Jump to content

BobBobson689

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About BobBobson689

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Nope. At no point did my girlfriend have a contract with Garage A. She phoned a mechanic, who we have used for years. However, since this mechanics old man died, he has been working on his own, and couldn't do the job required. It was this mechanic who passed my girlfriends van on to garage A, without first asking, or explaining anything to my girlfriend. My girlfriend recorded a phone call with garage A, where the guy informed her "well, that is just how it is", and then hung up, and then recorded an 8 minute call with the mechanic who she originally phoned. In this latter phone call, amongst lots of 'uh, I don't knows', he basically admitted that the contract was him, but because he couldnt take the job, he said to garage A, do you just want to take this, without seeking approval/permission from my girlfriend. Hard to find any information on this specific case, but I am hoping that since garage A is witholding my girlfriends property from her, when she didn't even give them permission to have jit in the first place, that this is a matter that can be dealt with quickly by the police, other than by civil process, which takes ages, and ages.
  2. The engine in my girlfriend's van recently blew up. The mechanic who she called to come out and recover the vehicle, took a look at the damage and informed her that she would need a new engine. He also informed her that he wouldn't be able to do the work, so had given it to the 'garage A around the corner'. Quite a bit of time passed by as my girlfriend deliberated upon what course of action she was going to take. When she finally decided to get a new engine, she started to attempt to make enquiries, with garage A, to which her van had been given. Not knowing much about anything, she required a bit of information from garage A, and contacted them several times, but she was poorly received, ignored, and requests for information were not responded to. Hearing all this, I told her to get her van repaired somewhere else. Thus she made new arrangements with a more customer friendly garage. All had been arranged, or so she thought, but when the new garage B (who she had arranged to do the work after the poor customer service from the original garage A) arrived to collect her van, garage A refused to hand over the keys to the van. Although garage A hadn't done any work on the vehicle, garage A has turned around and said that they wanted £25 per day as storage fee. Whilst I know that in the absence of any written or verbal contract, whereby girlfriend consented to paying a daily storage fee, garage A doesn't have a leg to stand on, I am wondering how much of a pain in the arse dealing with this issue might be. Is this a matter for the police, whereby they simply turn up whilst my girlfriend lawfully retreives her vehicle, or is might this be a real dragged out civil matter.....civil coursts, Sheriff's Officers, etc?
  3. I am not sure whether this is the right section/place for this, but perhaps someone around here can offer advice on the following. I recently got a letter from the R.B.S, informing me that that "we have, with regret, decided that we will no longer provide these [bank account] facilities for you" They don't give any reasons, but I am assuming that my name has come up on some wide sweeping statistical based list for potential fraud/money laundering, and I guess that the R.B.S doesn't like the little man trying to get a piece of their action. I don't have a regular job, but work freelance offshore. This means that I don't have regular income, but instead have large sporadic payments, often coming from abroad. I have also traded Bitcoins during the bubble where I made thousands, and also during the crash, where I lost even more thousands. This involved a high turnover of funds and international payments, including many payments into Bitcoin exchanges. Due to my work, I am also abroad quite often, use my card abroad, and access my online banking from foreign internet ISPs, which has caused the bank to suspend services to me in the past. Aside from that, I have no debt with this bank, am always several thousand in the black, etc. Whilst it doesn't break my heart that the parasitic übermonolithic R.B.S doesn't want to be my friend anymore, I do find it quite concerning that these institutions, upon whom society has been forced to rely upon for 95% of all economic interactions, have the power to simply cut someone off, without any evidence or proof of wrongdoing (there isn't any because I am not and never have been involved with any fraud/money laundering). Also, the bank states; "We will not be able to provide references for you". If I am not mistaken, I will totally 100% need a reference from my previous bank, in order to open another bank account. Can anyone suggest to me any course of action that I might take? Would telling another bank the truth about why I am wanting to open another bank account with them simply result in an automatic rejection? Am I going to be forced to lie to open another bank account?
  4. Thought i would mention for the benefit of others who may be seeking the same kinds of info i was 6-7 months ago. After ensuring that the visits for the Sherrif officers were made pretty unpleasant affairs for them (without breaking law of course), and having refused to accept, but nontheless having their vacuous threats delivered....but just ignoring absolutely everything. It seems that either the Sherrif's men have gotten bored, the cooncil have decided to stop throwing money at the case, or the whole scenario has wandered up a legislative cul de sac as far as a platry unpaid parking case is concerned at least. I don't mind which of the above happens to the case. From my own personal past experience of simply ignoring Sherrif's letters/warnings etc regarding unpaid parking fines (I have had a good few parking tickets over the years and have yet to pay a penny towards any of them), the case described (in a round about sort of way) above was certainly the furthest I have seen any attempts by SOs go in order to recoup the fine and the 1000% imaginary charges that get lumped on top for refusing to play game.
