My solicitor held that amount back and hasn’t paid the until I have out com of court

Don’t know court

don’t have any documents from charging order or original CCJ and I have never had any correspondence and given it’s from 2009 it’s not on credit file.

I’ve also paid  for a check on courts for CCJ’s search none recorded 

I have requested all this information off restons but they seem to be very slow with providing this part of the request

happy to provide charging order paper work with wrong address that I’ve never lived at or even visited let alone owned

 they put charge on my property with different street and postcode 

That the address on the court papers isn’t the property  the charging order has been attached to 

They haven’t sent me the original CCJ the have sent me one page charging order and on that the address is wrong?

Hi dx100uk

Update house sale went through solicitor hasn’t paid restons

That’s because I’ve applied for a set-aside

its now come to light after I’ve applied for a set aside that the court documents for the final charging order has an address on for a property that doesn’t exist and I’ve never owned or lived at or even visited.

I checked land registry property they have stated on court papers-  no records 

I then tried Royal Mail find a postcode again address not listed 

walked the street unable to locate.

how do I defend this and get this set aside as they have fraudulently used non-existent property to register a k form restriction as restons

 “we again repeat our previous statement that we do not believe your application to set aside the Charging Order has any real prospect of success and are therefore instructed to attend the hearing on 30 March 2023 to oppose your application and to seek our Client's costs from you”

what do I do

Thanks just need to find a solicitor that will do as I ask and follow the wording of the k restriction to the letter and the not pay them

this is what they came back with when I ask where it states in law it has to be paid

“Unfortunately conveyancers doing what you propose risk a claim against them by the beneficiary of the form K restriction for breach of trust.

We would need to see sufficient evidence that the person named in the charging order had no beneficial interest in the property before we could transfer the sale proceeds to the other owner.

You could also face action against you by the beneficiary of the charging order as one of the joint trustees of the property.”

I'm fighting a losing battle just wish I could find a solicitor that would deal with it like I asked

hi

Dx100uk my solicitor is saying she has to pay it and not just send a letter on day of completion then it be comes over reached and land registry will delete it once new owners are registered.

but when asked were in the law it says it has to be paid she can’t tell me?

Are there montages on the properties if not transfer them to a relative the k form restriction becomes over reached and land registry will remove on registering the new name then in a few months transfer back. 
 

a lot of solicitors won’t do it as they think it’s a charging order but k form restrictions aren’t I’m currently trying to find a solicitor that will do this for me me current solicitor has done all the work but wants to pay it not just notify them property has been sold 

anyone know a solicitor that will do what I ask and not what they want?

Ok  

I’ve found 8 different issues between Lowell in two letters and these are different to the letter that I received for EE(orange) this morning.

action plan

letter to  ICO, ofcom ombudsman and am I right in thinking the FSO lowel have put doubt in my mind with this one?

Lowell have said I can’t take it to FOS a it’s a communications debt and FOS have no authority over Lowell on this matter?

had a full and final response from EE(orange) but I’m even more confused as they now claim both are iPad data accounts.

they also claim the one account was cancelled March 2015 but Lowell claim one was cancelled may 2015.

Also both Lowell and EE(orange) neither have provided a copy of any contract of any sort or invoices/bills. Lowell have said they don’t have to supply the contract?

so now I’m stumped can I go to FOS?

what do I do now?

Dx100uk. I have dyslexia and some other issues so sorry if my English isn’t to your approval

lowell stat they purchased the account from orange before the default was placed on the account so that is why I want to sue them.

Your attitude isn’t very pleasant towards people and not very helpful

I’ve found a basic bank account opened in my name that I haven’t opened?

Lowell is my main worry

I want to prepare the ground and am I’m to sue for extra costs I’ve incurred and one of my business has incurred a higher interest rate on the equipment lease because or me acting as guarantor.

So thinking sort personal clam first then get my company to sue as well.

But don’t know how to approach it first as no info around about the rules they are using with regard to mobile phone defaults?

Orange wasn’t on my credit file ever had an account with them  then in March 2017 Lowell appears on my credit file with a default for jan/2016 I’ve written to Lowell and orange both refuse to supply contract it’s not in the SAR requests of both companies.

Is there any thing I can do with this?

as I need a new van for my trade even tho I’ve over paid and never missed a payment

current finance company won’t accept me for finance on new van with me trading in my old van and clearing outstanding and putting down more than is required for deposit.  

The on contract I’m on has a age limit on vans

mine is now over that age and they have informed me I have 21 days to change it or they will no longer supply me with work.

so I need to sue Lowell to get this sorted or is there a easy solution?

