Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are 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. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. 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 only contracted 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. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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
      • 160 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

Lowell County Claimform - old BT mobile debt


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2067 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

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Keep a copy of your log in details safe and go back to the link and do a CPR 31.14 request...as I have already advised.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have already unapproved it......and CCA are not applicable to mobiles......your doing a CPR 31.14

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

post 1st class mail to Lowell address on the claimform

you can use free proof of posting you get from the PO counter

all you need is to prove it was sent.

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

Ok Thanks. I found this link but is there a version that allows you to edit it ?

 

Sorry pdf working now ,didnt work before for some reason!

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?387484-LEGAL-CPR-31.14-Request-Request-for-information-when-a-Claim-has-been-issued.

 

But does this acknowledging the service with intention to defend all of the claim mean we now have the extended time for a defence automatically or??

Edited by Tired and Weary
change
Link to post
Share on other sites

To defend all automatically gives you 33 days...re read my post #11....again ...slowly:madgrin:

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfect

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Cpr 31.14 request was sent on the 14th June ,theyve received it and we havent heard anything from them yet.

 

What do i do now as regards the claim on moneyclaim.gov.uk,

i did say that i wanted to avoid court if possible.

 

Does putting in a defence automatically mean attending court as Andyorch said in an earlier post that it can be avoided with the right forms?????

 

I honestly havent the foggiest idea how to write a defence.

 

Without any details of debt its hard to know what to do, as my son has not provided any details other than its a bt broadband contract taken out in about 2014 for a flat he was only in for 2-3months.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

So youve not been using your time wisely then by reading other lowell claim threads???

 

Its to your advantage theyve not replied..think about it

 

Post 15 refers..to one part of the def...

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

Hi Dx,

yes ive read a few but cant seem to find anything similar ,

i havent got the faintest idea what to right in a defence.

without the CPR being received im a bit in the dark about exact details.etc...

 

All i know is looking at my sons credit file the account was opened in june 2014 and he appears to have made payments 12 times

 

so even if it was an 18 month contract that would only equate to about £240 (6 months remaining contract),

 

so where Lowells get £412 + their court fees and interest totalling £530 altogether ive no idea.

 

The POC state Lowells were assigned this debt in march 2017.

 

My son says he never received any debt assignment etc... as he has lived at 3 different places since 2015.

 

Regarding a defence does that need to be done as soon as possible?

June 1st + 33days

 

But as said i havent a clue how to write one in a legal jargon format like i see on here .

 

Is there any examples from threads on here somewhere i can adapt to use ??

 

Thanks

 

point 9. i havent asked them??

so may be irrelevant?

 

I posted an example which disappeared when i edited it that i could possibly use barring point number 9?????

 

Again.....

 

 

1. I received the claim from the the County Court Business Centre in Northampton on 1st June 2018.

 

2. Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

 

3. This claim appears to be for a telecommunications agreement with BT Plc.

 

4. The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate information to enable me to properly assess my position with regards the claim.

 

5.The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.

 

6.The Claimants statement of case states that the account was assigned from BT Plc to Lowell Portfolio on 27/03/2017. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.

 

7. On the 14/03/2018 I sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimant’s statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to Lowell Solicitors.

I requested the Claimant provide copies of the agreement with BT PLC, Notice of Assignment and Deed of Assignment.

 

8. Lowell Solicitors has not sent any of these documents to me.

 

9. In that letter I also asked the Claimant if we may agree to extend the time period allowed for filing of my defence pending receipt of documents (as allowed under CPR 15.5), but they have have failed to respond at all.

 

10. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation.

 

Therefore, it is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed.

 

11. I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case else the Claim should stand struck out.

 

12. In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment.

 

13. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.

 

Statement of Truth

 

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

 

Signed ________________________________

 

Dated ________________________________

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

defence is due by tuesday week [3rd july]

 

that s very old defence

use our search cag box in the top red toolbar

 

claimform Lowell mobile

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

Hi Andy and DX,

We received these from Lowells today, turns out it is a a BT mobile contract according to what they say.

