid it by the end of the month.

 

In January I received a letter from OUSBA which was dated the 23rd December 2017.

In this letter they refer to a Default Notice from the 25th November 2017 (which I did not receive) and said that they were terminating the agreement.

 

The last of my payments however was on the 21st December 2017 (2 days prior to this letter).

I wrote to them explaining the situation and asked that they revise the termination.

stating that I wished to continue with the token repayments until the situation changes.

I told them that I could provide a letter from doctor and also proof that I am currently unemployed.

 

They wrote back simply saying that the agreement has been passed onto their legal agents, STA International and I need to contact them.

 

A few days later I start receiving calls, SMS messages, emails, letters from STA International that state I must pay the rest of the loan 6.5K in full and I must respond to them within 14 days.

 

I am extremely nervous about this (I suffer from anxiety and the stress of dealing with the numerous issues with the OU has significantly intensified my condition

- I receive weekly professional help with it now)

 

I do not have this money, as mentioned above,

I am currently unemployed and struggling to make ends meet as it is.

I don’t want to make any mistakes in dealing with this.

Can anyone advise me on how best to deal with this situation.

 

Can STA take me to court? What’s the worst that can happen?

 

I am truly at my wits end after all of this.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

read these threads

https://cse.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-8889411648654839:6449422593&ie=UTF-8&q=STA+International+&sa=Search+CAG#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=STA%20International%20&gsc.page=1

STA wont do court

but hadfields sols will if instructed by the uni

only the UNI can take court action

is there not a student union there you can contact.?

 

might be best to seek advise from them esp as you have 'medical' issues.

and continue your payment direct to the UNI as you have been.

 

STA are a DCA

a DCA is NOT A BAILIFF

and have

ZERO legal powers.

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

Thanks for the reply dx100uk.

 

Unfortunately, because it is distance learning university there is no union only a students association. I have looked at their website and their peer support section is undergoing some change so is not available at the moment and the other student support redirects to the university website support page . (I have tried to use this service throughout my studies but it caused more trouble than it did good)

 

Plus OUSBA state that they are not the university but a separate (sister) company.

I wrote to them explaining the situation and asking if I could continue paying them the token payments each month until I get things sorted and am in the position to pay more. But they wrote back saying it has been handed to their legal agents STA and I have to contact them.

 

I am nervous about dealing with STA. They have been very intense so far, calling many times a day and sending SMS and emails on top of that. Do you think I should contact OUSBA again asking if I can just deal with them and make the payments to them (After all I didn't miss the payment in November I was just late with it)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sta are not legal agents

They are a dca

 

You deal with the uni

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

Again, thanks for the reply.

 

The debt is with OUSBA, the separate (sister) company of the Uni.

I contacted them in January already asking that they rescind the termination of the agreement and allow me to continue to make the token repayments

but they just just referred me back to STA and said I need to deal with them.

Do you suggest that I contact OUSBA again?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I contacted them in January already asking that they rescind the termination of the agreement and allow me to continue to make the token repayments

but they just just referred me back to STA and said I need to deal with them.

 

Have you put that in writing to the Uni? If not do so.

 

Once you have it in writing that they are washing their hands of it, then do nothing, ignore their pet DCA, in turn they'll return it back to the OU, who then might grow up and start a dialogue with you when they realise you're only going to pay them.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bazooka Boo.

 

If by Uni - you mean OUSBA (the sister company who I borrowed the money from) Then Yes, I put it in writing.

I'll attach what I wrote to them and their reply if you got a chance to look over it and maybe tell me if that's enough or if I should contact them again.

OUSBA Email.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so you have the OUSBA bank details?

 

If you were paying £50 a month to their account, then continue to do so, ignore their 'Agents' entirely....

 

You can if you wish respond to them, but be mindful of not getting into a game of letter tennis with them.

 

Simply,

 

Dear Bill&Ben,

 

Thank you for your recent correspondence, the details of which have been noted.

 

Unfortunately I am only able to pay £50 a month until my circumstances change, I will update you with my situation in three months.

 

I shall pay you via standing order, thank you for your assistance in this matter.

 

Sincerely.

 

 

Then set up a S/O to pay them each month.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I transferred £100 for jan and feb payment and emailed them (OUSBA) saying what bazooka boo suggested.

 

Thank you for your recent correspondence, the details of which have been noted.

 

Unfortunately I am only able to pay £50 a month until my circumstances change,

I will update you with my situation in three months.

 

I have transferred £100 for January and February and shall pay you via standing order,

thank you for your assistance in this matter.

 

Today they replied saying :

 

Thank you for your email.

 

I have looked at your records and can confirm that you account is now been referred to our collections agents.

You need to contact them to arrange your payment plan.

 

Should I just continue to pay OUSBA with the standing order I set up ?

or do I have to contact STA as they say?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ignore pay OUSBA

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 are under no legal obligation to pay anyone other than OUSBA.

 

This is the problem with emailing drones, you always get the standard knee jerk response.

 

No-one even read your email, you need to write them instead and tell them this is what is happening, you need a paper trail not a data trail.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean write them and tell them this is happening?

 

I wrote to them in January explaining the situation but they said that it's too late and i need to contact the STA

I do get the impression that they are reading the mails - they answered a specific question etc.

 

I also sent them what you suggested with regard to the standing order. I do get the impression that they are reading the mails - they just will not 'deal' with me anymore.

 

I will ignore as Dx100 suggests - for now anyhow - (STA have been calling and texting again today.)

 

But I'm still a bit nervous cause someone suggested to me that they more than likely are entitled to default the agreement and make me deal with STA because I originally breached the contract by not paying them back the original 500 a month.

So therefore I *have to do as they say and contact STA to make repayments.

 

Thanks for your replies, they're really appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well that somebody is TOTALLY WRONG.

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...