Jump to content

BazzaS

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    6,897
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

BazzaS last won the day on March 30 2020

BazzaS had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,344 Excellent

1 Follower

About BazzaS

  • Rank
    Platinum Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I’d add (just in case the DJ says “but if you couldn’t pay, you shouldn’t have parked”): “The situation being compounded by the app appearing to allow payment, with a countdown timer for the period ‘paid for’ appearing”. Have you offered to pay the fee the app should have taken but didn’t? If they were stupid enough to take it to court I’d invite the judge to find that they were entitled to that fee, and only that fee, but [contrary to the usual guideline of costs ‘in the case’] you were entitled to the {limited} costs available in the small claims track. They
  2. He is correct, though that only a judge can order him to refund the money. You can’t complain about him saying only a judge can order it: that’s what the County Courts do - adjudicate disputes. You can complain that the guidelines make it clear what the outcome will be, so his behaviour is unreasonable. ”That, Sir” (or Madam), “is the crux of why we are here. I suggest it is inevitable that you will find the refund must be made, and the Defendant should have seen that, but their intransigence has led to this matter reaching you”.
  3. I particularly admire the response to "are there any dates in the next 6 months", where he states 23/7/21-5/9/21, which is (just) outside of 6 months....... as well as "for the parties convenience" when he means "for THIS party's convenience. It isn;t for your convenience! I hope your DQ notes he is a business, you are self-represented ( used to be called a 'litigant in person'), and thus you invite the Court to decide the hearing should be held at the County Court nearest your home ......
  4. Sorry to disagree. Credit file drops off at 6 years, which is the Statute Bar period for 'simple contract debts' But the limitation period for mortgage debts is 12 years. https://www.nationaldebtline.org/fact-sheet-library/statute-barred-debts-ew-/ So (in theory, at least(, it can drop off a credit file at 6 years, the lender can issue a County Court claim at any point up to 12 years, and IF they do, and IF they succeed, the CCJ then shows on your credit file....... yes, there are lots of 'IF's there, but it isnt as cut and dried as at first glance.
  5. Complain. First (as you've already complained), escalate the complaint to the CEO for HM Courts and Tribunal Service. Ask for an acknowledgement of the complaint, and the timescale for the reply. Then (if they don't sort it), go back to your MP, but ask them (if they again say "can't do anything") to pass it to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. Evaluate your losses. That is, identify the extra costs involved; you want them to put you back in the position (financially) that you would have been had they not spectacularly and repeatedly fouled it up
  6. Duty to mitigate loss isn't a 'general rule, but case law (precedent) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Westinghouse_Electric_and_Manufacturing_Co_Ltd_v_Underground_Electric_Rlys_Co_of_London_Ltd https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2994&context=faculty_scholarship highlights that you'll need to focus on the post-repudiation value, rather than any current value for the assets.
  7. To add to the weight of evidence this is fraud, do you have (or can you get) proof of what the cost of the Special Delivery was?. If they paid for the weight of an envelope containing a piece of paper, they won't have paid for the cost of sending a laptop (given it is much heavier) ...... You should also contact ActionFraud.
  8. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/695575/inf188x6-can-i-drive-while-my-application-is-with-dvla.pdf S.88 RTA 1988. the last paragraph of the FAQ’s deals with licence renewal at 70.
  9. Except Waitrose don’t get prosecuted for failing to stop you and check your bag, which might happen to the AML staff at Revolut if they aren’t reporting suspicious transactions.
  10. Complaint will go nowhere, IMHO. it is part of their T’s & C’s (and standard across the industry) that SIMs become inactive if not used. This is because numbers will be recycled : there is a limited (large, but still finite) pool of numbers. If you weren’t able to make or receive a call, expect EE to say you could have made a top-up (e.g online) or have called their helpline to keep the number active. I don’t know that giffgaff will be able to help without a PAC but it has to be worth a try following Dx’s suggestion. I wasn’t aware of any networks allowi
  11. I’m not saying they were lying, but if there was no PG then the Barclays rep might have been mistaken. If there was no personal guarantee (& absent e.g wilful misconduct) then the Ltd Company debt can’t affect you personally - which is one of the reasons / ethos behind a Ltd Co : limited liability. Bear in mind the Barclays reps likely have Barclays interests rather than your interests as their focus. if there was no PG, it’s no surprise your accountant said to prioritise the Sole Trader debts, for which you can be personally liable.
  12. Did you sign any personal guarantee for the Limited Company? If not, why does the accountant feel the Ltd Co will impact your personal credit report?
  13. "he'd have time to re-arrange payment to stop it" relies on them accepting any new payment offer, though ....
×
×
  • Create New...