Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Been Paying Payplan for +6yrs - Can i still get CCJs - all defaults gone - CRF is clean


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2165 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

Evening Peeps, newbie here.

 

I used to be a member a long time ago and found the info on here very helpful. So thankyou !

 

I have now got a clean bill of health on my credit score, but still owe debts to various DCA's.

 

My question is - can a DCA still try and issue a CCJ, even after say 8 years of the original default account ( notice of default has been isssued )

- my accounts have ALL dropped of the various CRA's as they all defaulted many years ago ( over six years ago )

- I am still paying them via a DMP.

 

To summarise all debts are over 8 years old now.

And I am still paying them.

They just dont appear on my Credit Reference Agencies.

 

Are these debts still enforceable in a court of law ?

Lets assume than none of the DCA's have the original CCA's ?

 

Thanks for any info, will be much appreciated, but cannot find this information, having trawled the forums.

 

Big love and respect ! x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

you are still paying so not statute barred

 

you need to get CCA request off to each of them..

 

I smell a cash cow...

 

list your debts and who you pay

what was the type of credit and who was the original creditor

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

If you have kept the debts alive by making payments then yes they can still bring a claim. However, you should certainly check their enforceability by sending them requests for a CCA's. If they are unable to supply you with CCAs then the debts will be unenforceable and you should stop paying until such time that they are able to produce the agreement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info Peeps much appreciated, and so quick ! Thanks a million !

 

I am lost dx100uk - what does ' smell a cash cow ' mean, sorry !

 

This is what I thought. Request CCA's and take it from there.

 

They are all credit card debts ( ex wife loved LOVED shopping ) mainly to banks.

 

DCA's

 

Cabot

Moorcroft

Paragon Personal Finance

 

I am still paying them all through a DMP.

 

Thanks in advance !

Link to post
Share on other sites

cash cowing means your are blindly paying a debt you don't need to solely because you think/though a DCA has some magical powers overs you

they are not bailiffs and have ZERO legal powers

 

get those CCA request running

remove yourself from the DCA milking parlour

 

whos the DMP with

not fee paying I hope!!

 

Moorcroft don't buy debts

who are their clients

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 thanks dx100uk - yes I thought that ! Thanks for heads up ! Moooooo !

 

No it’s Payplan DMP.

 

I cannot even remember who the Moorcroft Debts are for ? Does it matter then if they don’t buy debts ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

its an important part of that story

as their client could be the original creditor but I doubt it after all this time..

 

anyhow it now very important to send WHOM YOU PAY thru Payplan a CCa request for EACH debt.

 

I've slightly re titled your thread and moved it to the debt management forum

there you will find lots of very useful other threads to read.

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

I’m pretty sure Moorcroft didn’t have these debts a few years ago.

 

Do you recommend going through Payplan with the CCA requests then ? As opposed to doing it all by myself ?

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mean 'thru' payplan..

 

time to read others stories now..

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?417-Debt-Management-Plan-Companies

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

well get reading

no never ever go BK/IVA etc etc

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

it bounce around sometimes

try again tomorrow..

 

how much total do you supposedly owe......

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

should be able to kill +75% of that..

do you know who your original creditors were can you not get it online at payplan under your account number?

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

Yes

Lloyd’s bank ( Akinika ) about overdrawn current account

Egg

Capital one

HBOS

 

Actually stands at 27k !

 

But seems to me they are still all so high !

 

I can get lots of info from Payplan and will post tomorrow ....

 

Start CCA straight away !

 

Thank DX !

Edited by yodabug
Link to post
Share on other sites

:yo::yo:

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

Morning DX

 

I have drafted all letters to DCA's. And ready to go.

 

Some have put this into letter as well ?

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY OR ANY COMPANY YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT.

 

The standard CCA letter does not have this clause - should I include it ?

 

Many thanks

 

( PS still not accepting paypal donations ! )

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks OCogger x

 

trying to understand the terminology here - on some posts

 

what does

.......if paragon bought them they are both well lemon debts and you've been cash cowed blind....

 

I understand the cash cow thing, but ' well lemon debts ? '

 

cheers Peeps ! x

Link to post
Share on other sites

you do acknowledge the debt, you are paying it!

 

As for cash cow, google the 5 animals of finance and you will see where the terminology comes from

lemon is opposite of peach so a peach is something juicy and a lemon is something bitter. common parlance with used car sales.

 

Morning DX

 

I have drafted all letters to DCA's. And ready to go.

 

Some have put this into letter as well ?

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY OR ANY COMPANY YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT.

 

The standard CCA letter does not have this clause - should I include it ?

 

Many thanks

 

( PS still not accepting paypal donations ! )

Link to post
Share on other sites

1st class with free proof of posting from the PO counter

you only need to prove you sent them.

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...