Jump to content

Azazal23

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    326
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Azazal23

  1. This topic was closed on 03/08/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group
  2. This topic was closed on 03/07/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group
  3. This topic was closed on 03/06/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group
  4. This topic was closed on 03/06/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group
  5. cheers, does anyone know how to complete the N510 there around 9 different options to tick??
  6. Update to my thread, I am taking action aginst this company now for failing to removed these searches from mycredit record as agreed. Does anyone know if they have a UK office for service if not can anyone advise how to complete the N510 "service out of jurisdiction" form. Cheers
  7. I have in my initial correspondance asked for damages for the unauthorised access of my report, plus damages for defamation as they stated the reason for the search was an outstanding debt which they have now admitted is not the case. If they deny my request i will submitt a county court claim. Thanks for all your help, i will update as things progress
  8. MH has now reply saying inlight of my complaint they have deleted the enteries on my report and they will not persue me further regarding the alleged debt. But can i now persue them for running an unauthorised credit check, I thought they could not run this type of check without consent. I know they can run a search
  9. Just to update you all, they have now discontinued the claim. Would advise anyone to fight these claims, for me they are just issueing summons to hopefully catch people out in the hope they dont reply and get an automatic judgement. Anyone need any help...happy to answer questions
  10. they ran a credit check, where it said reason they entered outstanding debt. This is visable to any authorised creditor searching my file? It is to do with an outstanding parking ticket not a credit agreement
  11. Recently had a letter from Mackenzie Hall regarding an upaid parking ticket, however I have run a credit check to day regarding a different matter and there is a record of them running a credit check? Can this be done, i thought they would need my consent, is this not a breach of the Data Protecion Act
  12. .....Update Filed my defense in Jan, phoned the court today and the claim has been stayed indefinetly as the other party has failed to respond. I am now think of either applying to have the claim struck out which costs £40 and recover the costs from the other party. Or Get in touch with the claimant solicitors and seek confirmation that they do not intend to take the action any further.
  13. Hi See my current post i am just about to update. PM if you have any problems Problem you have is a. Your sister was gulity b. Becuase she was not insured the MIB are now looking to recover there costs. You maybe able to set aside a proportion of the claim if it was for personal injury there is a 3 year time limit for bringing action. I am not sure were you would stand regarding repairs and costs. Something you will have to research
  14. here is the claim form seems very basic, think it was done via money claim online
  15. Hi Definetly have not recieved a claim before, and nothing has been rgistered on my credit file. I am quite maticulous about my credit file so have copies going back 5 years. If the defence looks ok i am going to file today on moneyclaim to save time. I have also wrote a letter to the court asking for the decison to allow the claim to be filed to be reviewed, i have stated the claimant would have known the claim is statute barred, vextrous and a waste of the courts time. So they may decide to strike it out before if goes any further. I will keep you all up to date with proceedings. Obviously any other comments or suggestions are welcome.
  16. Hi Have already check my credit record, there have been no CC judgements assigned to me over the past 6 years. Nor have i recieved any debt or court documentation until dec 2010 Plus the time limit for RTA claims and personal injury or any type of neglegence claim is 3 years.
  17. MIB got in touch with my in May 2004 in which it has been alleged i was involved in an accident and was not insured. The vehicle i owned at the time was off the road (head gasket) so i let my insurance lapse. But i did not file the off road declaration with DVLA. Anyway i wrote back saying no chance as the car is not drivable and i would be happy for them to inspect it. They never replied, but the strange thing is the claimant had the same first initial and surname as myself. Was contact on 24 12 10 yes... by Close Credit management saying they wanted 15k for this claim. I emailed back stating it was a fraudulent claim and in any case is statute barred. I was issued with CC proceedings on 7 Jan 2011, have filed acknowledgement of service. Have wrote a defence out can anyone take a look and give me an opinion 1. The defendant states that the time limit for the commencement of any proceedings related to the alleged Road Traffic Accident on ** May 2004 has expired. 2. The Limitation Act 1980 section 11(4)states there is a 3 year time limit in which to bring action for such claims, this has clearly expired, the claimant therefore has no right to bring such action as the claim is statue barred by virtue of the Limitation Act 1980. 3. The defendant requests the claim be struck out as an abuse of the process, the claim is vexatious and a waste of the courts time. 4. The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £15000.00 or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.
  18. Two women have recently submitetd an insurance claim against me, alleging that i have back my vehicle into them when infact they drive into a car parking space as i was reversing into it. Anyway there was no contact but they alledge that the dent on their vehicle was done by me even though there was no damage to my vehicle. They are no claiming one of them broke their wrist in the accident and they both have severe whiplash. My insurance company is defending it to the full and i have many witnessess. All i want to know if i win or they drop their case i can sue them for damages
  19. Lamma My reply was as follows Dear Sir/Madam Please find attached my completed NIP response. I feel I have taken all reasonable steps to identify the driver (either myself or my wife) at the time of the offense. The vehicle was used 3 times in a 2 hour period on that day, as we are the only two people who have access and are insured to drive the vehicle we do not keep any form of log. Having exhausted any obvious avenues to identify the driver I wrote to Merseyside Camera Partnership to ask for assistance in identifying the driver or even a passenger, I received a response on the 9 October. The response states that a review of the evidence (DVD and or photographic) has been completed and despite the camera being forward facing (to help aid driver/passenger identification) due to reflection/glare on the windscreen it was not possible to identify a driver or passenger in this case. The camera partnership did not provide any photographic evidence as requested to help aid the identification of the driver, they choose to state they are not legally obliged to comply with such requests which I find unhelpful given I am legally obliged to supply the information within a set timeframe. If a passenger could have been identified it would have been obvious to myself who would have been driving and I could respond formally. As this is not the case I cannot say with any certainty whom was driving at the precise time. I am aware that I am legally obliged to provide this information but I am unable to do so in this case. I feel I have taken all obvious reasonable steps to identify if myself or my wife was driving at the time of the offense. But I am also mindful that providing a false statement or a statement which I know to be inaccurate is also an offense, on that basis the only information I can supply is that it was either myself or my wife who was driving at the time, due to the fact the vehicle was used several times in such a short space of time and the DVD/Photographic evidence is inconclusive I am unable to say which one of us it was. I hope you will take this into account when making a decision on how to proceed.
  20. Lamma Read the decision, quite an interesting read. Have I interpreted this correctly when I say I feel that I have complied with the s172 request so far as I have identified the driver(s), and I have given all the information that has been in my power to give. Or Is it there onus to prove that I have failed to reply to the s172 adequately. I have only got a A Level Law and im very rusty.
  21. yes, obvisously provided my full details, and then my wifes on the attached letter i sent back. Yeah i feel quite confident i took all reasonable steps to try to identify if it was my wife or me driving. I feel i have complied with the S172 becuase i have identified the driver(s) plus they have done nothing to help identify who was driving at the time
  22. Hi I am haveing exactly the same problem at the moment, how did you get on
  23. Found my original post can a mod link it please http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/225404-nip-police-cannot-identify.html
  24. So there response goes Dear Azazal23 I refer to your recent correspondance in relation to the above NIP and note your comments. It is important drivers maek every effort to comply with traffic regulations to increase road safety and reduce the number of serious and fatal accidents. For future reference, it is essential that you are able to identify the driver of your vehicle at all times. The matter must now be dealt with by way of summons to court, under S172 RTA 1988 for failing to furnish police with driver information. Any helpfull suggestions for a defence would be appreciated.
×
×
  • Create New...