Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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
    • 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.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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

Belfast bakery did not discriminate in gay cake case


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2010 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

Just a little unfinished business

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-discrimination/belfast-bakery-did-not-discriminate-in-gay-cake-case-uk-court-rules-idUKKCN1MK10O

 

A Northern Irish bakery’s refusal to bake a cake iced with a pro-gay slogan on account of its owners’ Christian beliefs was not discriminatory, Britain’s Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday.

 

 

Just to clarify, I am largely (although not actively) anti religion - best description I've ever heard of religion is that its the real original sin,

I think the DUP is a little qualified stain on an already heavily stained political spectrum,

and am certainly NOT anti LGBT

 

I simply believe that NO single interest group should gain preferential rights in law over any let alone all other.

 

 

Wonder if this will be deleted?

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what I class myself as, I believe in God, I believe in the concept of what a church should be - yet I don't agree with the concept of what the church currently is

 

I'm proud to say I'm not a homophobe or a racist but part of me does support the bakers on this

 

Like they say they had served the customer before and were not against him

I agree they were being homophobic in refusing to support gay marriage but that part of me that supports the bakers just keeps saying that it was made illegal to force the straight view on everyone - why should it be legal to force the lgtb view on other people

 

I think they should have been supported to understand it not forced

Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would wish the couple well in their partnership,

but as they at best allowed themselves and their love to be deliberately used by an activist lobby group targeting anothers beliefs I find I can't - and it was targeted - read the full story.

 

If this were a Christian or Muslim group deliberately targeting a similar but clearly LGBT cake shop and ordering a cake saying "marriage is the sacred union between a man and a woman" let alone something more 'activist' and were refused.

I would expect the end result would again be to find for the targeted bakery.

 

Words do matter to pretty much everyone.

I would actually prefer that any couple could innocently go to their local cake shop and get their cake with blessings whatever the bakers personal beliefs were, or be the better person and be tolerant and accept others genuine beliefs if they were politely declined with an explanation

... rather than acting with some lobby group to deliberately and actively go out of their way to target anothers equally legitimate (like them or not) beliefs - which certainly appears to be what this couple did in this case

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

If religion wasn't involved would the outcome have been different, if they were just a cake shop that refused to bake a LGBT cake.

 

LOL The cake has resisted all questions on its sexuality; as is its right,

It says it is just a simple jam sponge and cream with some chocolate sprinkles, that the icing message was not necessarily its personal beliefs and was made a little overly sugary for its taste, but other than that had no strong feelings either way about it and asked for its privacy to be respected ..

:-D

 

The clear personal beliefs of the bakers is the whole of the issue and the case found that the bakers were happy to serve the couple and it was the specific cake message which impacted their own beliefs that they objected to.

- as it seems it was intended to ...

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what ive read of the story, it seems like the people that wanted to buy the cake, did this delibrately as they knew what would happen if the baker said no.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting update

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/gay-cake-christian-bakers-photos-ashers-northern-ireland-a8579136.html

 

So despite again a stated deliberate 'tit for tat' what is the 'Christians' response?

 

Surprisingly Very 'Christian - despite the simple fact I believe its highly likely the 'Christians could have sued and would have won.

 

 

 

Quote:

Responding to the refusal to hand over the images, Ciarán Kelly, deputy director of the Christian Institue, said: "We’ve been in touch with the company involved and thanked them for their impending refund.

"We think it’s great that we live in a country where people are free to express, or not express, their sincerely held beliefs – the point underlined so emphatically in court yesterday."

 

 

 

 

Now if only queerspace took a 'Christian' approach .... (pun intended)

 

:sad:

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your original post is incorrect

 

A Northern Irish bakery’s refusal to bake a cake iced with a pro-gay slogan...

 

The cake said "Support Gay Marriage" so wasn't a slogan it was a 'promotion' and the court upheld the bakers right not to have to promote something against his beliefs.

Life is so much better and happier as an Optimist than a boring depressed Pessimist

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your original post is incorrect

 

The cake said "Support Gay Marriage" so wasn't a slogan it was a 'promotion' and the court upheld the bakers right not to have to promote something against his beliefs.

 

I acknowledge that my initial post erroneously omitted quotes from around the phrase, as it was a quote from the article,

... as it would seem you perhaps didn't notice or chose to ignore..

 

BUT If we are being pedants, I'll briefly play:

 

Please confirm that you are legally qualified to technically review a supreme courts judgement, and have confirmed that slogan was NOT legitimately used to describe the message anywhere in the case?

... Particularly as secondary school English tells us that 'promote' is a wider process (possibly that the court was passing judgement on) and 'a slogan' just one of many possible mechanisms within a promotion process.

It seems to my lay but reasonable English that the message was adjudged part of a promotion process, hence the message itself could quite correctly be commonly identified as a slogan,

.. rather than a simple message of Love, Good Will or even Congratulations for example.

 

 

 

I have no doubts that the result/ruling as delivered by the supreme court is a correct and just one.

