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.   
  • 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

PRAC/BW Letter of Claim - Old Payday UK PDL


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2066 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

Greetings my fellow Acting Consumers :)

 

Have just come back from holiday only to find this letter (attached).

 

Went through all of it and started to panic a bit.

Been reading CAG since morning and I'm not sure how to go about this letter.

 

It's a Letter of Claim issued by BW Legal on behalf of PRAC for a PDL i took back in 2012.

 

I know I'am suppose to action it but after spending all day reading I just don't know how to. (too much information).

I do not have time to digest all that info as the deadline for response is 21/08 (tomorrow).

 

I'm guessing if I fail to respond on time, the next letter will be a Court Claim?

 

I had a look at my credit file and the Default date for this loan was 01/11/2012

I am literally months away being Statue Barred on this account :(

 

Is there anything I can do NOW to get out of this mess.

Possibly delay any proceedings for few months or Claim back from PDUK for irresponsible lending.

 

I was in a big trouble back then when I took this loan, stuck in payday loan loop with multiple PDL's.

 

Any help or advise would be much appreciated.

 

Thank you

bw.jpg

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

when was your last payment , SB date is nothing to do with defaulted date

re titled and moved to PDL forum

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

PDF please

read upload

go ring payday uk and ask

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

aw what a shame

prac bought a lemon...

 

go see and follow post 4 in this thread

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?481827-The-Pre-Action-Protocol-for-Debt-Claims-is-made-by-the-Master-of-the-Rolls-as-Head-of-Civil-Justice.-1st-Oct-2017

 

use OUR form NOT theirs

reason to dispute debt

Its Statute Barred.

 

pers I wouldn't both putting all the stuff about paperwork requests etc

 

dx

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

Great Stuff DX!

 

 

THank you very much.

 

 

Should I print off the PAP form, fill and send it to BW asap?

The deadline is tomorrow, they won't receive it by then.

There's also an option to do it online (according to their letters) but I'd rather not use as don't want to give too much information out.

If I decline the debt because it's SB should I request more paperwork (to buy some more time?) or just go bluntly "Statue Barred" as a reason :)

 

 

Thanks DX

Link to post
Share on other sites

forget their stupid deadline matters not

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

 

the rest as Ive already said in post 6

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 would leave it a week to make sure they cant respond and then act this month

 

No need to rush over this if they spend money trying to chase it up just because they have set a meaningless cut off point then tough luck to them.

 

Once you have sent the SB letter dont enter into any other correspondence on this matter, if they do sue then your defenec is absolute (SB) and there is sod all they can do to change it.

 

Now the SB clock is stopped 6 years after the date the debt became due so for a credit agreement that will be the billing cycle after you failed to pay them so for example, if you paid in may and then the june bill becomes errant when you dont pay and it defaults at the time of the july bill is due and you still havent paid.

 

As most bills fall at the end of the month it is likely that your account is only SB by a few days so better to let things drag out until there is a bit of blue water between the last payment date anniversary and when the actual account defaulted

Link to post
Share on other sites

not sending SB letter

returning PAP response form in post 4 of the thread in post 6 stating its statute barred as the reason not owed/disputed

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

Just to be clear here - Broken Whiney Legal's timescales do not apply - even the 30 days can be a bit off here or there and they really dont stick to them.

What does matter is the courts timescales... If you do get a claim form, make sure you stick to the timescales...

 

Just OOI, how many PDLs did you have?

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all for the replies :)

 

 

@fkofilee: I had quite a few PDLs back then. Got in a real mess with finances (had a baby, made redundant and eventualy evicted from a rented flat lol)

 

All of this around 2012 (the world was supposed to end or something... almost did) I've stopped paying back all PDLs and ignored pretty much all the rubbish they've sent me.

This one looked scary though as I know BW Loonies do take people to court so I panicked a bit.

 

 

I know I could start fighting back and claiming the moeny I paid but now I just want all of this to be over.

Debts SBed, written off... gone from my CF (not many left and all to be gone this year)

 

 

Waiting for Claim Form from the Courts is an option as it may buy some extra time but is it worth it...

It's a same reply/defense as PAP :)

 

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if it does come then if you win - Itll be another loss that they can mooch about...

As for the other loans...

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=72598

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

go get some moneyback poss? under irl claims to the lot of 'em..??

 

just get that post 10 done

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...

now time to get IRL claims running on every PDL you had

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...