Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • How much of the documentation have you seen from when probate was obtained? And do you have a copy of the original will? I can't remember. My thought about you making the decision on your own to go with another lawyer is that three of you are meant to be beneficiaries of this will trust, aren't you? Normally you would need to act together. HB
    • Octopus allows you to pay by variable Direct Debit, so you pay only for what you use but still benefit from DD pricing. That's what I've done ever we were SOLRed over to them in July 2022.
    • Hi guys, I am about to file my defence via email as cannot log in to the claim anymore.  Can you please advise if I can paste below and if it's good to go for now, or should I add anything else in?  Thanks!  The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4.  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.  1.  The Defendant is the recorded keeper of vehicle xxxx xxx.  2.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant - Parking Eye LTD.  3.  As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim.   4.  In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant.  5.  The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer.   6.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.
    • Getting onto the ladder: The first-time buyer conundrumView the full article
    • Ooops - one to many also s..... my draft reply should read as:  Thank you for your response Mr Schnur  I set out my position quite clearly in my letter of claim and nothing has changed. Your insurance requirement is unlawful and is contrary to section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act, and also section 72 of the same statute. I would also refer you to the outcomes in PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729).  My deadline for action - 1 May 2024 - still stands, and if P2G wish to avoid the addition of court costs and interest to my claim, you may wish to respond positively before that date.
  • 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

Letter received: LLoyds Credit Card debt - "account now closed - fully paid" But it isnt?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2208 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 everyone.

 

Need some a little bit of help.

 

Got a letter from westcot, saying my account with them had been fully paid, and was now closed. And to stop making more payments to them. Also it said the balance was: minus £303.

 

Phoned them up as I thought there was more to pay on this, and the lovely lady, after putting me on hold for a while, explained that the originator of the debt had informed them it had been paid, then retract that message later. She would contact them, to get an explanation. But there was still £1400 owing.

 

Where does this leave me? I have a letter saying the debt is cleared. Can they comeback and say "oops, mistake, keep paying" or is the letter legally enforceable? In the eyes of the law, is the debt now clear?

 

Thanks

 

doomsponge

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they say the debt is cleared in writing, you are entitled to believe that the debt is cleared and if there is record of it on your credit record, to ask the credit reference agencies to correct your record to show it as paid in full

 

Of course the debt owner can come back later to rectify a mistake and if they prove the debt, they have right to enforce it, subject to limitations act and going through the correct process.

 

What is the history of this debt ?

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

what are you doing blindly paying DCA's and for god sake ringing then up

they are not bailiffs and have zero legal power to demand anything...

 

have you check all the other debts you are blindly paying off via step change are even enforceable??

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

Fair point.

I suspect you may already know the answer to your question.

 

Where do I start?

 

From looking at my credit report, some things have dropped off that im paying for.

 

CCA to the owners of the debts, then post up the results?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep

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 didnt say that, you said you got a letter and the girl on the phone had been informed the debt had been paid and unless she wasnt talking to you that seems like a confirmation of the letter.

 

I read it as you thought there was £1400 still due.

 

If you care to rewrite your first post in a suitably worded and chronological manner so it is absolutely clear who said what and when then advice will be given that fits exactly to the question.

 

Now you have me thinking I have given you poor advice because I read your post as having received a letter, queried it and then got verbal confirmation.

 

really? The girl on the phone did say that the letter was a mistake and there was still money owed. Does this letter trump all others?
Link to post
Share on other sites

you didnt say that, you said you got a letter and the girl on the phone had been informed the debt had been paid and unless she wasnt talking to you that seems like a confirmation of the letter.

 

I read it as you thought there was £1400 still due.

 

If you care to rewrite your first post in a suitably worded and chronological manner so it is absolutely clear who said what and when then advice will be given that fits exactly to the question.

 

Now you have me thinking I have given you poor advice because I read your post as having received a letter, queried it and then got verbal confirmation.

 

Sorry for any confusion. Here is an edited version, making what the girl said more explicitly clear:

 

Hi everyone.

 

Need some a little bit of help.

 

Got a letter from westcot, saying my account with them had been fully paid, and was now closed. And to stop making more payments to them. Also it said the balance was: minus £303.

 

Phoned them up as I thought there was more to pay on this, and the lovely lady, after putting me on hold for a while, explained: "The originator of the debt had informed them, the debt had been paid, but then retracted that message 3 days later. She would contact the debt originator, to get an explanation. But there was still £1400 owing"

 

Where does this leave me? I have a letter saying the debt is cleared. Can they comeback and say "oops, mistake, keep paying" or is the letter legally enforceable? In the eyes of the law, is the debt now clear?

 

Thanks

 

doomsponge

Link to post
Share on other sites

forget what was said on the phone

its inadmissible anyway!

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

Ah good old Estoppel - I once went to Court against a Solicitor who paid me a sum of money when they dealt with a will.

 

After they issued a final account and the service was completed they discovered they had overpaid me and sent a begging letter about 2 months later asking for the over payment back

 

I wrote to them and said the principle of estoppel applies and they refused, insisting I pay the money back.

 

I wrote to them several times asking them why they believed the principle of estoppel didn't apply and they refused to answer and took me to Court.

 

In court I showed my letters to the Judge who agreed with me in principle and then explained why estoppel didn't apply in this case, I thanked him for the explanation and offered to refund the money immediately saying that I only ever wanted an explanation.

 

So no win you might think but the cheeky Solicitor piped up about the matter of their costs at which point the Judge virtually bellowed at them that they should be paying my costs as they had ample opportunity to answer my simple question regarding estoppel.

 

That made me smile all the way home, plus I'd earned a bit of interest on the money while I had it and stuck it to an incompetent solicitor who had been useless throughout their service, but whom I was stuck with because of the deceased's arrangements..

 

Estoppel is basically the principle that mistakes cannot be rectified once the account is declared closed, the same reason that shops have notices that say mistakes in change given cannot be rectified once you leave the shop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...