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor old Jeremy will not now be able to force Jewish printers to print Palestinian terrorist organisations literature. A coarse example of where we were with the original ruling. The law decided some years ago that gay rights are supreme to religious rights with the csae of the B&B refusing unmarried couples to stay there.

 

 

A publican can refuse to serve anyone and not give a reason for the refusal. If the person refused service then complains of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation the publican loses their licence (and worse). Now refusing to serve someone because they are gay would be stupid but why must the publican be on the back foot if he decides that the drunk in front of them has had enough but might take offence because of their (unexpressed) sexuality?

 

 

 

We create a lot of unforseen consequences when one minority is promoted over others in the name of equality.The govt is going to do it all over again with ethnic monitoring of pay as well as gender monitoring. If Trade Unions were worth anything this wouldnt be necessary

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

Trade unions are worth it. The problem is that the majority of stuff they can do has been stripped or restricted by governments. That and the fact that some of the big players will only do anything if theres big publicity in it.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the bigger picture has been lost here.

These selfish individuals wasted a lot of taxpayer's money to prove a point which didn't need to be proved.

If anyone tells me that they don't want to deal with me, I go somewhere else.

I might make a bit of noise there And then and on social media just to upset them, but surely a reasonable person would not waste other people money just to be told they're right (or wrong).

I wonder if the 2 gays run a bakery and I asked to have "gay love is wrong" printed on a cake, would they do it?

Personally I don't care what colour, religion or sexuality people are, but I do get peed off when anyone wastes my taxes.

There are politicians doing it, that's their job (wasting taxpayer's money I mean)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres a couple of good points to be made there king12345

 

 

Apparently it was the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland that funded the cost of these queerspace antics NOT queerspace themselves.. Somewhere around £300,000.

and I stand by the mild (IMO) usage of the term antics given the stated situation.

 

Now surely, with both being 'protected characteristics' (let alone the very questionable nature of the queerspace antics from the word go) the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland should have funded both or neither.

 

AND given the supreme courts ruling, surely the Equality Commission should be seeking a refund of that taxpayers money from queerspace and perhaps giving it to the JUSTIFIED Christians to cover their somewhat smaller but still significant costs .....

... and the Equality Commission person who authorised this sacked given their seeming prejudiced or at best simply poor decisions.

 

:sad:

 

 

Interesting that queerspaces' taxpayer funded costs are reported as notably higher than the Christians' none taxpayer funded costs

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strangely edit is creating new posts on occasion

 

I tried to add the word 'apparently'

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read through some more detail on this case and it would seem I was mistaken.

I initially thought it at least was a cake ordered by a genuine loving couple for their same sex wedding, even if the message was more political than bridal

It would appear this wasn't a cake for a wedding at all.

From what I can now gather, it was just a cake with an after the order promotional message added by a queerspace activist targeted at a Christian baker

 

If that is the case, that the Equality commission EVER agreed to support this and that ANY court found for them is utterly beyond sense.

 

It would appear I was VASTLY overly lenient and understanding.

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the bigger picture has been lost here.

These selfish individuals wasted a lot of taxpayer's money to prove a point which didn't need to be proved.

If anyone tells me that they don't want to deal with me, I go somewhere else.

I might make a bit of noise there And then and on social media just to upset them, but surely a reasonable person would not waste other people money just to be told they're right (or wrong).

I wonder if the 2 gays run a bakery and I asked to have "gay love is wrong" printed on a cake, would they do it?

Personally I don't care what colour, religion or sexuality people are, but I do get peed off when anyone wastes my taxes.

There are politicians doing it, that's their job (wasting taxpayer's money I mean)

 

That's where I'm at on this.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

what I meant was if the Unions were active in this area the govt wouldnt need to even contemplate having to do ethnic monitoring. When I was a big tough trade union rep we had processes in place for this and that was 40 years ago. Whe i retired my role as a rep was managing change, alomost on behalf of the employer. Unity is powr but when the senior admin outnumber the rest of the workforce it is difficult to take effective action and incidents of bad behaviour by an employer are then almost impossible to resolve when in the past you could just embarrass them by getting a thousand peopel to take their tea brak at exactly the same time and disrupt the managemtn echelon's meeting by standing under their windows and shouting. the 2 times table.

 

 

Trade unions are worth it. The problem is that the majority of stuff they can do has been stripped or restricted by governments. That and the fact that some of the big players will only do anything if theres big publicity in it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

and hers a similar issue

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/24/european-parties-urged-agree-israel-boycott-bds-antisemitic-mep

 

Need to ensure that a differential is maintained between actions resulting from the state of Israels abuses and antisemitism.

 

 

A group of Jewish jobs attacking someone is the same as a group of Muslim or NF or gay or wasp yobs attacking someone.

The simple fact of their religion, beliefs, colour or origins should make no difference whatsoever to how their actions are perceived and acted upon.

 

Any attempt to silence criticism of acts simple because of a persons 'characteristics' should be unequivocally apposed.

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...