Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • 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
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Lending Stream GDPR failure***Success***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2022 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

Well fellow caggers it seams like lending stream are taking no notice of the new GDPR regs

 

I applied for a SAR on 25 May and have just spoken to them to find out where it is as I have no comms from the part from their acknowledgement

 

They have informed me that because it has been sold to Lantern that they need some more time to get the required information.

 

I have informed them that I shall be reporting them to the ICO for failure to comply.

 

Has anyone got the link to the letter I need to send to the ICO I can't seem to find it now

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sar

Link to post
Share on other sites

Report the fact they are being obstructive to the ico

Why dont you start an IRL complaint anyway?

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 have already DX

 

I only had one loan with them and it went to the ombudsman but was rejected

 

my main reason for this SAR is to see if they carried out the default procedure correctly and see what info they have in case of a claim being issued

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how the court system works in Northern Ireland, but in the England and Wales you'd send a letter before action and then issue a claim in the court.

 

The cause of action is their breach of their statutory duty under the Data Protection Act 2018 and you'd claim damages for distress.

 

If you issue a claim you'd want to keep it small - £250 would be a good starting point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now received an email from NI Courts and Tribunal service saying they have to refer the claim to a judge to see if it can proceed as the courts staff don't know if you can submit a claim for damages due to distress

 

I will say that all small claims are checked by court staff before being issued in NI

 

anyone heard of this sort of thing in the UK?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Checks are also carried out that claims are suitable for MCOL (England & Wales)

 

Please be aware that not all disputes are suitable for MCOL. For more information on

different types of disputes you can download booklet EX301 – ‘I’m in a dispute – what can I

do?’ from http://www.justice.gov.uk/forms

 

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

MCOL is probably not appropriate for this sort of claim as your damages are for "distress" which is technically a personal injury. You'd want to issue the claim through your local county court.

 

Cant anyway...this is Northern Ireland

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

well whilst the claim is being queried LS have sent what they think is sufficient as a SAR

 

they've included

1) Statements

2) Application

3) DN

4) TN

 

No screen prints, calls, who they've disclosed my data to etc

 

I have emailed them to notify them of their failings and have given them 48Hrs to comply

 

Im awaiting my claim coming back from being looked at by a Judge but I am going to let it run

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is actually the Data Protection Act 2018 which gives legal effect to the GDPR in the UK.

 

Not quite correct, until Brexit that is. The GDPR is in effect without the DPA 2018 but the DPA makes changes, exclusions and exemptions as allowed for by the GDPR so they both have to be read together. Mostly the DPA just incorporates the GDPR for when Brexit occurs with main exemptions for security services and crime detection from a number of provisions of the GDPR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From tracking my Claim online I can see that the judge has responded and my claim has moved from being queried to being active

 

So the judge has accepted I have a valid claim and I will wait for whether LS contest the claim or defend it

Link to post
Share on other sites

well claim packs have been sent today

 

got an email over the weekend from LS saying they are looking into my email where I told them they were deficient in their late SAR

 

as the papers have now been issued I won't be stopping my claim against them and will wait to see if they defend it even if they do provide me with the info as they were still late in giving me the SAR info

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) the claimant held and account with lending stream under the acct no ..............

 

2) On dd/mm/yy the claimant sent Lending Stream a Subject access request under the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR)

 

3) Under the GDPR Lending Stream has 30 days to satisfy this request to date they have not fulfilled this request and the claimant claims £xxx for damages and distress.

 

these are the POC I filed and it got queried by the courts as they asked for the legislation I was relying on but it has now been served on LS after confirmation, maybe one of the others could check and amend

Link to post
Share on other sites

just received this -

 

Dear xxxxx

 

This is in continuation to our previous email dated 13th July, 2018. We apologize for the delay in sharing our response.

 

Thank you for waiting while we were gathering the requested information. We understand that you were concerned about the information shared by us in the email dated 4th July, 2018 and you believe that it was incomplete. Hence, we have gathered all the requested information and would like to share our findings.

 

To begin with, as you have requested for the copy of complaints data; we have attached all the relevant complaints data relating to your loan accounts. Also, we have attached the transcript and email communications shared with you in regards to your loan accounts.

 

For your concern about your information and data being processed, we would like to inform you that as a responsible lender we are required to report the status of your loan accounts to the credit bureaus on a regular basis and if you require any further information in regards to your credit file, you may contact them accordingly.

 

Please be informed that the information provided at the time of borrowing serves an important part to perform the affordability checks and to enable your credit agreement to be serviced. And your data is only processed for purposes in accordance with the specific consent you have provided.

 

Also, as stated above, your data is not available for any automated processing. It is only used in accordance with the consent provided by yourself for the processing of your credit agreement, including that appropriate affordability and credit worthiness assessments are carried out. Also it is required to ensure that financial transactions between ourselves and yourself are actioned appropriately and legally required credit reporting is fulfilled. Please be assured that the administration of our customer records is maintained appropriately.

 

For your reference we have attached all the relevant documents. We hope the above helps and addresses all your concerns.

 

Hence, please consider this as our final response towards the matter.

 

 

I replied with -

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Thank you for your email below. As stated in my email of 04/07/18 this is now subject to a County Court Claim issued in Langanside Courts Belfast on 03/07/18 under ref 18/064158. This has been served at your business address - Lending Stream, Wysteria Grange Barn, Pikes End, Pinner, London, HA5 2EX.

 

As you are still deficient in the information you have provided in my DSAR I shall be pursuing the Claim, please respond as you see fit to the Courts paperwork.

 

If however you are willing to discuss this without the needs of involving the Courts I am willing to remove my claim on the following conditions-

 

a) All documentation that you hold on myself is disclosed

b) Compensation in the amount of £100 is paid to myself

c) I am reimbursed the Court fee of £35

 

As you are aware the courts regard themselves as the last resort to sort out differences and if you do not accept this proposal I shall produce this email as evidence of my willingness to resolve this issue without involving the Courts.

 

Regards

 

This see what their reply is, the claim form was posted on Monday so they have received it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...