  5. This is for an unpaid parking ticket as detailed in another thread within these forem. Sheriff Officer's have been trying to serve legal documents on a person, without ever once having succeeded in actually handing this person one single sheet of paper. Somewhere amongst all those documents was the threat to come and uplift a vehicle (Attachment Schedule) outside a property where the person they are pursuing does not live. The day on which the Attachment Schedule was to be conducted (car uplifted/stolen) has come and gone. Obviously they never managed to steal the car as it was not parked at the stated address on the said date. It could have been any number of individuals who were driving it on the date of intended uplift/theft, none of them with any possible knowledge of the Sheriff's intentions (backed by the court). If anyone out there has been in similar situation or has knowledge of the likely process otherwise, what would be the Sheriff's next move? The only big concern is that some Procurator Fiscal could take the view that a contempt of court has been comitted by someone here. This however, would be virtualy impossible to prove unless the person who was driving the car that day admitted that they knew of the Attachment Schedule (which they didnt). They would also have to determine who was driving the car on the specific date. Other than that I imagine that they may have another attempt at uplifting the car, adding yet more imaginary money that shall never ever be paid to thier imaginary list of total charges. The car will never (or only rarely) be parked at this address ever again. Would it be possible for the SO's to track the car to another address/location and have permission from court to simply lift it from the street when they find it? Any relevant info much appreciated. thx.
  6. Yes, thanks for your top advice. You have made 7000+ posts here. Has anyone ever advised you that this might be the wrong place for you? Perhaps you should search around for a www.debtcollectorsactiongroup.com site somewhere. I think you may be happier there. Lots more punitive like minded people who have zero tolerance for proletariat **** who show no respect neither for civic parking regulations (operating increasingly like te money making racket that it is) nor Her Majesty's courts of justice (infested with kiddy fiddlers). *For anyone else who has come across the post looking for advice who is the same situation (and who is mental enough to risk a hell of a lot over a trifling just for the sheer principle). I think the key here is to make sure that the Sheriff Officers NEVER successfully serve any kind of warrant or attachment schedule direct to the person who they are pursuing. This means not responding to anything that the Sheriff serves either directly or to a third party. This means not seeking legal advice and then having your solicitor contact the concerned agencies with reference to the legal documents which the SO's have been trying to serve. Any kind of such action would constitute acknowledgement of receipt of the warrants etc. and place the person they are pursuing liable for contempt of court should any of the conditions set out in the warrants or attachment schedules be broken. If the warrants/schedules have not been properly served, then the person cannot possibly know about any such conditions and therefore cannot be liable for contempt of court should conditions set out in the Attachments be breached. Please note, this is just my opinion to the best of my knowledge and not the Gospel truth. I m still looking into this and will update here (for information of others) as my knowledge and the situation progresses.
  7. I can assure you, nobody here is driving around without insurance. Who stays where and who is involved with who all depends on who is asking. Burden of proof is a fantastic thing. As for me, everything I have goes into precious metals, that I can hold in my hand. How much do I own? 20K? 40K? 60K? Who can possibly say? It is mine, only I know where it is, and it cant be touched by anyone. If I am in need of filthy fiat currency it can be changed very easily....oh yes, and unlike the money in your bank account or the value of your home, it's value generally is going up all the time. No doubt you will frown further upon my posturing here, but be assured, the untoward aloof tone in your posts is easy to recognise and not appreciated. But you may also want to take it as a bit of an alarm bell. This country, or rather, the whole world, is headed towards a fiscal cliff, and everybody is acting like everything is ok and a 'recovery' is just around the corner. Whether we nose dive off the cliff or kind of just stumble down it, what do you think is going to happen to the 'money' (privately created corporate credit) in your bank, your pensions, the value of your home, and any other paper investments you may have? If you think I am just a nasty scare monger then take some time out to see how much everyday stuff your frozen wage rate bought you back in 2008 and see how much it buys you now. The Likliehood is that you are around 1/3 poorer than you used to be and dont even know it. Perhaps instead of dishing out scorn, you should take a leaf out of my book.
  8. As they say it is the tone that makes the music.... ...If the fact is that any recourse to the law would result in the courts siding 100% with the Sherrif Officers, that means that the best line of action for all involved would be to simply avoid the courts, and to refuse all legal documents served by the SO's. When the 11th Jan comes. That car will not be anywhere near where the SO's expect to find it. When the next date comes, it will also not be anywhere near where they expect to find it. It will not be contempt of court because the person who moved the vehicle was unaware of the orders served by the SO's. When adequate money comes available the car will be replaced and sold on.
  9. Its not my debt mate. But I think you will find that who the registered keeper of a vehicle is goes a long way too determining who the legal owner is....unless their is some other contract stating that a third party is the owner of the vehicle. Your post is not very helpful and I will tell you something else. If you make sure that you cant be touched......for example, no wealth in bank, no housing contracts or mortgages in own name, self employed, all wealth in precious metals.......debts do go away. I know from experience. I had 2K worth of debt with prominent UK bank, which I was paying back....until they started hitting me with charges that they refused to refund me. At this point, I decided that I was going to have last laugh, closed my accounts, and now they will get nothing. Not ever. Even when there various debt collection agencies offer for me to just pay back half the amount owed in order to settle the bill in full. Do I feel like I am doing something immoral? On the grander scale of things, no! At the end of the day, a debt is only a bunch of fannies hopping up and down waving legal bits of paper in peoples faces saying "you owe us money". This is a costly and time consuming process and there comes a point where it doesn't make sense for them to keep trying to get blood out of a stone.