 

All letters have his current temporary address on . Im totally confused now as getting info from my son is like hitting your head on a brick wall.

 

He recalls it was a 12 month contract, now lowells are claiming the last payment was made on January 2015, when in fact he says he paid it off but has no proof. His credit file show 5 payments made in 2015 up to end of July 2015 and 7 in 2014.

 

There are two letters attached both dated 15th June 2017 addressed to his current temp. address. He has only been here for a few months. In 2017 he was living at a different address. So look like fabricated letters. also his surname is not spelled correctly on all correspondance including the court claim(though its only the last letter thats wrong)

 

They claim the £412 is made up of £207.35 early termination fee and airtime debt of £205.17 (not including their court fees ,interest etc...)

 

Any comments

 

Also credit file

 

One of the pdfs in post 41 still has the name on can it be removed?

Thanks

Correct version here :

 

Heres remaining two:

docs1.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

So all copied and paste documents recreated to fit their claim.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to one of the letters received above in response to the cpr 31.14 request it states in part of it ``mobile phones have a service agreement and therefore a default notice doesn`t apply``.

 

But above this in the same letter it says the `contract number ` linking to the account was ......... where ...... happens to be a landline number Not a mobile number. I`m thoroughly confused.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you cant sort it out

How the beep...will the judge

If it ever gets that far.....

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

Hi DX, i did say earlier that im trying to help my son who has an autistic disorder and we are going through a difficult time seperate from this as mentioned early in the thread.

 

Im sorry i may be sounding dumb to you but ive never defended a court claim myself never mind for someone else ,so i would be greatful of some help.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have too!!

 

Post 40

The more you read the stronger we become

 

Its no big deal believe me

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

docs sorted thread tidied...

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

So is this the sort of defence needed?

 

Particulars of Claim for cross reference only

 

1)The defendant entered into an agreement with BT PLC under account reference .......(`the Agreement`)

2)The defendant failed to maintain the required payments and the service was terminated.

3) The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 27/03/2017 and notice given to the Defendant.

4) Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of £412.52 remains due and outstanding.

 

And the claimant claims

a) the sum of £412.52

b)Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue,accruing at a daily rate of £0.090,but limited to one year,being £33.00

c) Costs

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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.

 

1. Paragraph 1 is accepted insofar that a relationship did once exist between the Defendant and BT Plc however, I cannot recall this account (Agreement) and has yet to supply me with a copy of the Account/Agreement mentioned in particulars of Claim.

 

2.Paragraph 3 is denied .The defendant is unaware of any legal notice of assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to Law and property Act 1925 Section 136(1).

 

3.Therefore the defendant denies owing any money to the Claimant and the claimant is put to strict proof ,

 

Show how the Defendant has entered into an Agreement.

Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for.

Show how the Claimant has legal right ,either under statue or equity to issue a claim.

 

 

4.As per Civil Procedurelink3.gif Rule 16.5(4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed; having been provided with written requests for information under CPR 31.14 and to date have failed to provide any such documentation as detailed on the particulars of claim.

 

5.On the alternative, if 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 1925.

 

6.Notwithstanding the above should the alleged amount claimed include an early termination charge(s) amounting to the entire balance of the remaining contract. OFCOM guidance states that any Early Termination Charge that is made up of the entire balance if the remaining contract is unlikely to be fair as it fails to take into account the fact that the provider no longer has to provide and pay for their service.

 

7.By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Now they have sent us the documents shown in post.41 but the assignment looks fabricated and not a true copy and the last payment date Lowell are claiming was made is obviously not correct as per credit file showing in fact no payment made in january 2015. But five further payments made from march to july 2015. So their all amount claimed is obviously incorrect and should be denied .

Also can they still claim that assigment termination etc ... have been received if they may have been sent to a previous address and so not received by the defendant??

Edited by dx100uk
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

Point 2 requires a response ?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic 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...