Update I’ve managed to get over half wiped and had a fair bit of compensation back due to irresponsible lending

Hi Guys 

lowell have placed a default on my credit file for a mobile phone/iPad 30 day contract

they claim it to be a mobile contact but then next letter it’s a iPad 30day account

in the next letter there are two contracts the sort code matches mine but bank account doesn’t match (I’ve found out the account is for a dissolved business)

the agent advised you that this would be actioned as requested taking into account 30days cancellation notice

they have stated in letter that  line was disconnected as requested 

orange have advised Lowell payments made a month after cancelation

lowell have also closed the account as a good will gesture but won’t remove default and aren't chasing it but it’s not marked as closed on credit files

the sum claimed I owe and the default sum is different

no default received

default placed in 2017

for jan 2016 on my credit file showing a default had been place 8monthes after payment(out side guide line).

Lowell

I have a letter from 2016 saying Accout was cancelled early April 2015 and a payment taken early may 2015

(I don’t have bank statement as it not my bank account the payments where made from and I’ve never been with orange  

in jan 2017 they register a default for jan 2016

I’ve written to them many times since 2016 when I received a letter

and sent the prove it letter

they send a unreadable contract

I had a letter saying it’s for the iPad 30day account but (if it’s a 30day account and you don’t make payment wouldn’t this terminate the contract? Or would arrears build up for a few month then default and they and a early termination fee?)

I’ve today had a letter stating it’s for the mobile telephone which they claim had been cancelled by giving orange the required 30days notice which I have I gotta writing from them???

as this has prevented me getting fair finance deals on both my car and van

can I sue them for the extra it’s cost me?

my limited company has also just looked to trade the pickup in with same finance company

all payments are up to date intact we have made over payments

they checked my credit file and rejected the application 

this default is the only negative on my file

all payment up to date and on time and most paid off early

since this has been on file our equipment lease with our other company will end up costing thousands more.

Would take it if I had had accounts with orange

but orange doesn’t even work in my house

I’ve always be with o2, Tesco’s and now sky all on o2 platform.

its probable cost me over £20k so far

but our new business will need to borrow heavily over the next ten years

I’m frightened we may get refused because of this

Hi guys thanks for all your help

I won and had £103 awarded in costs.

The pcn had the wrong address and also £90 on the pace then on the photos of the signs it stated £100 Jude was very helpful in picking theses up

I hearing 14th September

Witness statements 19th July,

Aug for them to pay the £25

I forgot that I had to have witness statement in today meeting over ran and traffic coming home

I've missed dead line sorry has witness statement of bwlegal

Theses 17 mins between in photo and out photo

They are claiming 100 but on the letter they say they sent it says £90

The letter from land lord is from 2014 not 2011 when alleged parking happens

Advocate will be at court witness

I I have searched but using a iPad at present and can't seem to find any. Also need to know how to get the cases I have quote so I can print hard copies for ref. Paper work not my thing

1. The facts in this witness statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge there are true to the best of my information and belief

2. The defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof of any liability for the sum claimed, or any amount as defendant was not the driver at the time.

3. Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question in this case. Defendant was not the driver. As informed to the claimant the vehicle was owned by a limited company and used as a pool car, as ltd company was the owner there is no individual responsibility and in any case any corporate responsibility has now gone Due to a fire in the yard in early 2016 in which everything was lost company is now dissolved.

4. The claimants have failed to respond to my CPR 31:14icon request made on 10/03/2017 requesting any documentation or relevant contracts with the land owners at the time of the alleged offence that allow the claimant (Excel) to issue claims upon the landowners’ behalf.

The Court is invited to dismiss this Claim, and to allow my wasted costs which will be submitted separately and in a timely manner, depending upon whether a hearing takes place.

I firmly believe that to pursue me as registered keeper when the Claimant admits they have no such right, and to submit such incoherent particulars and lacking ‘evidence’ is wholly unreasonable and vexatious. And a breach of DATA protection can occur when a parking company pursues a charge which is not valid, or an over inflated charge, or both and the defendant believes this has happened and use this case as ref case D6GM2199 v Mr B Bury county courticon, before DJ Osborne.

5. Claimant claim to have issued a NTK that they claimed was compliant with POFA. this cannot be the case as the law didn’t exist at the time*

so claimant is misleading the court in asserting things they know cannot be true.

As Claimant did not produce evidence of the driver, and as

Elliott v Loake is not persuasive and can be distinguished, the claim was dismissedicon.

