Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • 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
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • 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.
  • 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

MMF claimform - old CFO PDL


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2095 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

helping a friend out

 

she's being taken to court about a old cfo loan now mmf now lantern

 

we filed to say we fighting it and asked for all the info you need like credit agreement etc .

No response off them

 

defence needs to be in asap.

But not sure on this what we need to put

 

any help be great thanks

 

. P.s no payment ever been made

it's around 4yrs old and

 

also when first took loan out they just increased and increased without a payment in return she also lied about working but never checked.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please post up the claim form in pdf format.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also please fill this out

Link to post
Share on other sites

Copy and paste the q's in the 2nd link here and answer each q

 

We dont need to see the claimform forget that

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

Thread moved to Financial Legal Issues Forum ..please continue to post here to your thread.

 

Thread title amended

 

Regards

 

Andy

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi sorry for late response not been well

 

put in defence as no paper work

also was irresponsible selling no credit checks where done or employer checks

 

letter came today saying client is proceeding with claim . m

 

Got defence of bailiffs debts and bills site she did .

 

What do she do now

it's lantern Drs limited now

 

so do I take it she needs to go to court

she's not well

has really bad morning sickness 24/7 H

 

Has aspergers so hates confrontation of any kind

she's panicking now.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please post a copy of the defence submitted.

 

 

Andy

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

Please post a copy of the defence submitted.

 

 

Andy

1. The Defendant denies that he is indebted to the Claimant whether as alleged at all.

 

2. The Defendant contends that the Claimant is in breach of Rule 16.4(a) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 in that the Particulars of Claim do not set out a clear and concise statement of facts upon which they rely.

 

3. The Claimant has failed to identify or plead a date the cause of action allegedly accrued.

 

4. There are no details as to when the alleged default occurred, the degree of default, the Defendant contends that the pleadings are wholly inadequate and that the Claimant should be required to plead its case coherently and accurately as required by the CPR 16 and Civil Procedure Practice Direction 16.

 

5. The Claimant has failed to comply with Practice Direction 16 Pre Action Conduct in that it

a. Failed to set out the basis on which the claim is made;

b. Failed to provide a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based;

c. Failed to detail what the claimant wants from the defendant;

d. Failed, if financial loss is claimed, provide an explanation of how the amount has been calculated;

e. Failed details of any funding arrangement (within the meaning of rule 43.2(1)(k) of the CPR) that has been entered into by the claimant.

f. Failed to list those documents upon which the claimant intends to rely;

g. Failed to state the date by which the claimant considers it reasonable for a full response to be provided by the defendant;

h. Failed to afford the Defendant the opportunity of requesting copies of those documents prior to the filing of a Defence

i. Failed, knowing that the Defendant was unrepresented to refer the defendant to this Practice Direction particularly in respect of paragraph 4 concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction;

j. Failed to warn the defendant that ignoring the letter before claim will lead to the claimant starting proceedings and may increase the defendant's liability for costs.

 

6. The Defendant denies receiving a Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 from either the claimant in respect of the alleged agreement, or the original creditors, and puts the Claimant to strict proof by providing a certified copy of said Notice as referred to in the Particulars of Claim.

 

7. The Particulars of Claim are lacking detail and do not identify any specific item, service or goods to which the Defendant is allegedly indebted nor do they specify when the alleged agreement was entered.

 

8. The Claimants claim form fails to adequately or even accurately set out the nature of the claim

 

9. The Defendant contends that the Claimant has failed to attach any documents to the Claim Form as required.

 

10. The Defendant demands by reason of the provisions of Civil Procedure Practice Direction 16 para 7.3 that the claimant does provide a certified copy of the alleged executed written Agreement referred to in the particulars of claim, as the Defendant does not recall signing such document.

 

11. The Defendant reserves the right to replead their Defence should the claimant replead its claim adequately.

 

12. The Defendant denies being served a Default Notice / Notice of Termination of Agreement pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 by the original creditor for the alleged agreement and puts the Claimant to strict proof by providing a copy of said Default Notice / Notice of Termination of Agreement as referred to in the Particulars of Claim.

 

13. Section 87 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 states as follows:-

a. (1)Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a “default notice ”) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,—

(a) to terminate the agreement, or

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

© to recover possession of any goods or land, or

(d) to treat any right conferred on the debtor or hirer by the agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

(e) to enforce any security.

 

14. The Defendant denies signing any agreement with the Claimant and demands the claimant provide a certified copy of the Deed of Assignment signed by the original creditor, the Defendant & the Claimant, as proof they have the right title and interest to pursue the alleged debt.

 

15. The Defendant demands that in accordance with s.136 (1) of the law of property act 1925, that the claimant do provide proof of absolute assignment, by providing a certified copy of the Deed of Assignment between the original creditor and the Claimant to show proof of complete transfer and ownership (all rights, title, interest, benefits and liabilities) and that they have the power to give good discharge pursuant to s.136 (1) © of the Law of Property Act. As referred to in the Particulars of Claim.

 

16. The Defendant avers that the Claimant’s pleadings are an abuse of process.

 

17. The Particulars do not identify any cause of action.

 

18. The Claimant is put to strict proof.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Far far too much !!

 

why didnt you Use our std defence in any pdl claimform thread?

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

What date did you file that?

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

Far far too much !!

 

why didnt you Use our std defence in any pdl claimform thread?

I was ill she panicked, was told they was good to help, then they stopped helping her ,now they going ahead with the court case. No clue what to do now.

 

Far far too much !!

 

why didnt you Use our std defence in any pdl claimform thread?

 

Didn't know there was one sorry

 

What date did you file that?

 

30th June I think it was give or take a day

Link to post
Share on other sites

Next move is theirs

They have 28days

 

I take it you've not yet received an n180?

Direction questionnaire?

From the court?

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

No nothing yet

when she gets that come back for advise is it ,

 

what I do know is they put it on her credit file as a default pretty recently then they closed it so looks paid i don't understand that .

 

Thanks for the help by the way

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to get reading up on things..cag is self help too

 

When the OC sold the debt.

They default it, then mark it £0

There should be an entry from mmf showing the same defaulted date and the true bal

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 need to get reading up on things..cag is self help too

 

When the OC sold the debt.

They default it, then mark it £0

There should be an entry from mmf showing the same defaulted date and the true bal

 

Cfo never done a default on her credit file that much you can see but mmf did and month later marked it as closed which I find really weird .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope only the oc can register a default

Not a debt buyer

 

Ignore the cal section if thats what you are looking means nothing

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

N180?

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

need to read up whilst you await things to happen

plenty of threads here

you should be doing that so you know what to do.

 

yes to mediation

yes to small claims track

State your local county court

1 wit you

the rest is obv

 

3 copies

1 for your file

1 to the court

1 to solicitors [you can omit sig/phone/email]

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

that's what we are here for...

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...