Jump to content

Crocdoc

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    1,345
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Crocdoc last won the day on December 19 2013

Crocdoc had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

789 Excellent

About Crocdoc

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder
  1. The hearing is now due to take place on Thursday January 22nd. I understand one test case is going forward. It will be interesting and I will update.
  2. I should be able to update later today, unfortunately I am unable to attend but I will obtain feedback.
  3. I note that two cases relating to Private parking are listed at Edinburgh Sheriff Court for tomorrow the 15th January. VCS V Flexistore limited and VCS V Gilbert Reilly The outcome of these will be very interesting assuming they are properly defended. An undefended Judgement will of course prove nothing other than give VCS the opportunity to use their victory as a further scare tactic.
  4. I think Mr Troy may be trying to mislead here, the announcement regarding legislation made by CAB relates to Scotland, the recommendations are as follows ProposedRegulation. A) The introductionof industry funded licensing for car parks using private parking companies with the power to enforce terms and conditions given to Trading Standards. Fit and proper person check to be included in terms and conditions. B) The introductionof an industry funded independent appeals service in line with England and Wales. C) Banning the use ofthe term Parking Charge Notice to avoid confusion with Penalty Charge Notices issued by Police and local Authorities when abbreviated. D) The introductionof a cap on the level of charges which must represent Genuine pre Estimate of loss. E) Introduction of standardised dimension of signage including size of lettering with the further inclusion of the landowner address. At no time has it been suggested that POFA should be adopted in Scotland despite the fact that this may be on the BPA wish list. Underlying concern. Advice organisations are concerned that there appears to be an acceptance in certain circles that Private limited Companies should be entitled to impose fines based on Breach of Contract. It is our view that this is a very dangerous precedent to set particularly as this practice appears to breach Scots law
  5. £35k.THIS IS ENOUGH TO ALLOW THEM TO LOSE 1296 POPLA APPEALS.
  6. I have invited a number of companies to raise an action in Scotland numerous time without success. In addition,You will also find that P4 parking and TNC Parking Services who do their begging mention POPLA in their correspondence as do a number of other BPA MEMBERS. OF COURSE THERE IS NO DELIBERATE INTENTION TO MISLED PEOPLE IN SCOTLAND INTO BELEIVING THAT THE PROTECTION OF FREEDOMS ACT APPLIES. HOW COULD ANYBODY THINK SO BADLY OF THIS HIGHLY ETHICAL INDUSTRY? IF I WERE YOU I WOULD SIMPLY IGNORE ALL FUTURE BEGGING LETTERS AS THEY DO NOT DO COURTS IN SCOTLAND.
  7. Without knowing full details it is always difficult to provide detailed and accurate advice. Nevertheless, the following may assist. There is no such thing as a joint Bankruptcy application, two single applications would be required. The Trustee will not take control of your bank account, he/she will take into account income and expenditure and may look for a monthly contribution from disposable income. You will still see the glossy TV adverts, however in reality Trust Deeds are becoming a thing of the past, at long last it has been recognised that the only people to make money from TD's are insolvency practitioners. Therefore I cannot see the purpose of going down this route. A joint DAS may be possible depending on your circumstances, if you chose this route ALWAYS do it through one of the free money advice agencies to avoid paying fees. I would suggest that you take some free advice in any case.
  8. I would not do any more at this stage other than keep accurate record of correspondence and produce it in court if it gets that far . Remember, it is not up to you to prove that the debt does not exist, it is a matter for the pursuer to prove otherwise. As you have requested the information in advance of the hearing wait for the response, if no explanation is provided, highlight this factor to the court.
  9. Sorry for the delay in responding as I couldn't find the original post due to a problem with my laptop e-mails. I would send the SB letter to the pursuing solicitor by recorded delivery and see how they respond as it is then up to them to prove that the debt exits. I would also ask for proof assignment, this will force the solicitor to obtain the information from Marlin in prove that they have right to raise the action.. By recorded delivery. If the information is not provided before the hearing, provide copies of correspondence to the court and seek continuation on these grounds. It may be that the bank no longer hold records due to the age of the debt, however this in itself brings us back to the SB question. If you have not acknowledged the debt IN WRITING OR MADE PAYMENT in the past 5 years THE DEBT DOES NOT EXIST in any shape or form.
  10. There are numerous appeal letters available relating to Private Parking companies in England and Wales which argue the GENUINE PRE ESTIMATE OF LOSS point (Amongst other points). I don't actually hold them as I in Scotland where the system is very different. However, I have no doubt that someone will come along and provide a suitable letter which the private parking company will reject. Nevertheless this will give you the opportunity to appeal to Parking on Private land appeals (POPLA) who do uphold appeals on the basis of GPEOL, Signage, and contractual entitlement to issue charges.
  11. You could forward the following to the pursuing Solicitor and see how they respond as it is up to them to prove that the debt exists. If this fails and you are liable you can apply for a Debt payment Programme under the terms of the Debt Arrangement Scheme (Scotland) Regulations. This blocks any enforcement action, Stops al interest and charges even the 8% Statutory and allows you up to ten years to repay with no admin fees. Dear Sir/Madam Your Ref I refer to yourcorrespondence dated the XXXXXXX , for ease of reference a copy is attached. In response, I would ask youto consider the following points: 1) This alleged debt has now prescribed under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 as the debt has subsisted for a continuous period of five years- (a) Without any relevant claim having been made in relation to the obligation, And (b) Without subsistence of the obligation having being relevantly acknowledged, Then as from the expiration of that period the obligation shall be extinguished A relevant acknowledgement in a consumer credit contract would normally be an unequivocal written admission by the debtor that the debt still exists or by making payments to the debt I would further advise you t at in Scotland unlike England and Wales the debt is totally extinguished and ceases to exist. Unless you have contrary and irrefutable proof to the above we would ask that you refrain from making anyfurther claims. I look forward to your detailed written response in advance of the pending court action. Yours faithfully GOOD LUCK
  12. This is an extremely unusual situation as the DAS admin team are normally very efficient when dealing with issues of this type. However as DAS is a Scottish debt remedy which does not extend to other parts of the UK, you will find that third party agents from outwith Scotland are not familiar with the legislation and tend to blunder on regardless. Nevertheless the legislation is quite clear and I am confident that this issue will be dealt with sooner rather than later. If not you may wish to contact the DAS admin team and request a payment reduction by means of Variation until such time as this issue is resolved. I hope this information is of assistance
  13. I agree that there never has been provision, however the BPA and their members have tried to state otherwise since the introduction of POFA in England and Wales. The example on the Pranksters website quotes the company as stating that an Australian address is not serviceable and initially refusing to provide a POPLA code, which is just another example of these companies quoting things as they would like them to be and not the way it is. I wonder what these companies will actually do having paid the fee if an appeal to POPLA fails . Could for example Debt Recovery Plus become Debt Recovery Plus International. (Begging letters now available in Mandarin, Cantonese, Japanese and Arabic ) Just a thought !
  14. I was interested to read on the Parking Pranksters website that POPLA has decided that addresses outside England and Wales are acceptable as serviceable under the Protection of Freedoms act. I fear this may upset the BPA and the PPC's who have always stated that serviceable addresses for the vehicle driver must be in the area covered by POFA. One wonders if a new can of worms has just exploded as I do recall posting some time ago during the introduction of POFA mentioning the number of people who travel from Outer Mongolia borrow a car and shop at Lidl's.
×
×
  • Create New...