6. The claimant hasn't provided any evidence at all that the alleged contraventions even occurred.

ANPR camera photos merely show a vehicle arriving and leaving.

All vehicles will have been recorded thus (assuming their VRNs were captured).

All vehicles, including those whose drivers paid and displayed.

7. Ive not received evidenced of photos of the dashboard showing no P&D ticket displayed?

Failing that, as this is an ANPR site, where are the system records showing no payment made on these days?

They have not even supplied lists of the VRNs input by drivers on those days,

e.g. showing a mismatched payment, wrong VRN or no entry at all that corresponds with this vehicle.

8. I Cite and example of parking ticket machines of the claimants failing to record a VRN and this has been recorded in two recent cases.

One mentioned above, at Stockport CC in Excel v Mr C C8DP37F1 Stockport 31/10/2016.

The other being Excel Parking v Mrs S. C8DP11F9 on 09/09/2016 at Oldham CC.

In this case the defendant purchased a ticket, but the machine was faulty and did not print her VRN correctly.

The judge ruled in favour of the defendant on the balance of probabilities that she bought her ticket and entered the VRN correctly, only for the machine to erroneously mis-print it. The case was dismissedicon.

9. The driver maintains that a ticket was bought and displayed on the vehicle during the stay at the car park, however, as this was the first use of a pool vehicle, the VRN may have been incorrectly entered, albeit still a valid VRN.

As stated in point 6. Above, no pictures of the vehicle without a valid ticket have been produced by the claimant. There are no system records showing no payment made, nor has there been any lists of VRNs input by drivers on that day,

e.g. showing a mismatched payment, wrong VRN or no entry at all that corresponds with this vehicle.

10. The claimant`s Particulars of Claim states that the PCN was issued on 11/12/11 which is incorrect. It was issued on 06/01/2012 as stated on their own PCN letter.

The contents of my statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

1. The facts in this witness statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge there are true to the best of my information and belief

2. The defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof of any liability for the sum claimed, or any amount as defendant was not the driver at the time.

3. Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question in this case. Defendant was not the driver. As informed to the claimant the vehicle was owned by a limited company and used as a pool car, as ltd company was the owner there is no individual responsibility and in any case any corporate responsibility has now gone Due to a fire in the yard in early 2016 in which everything was lost company is now dissolved.

4. The claimants have failed to respond to my CPR 31:14icon request made on 10/03/2017 by Royal Mail recorded delivery postal service requesting any documentation or relevant contracts with the land owners at the time of the alleged offence that allow the claimant (Excel) to issue claims upon the landowners’ behalf.

The Court is invited to dismiss this Claim, and to allow my wasted costs which will be submitted separately and in a timely manner, depending upon whether a hearing takes place.

I firmly believe that to pursue me as registered keeper when the Claimant admits they have no such right, and to submit such incoherent particulars and lacking ‘evidence’ is wholly unreasonable and vexatious. And a breach of DATA protection can occur when a parking company pursues a charge which is not valid, or an over inflated charge, or both and the defendant believes this has happened and use this case as ref case D6GM2199 v Mr B Bury county courticon, before DJ Osborne.

5. Claimant claim to have issued a NTK that they claimed was compliant with POFA. this cannot be the case as the law didn’t exist at the time*

so claimant is misleading the court in asserting things they know cannot be true.

As Claimant did not produce evidence of the driver, and as

Elliott v Loake is not persuasive and can be distinguished, the claim was dismissedicon.

6. I also point out to the presiding Judge that the Claimant has not supplied any evidence at all that the alleged contraventions even occurred.

ANPR camera photos merely show a vehicle arriving and leaving.

All vehicles will have been recorded thus (assuming their VRNs were captured).

All vehicles, including those whose drivers paid and displayed.

7. In order to demonstrate that the driver(s) on these occasions failed to pay & display, the Excel should have evidenced of that, Excel have failed to provide photos of the dashboard showing no P&D ticket displayed?

Failing that, as this is an ANPR site, where are the system records showing no payment made on these days?

They have not even supplied lists of the VRNs input by drivers on those days,

e.g. showing a mismatched payment, wrong VRN or no entry at all that corresponds with this vehicle.

8. There is a well-known history of the parking ticket machines of the claimants failing to record a VRN and this has been recorded in two recent cases.

One mentioned above, at Stockport CC in Excel v Mr C C8DP37F1 Stockport 31/10/2016.

The other being Excel Parking v Mrs S. C8DP11F9 on 09/09/2016 at Oldham CC.

In this case the defendant purchased a ticket, but the machine was faulty and did not print her VRN correctly.

The judge ruled in favour of the defendant on the balance of probabilities that she bought her ticket and entered the VRN correctly, only for the machine to erroneously mis-print it. The case was dismissedicon.

9. The driver maintains that a ticket was bought and displayed on the vehicle during the stay at the car park, however, as this was the first use of a pool vehicle, the VRN may have been incorrectly entered, albeit still a valid VRN.

As stated in point 6. Above, no pictures of the vehicle without a valid ticket have been produced by the claimant. There are no system records showing no payment made, nor has there been any lists of VRNs input by drivers on that day,

e.g. showing a mismatched payment, wrong VRN or no entry at all that corresponds with this vehicle.

10. The claimant`s Particulars of Claim states that the PCN was issued on 11/12/11 which is incorrect. It was issued on 06/01/2012 as stated on their own PCN letter.

The contents of my statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

I will need to get this sent off tomorrow to comply with the dates set by the court, so any helpful comments would be appreciated.

1. The facts in this witness statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge there are true to the best of my information and belief

2. The defendant is not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all and this is my Witness Statement in support of my defence as filed.

3. Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question in this case. Defendant was not the driver. As informed to the claimant the vehicle was owned by a limited company and used as a pool car. Due to a fire in the yard in early 2016 in which everything was lost company is now dissolved.

4. The claimants have failed to respond to my CPR 31:14icon request made on 10/03/2017 by Royal Mail recorded delivery postal service requesting any documentation or relevant contracts with the land owners that allow the claimant to issue claims upon the landowners’ behalf.

The Court is invited to dismiss this Claim, and to allow my wasted costs which will be submitted separately and in a timely manner, depending upon whether a hearing takes place.

I firmly believe that to pursue me as registered keeper when the Claimant admits they have no such right, and to submit such incoherent particulars and lacking ‘evidence’ is wholly unreasonable and vexatious. And a breach of DATA protection can occur when a parking company pursues a charge which is not valid, or an over inflated charge, or both and the defendant believes this has happened and use this case as ref case D6GM2199 v Mr B Bury county courticon, before DJ Osborne.

5. Claimant claim to have issued a NTK that they claimed was compliant with POFA. this cannot be the case as the law didn’t exist at the time*

so claimant is misleading the court in asserting things they know cannot be true.

As Claimant did not produce evidence of the driver, and as

Elliott v Loake is not persuasive and can be distinguished, the claim was dismissedicon.

6. I also point out to the presiding Judge that the Claimant has not supplied any evidence at all that the alleged contraventions even occurred.

ANPR camera photos merely show a vehicle arriving and leaving.

All vehicles will have been recorded thus (assuming their VRNs were captured).

All vehicles, including those whose drivers paid and displayed.

7. In order to demonstrate that the driver(s) on these occasions failed to pay & display, the Excel should have evidenced of that, Excel have failed to provide photos of the dashboard showing no P&D ticket displayed?

Failing that, as this is an ANPR site, where are the system records showing no payment made on these days?

They have not even supplied lists of the VRNs input by drivers on those days,

e.g. showing a mismatched payment, wrong VRN or no entry at all that corresponds with this vehicle.

8. There is a well-known history of the parking ticket machines of the claimants failing to record a VRN and this has been recorded in two recent cases.

One mentioned above, at Stockport CC in Excel v Mr C C8DP37F1 Stockport 31/10/2016.

The other being Excel Parking v Mrs S. C8DP11F9 on 09/09/2016 at Oldham CC.

In this case the defendant purchased a ticket, but the machine was faulty and did not print her VRN correctly.

The judge ruled in favour of the defendant on the balance of probabilities that she bought her ticket and entered the VRN correctly, only for the machine to erroneously mis-print it. The case was dismissed.

9. The driver maintains that a ticket was bought and displayed on the vehicle during the stay at the car park, however, as this was the first use of a pool vehicle, the VRN may have been incorrectly entered, albeit still a valid VRN.

As stated in point 6. Above, no pictures of the vehicle without a valid ticket have been produced by the claimant. There are no system records showing no payment made, nor has there been any lists of VRNs input by drivers on that day,

e.g. showing a mismatched payment, wrong VRN or no entry at all that corresponds with this vehicle.

10. The claimant`s Particulars of Claim states that the PCN was issued on 11/12/11 which is incorrect. It was issued on 06/01/2012 as stated on their own PCN letter.

The contents of my statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

I will need to get this sent off tomorrow to comply with the dates set by the court, so any helpful comments would be appreciated.