  10. I appreciate the fact that if we are going to play cat n mouse with the Sherrif Officers, we would do well to remember who is the cat and who is the mouse. However, we shouldnt even know about this. Only reason we know about it is because we opened an evelope addressed to someone else (doing this is possibly illegal?). Therefore, if the car is not in the place that the Sherrif Officers want it to be on the 13th Jan, it is not our fault, as we never knew they were coming, and we never knew that they wanted to seize the car. Also, the car changed hands before the Attachment Schedule was served and the new owner registered with the DVLA 3 days before the Attachment Schedule was served.
  11. We have decided to open the brown envelope. Contained within, is 'A Notice of Removal of Attached Articles And Public Auction' It states that; "the attached articles will be removed from 'your' (he dont fkn live here) premises on 11th January 2013. You should arrange for access to your premises at that time. The officer of the court may, if access is denied, open shut and lockfast places for the purposes of removing the articles(s)." I suppose that is easy enough, we merely make sure the car is parked miles away on the 11th Jan 2013. Since the 14 days timeframe for applying for a 'release of the attachment schedule' has expired, what measures should be taken at this point to stop these zealous chunts. (they have already been informed of ownership of the car, and that the debtor does not live at the address they are targetting). THX Again. P.S. The fine is now 421.75 GBP.
  12. So Sue would have to contact Tom's mother (Tom and his mother are in Tenerife right now and wont be back until Jan 2013), and ask her to write to the court to get the Attachment Schedule released? Also, I am guessing that since the Attachment Schedule was served some time ago, that this latest brown envelope will be the next phase in the process. I was going to get down to the court on Monday and hand the envelope back to them. Would this make any difference? If not, would you recommend that we open the envelope in order to learn exactly what proceedings are afoot? After all, there is every chance that the Sherrif's Officers could turn up and uplift the car before Sue has even had a chance to square this latest development away with her ex.
  13. Hello. I have come to this forum as a result of already having gleaned a lot of useful information from other posts on this website. I am seeking advice from anyone who is or has had trouble with Sherrif Officers due to unpaid parking fines. Before I ask for specific adice though, I will provide a background to the situation. My girlfriend (Sue), or rather her address, is getting targetted by Sherrif's Officers working under the jurisdiction of Perth Sherrif court (Scots Law). They are chasing after her ex-boyfriend (Tom) for an unpaid parking ticket and have served an 'Attachment Schedule', threatening to uplift a vehicle, which is now owned and mainly driven by Sue. Although Tom still has contact with my gf, he is obvioulsy no longer with her and the car in which he incurred the parking ticket, was passed onto Sue quite some time ago. The story behind who the registered keeper is, who the owner is, and who insures the car, is convoluted, but: Tom was the owner, and the driver of vehicle when ticket was issued. Sue has been the owner of the vehicle for some 8-9 months. Tom is still the main insurer of the vehicle, with Sue as named driver (for Sue to insure herself it would cost twice as much). The vehicle was registered in Tom's name until (surprise/surprise, oh what a coincidence) just a few days before the 'Attachment Schedule' when his mother became the registered keeper of the car. Tom has never permanently lived at Sue's address, but somehow these (Edit) have tracked the car down to her home. The first visit of the Sherrif officers, was dealt with by Sue. They issued her with the 'Attachment Schedule' addressed to Tom, threatening to uplift the car if the fines + add-on expense are not paid. She relies on the car for everything (lives in the countryside) and in typical female fashion, feels so intimidated by the Sherrif officer's authority, that she is wanting to pay the fine plus all additional costs, some 350 GBP by now! I am of course absolutely shocked and disgusted by this prospect and know for a fact that since the vehicle does not belong to Tom, there is no way that the Sherrif's men have the right to do this. Tom was contacted, and he duly got his mother to write a letter, countersigned by him, stating that the vehicle (very recently registered in her name even though she dont even drive), is her property and that any attempt to uplift the vehicle would be unlawful....property, 9/10ths of the law n all that. Yesterday however, i answered Sue's front door to greet a couple of the Sherrif's men. My personal policy when dealing with these people is to give them absolutley no information whatsoever. This is what I done yesterday in addition to being pretty rude towards them (the least I could do). They clearly believed that I was Tom, and served me with another brown envelope with 'Tom' written on the front of it. I refused the envelope and threw it back in thier faces. I found it this morning laying sodden wet next to Sue's front door. I am therefore wondering if anyone could fill me in on what the correct moves to make here would be. My instinct tells me not to open the envelope to find out what the Sherrif Officers next move is. So could anyone tell me what this would likely be? If my girlfriend has already told the Sherrif's officers that Tom does not live with her, and Tom's mother has sent them a letter stating that she owns the vehicle, could the Sherrif's mens persistence in visiting Sue's address and issuing bits of paper to people who do notlive there, not be construed as 'Harassment'? I know that according to the written letter of the law, that the Sherrif's men have no right to uplift Sue's car. But I also have zero faith in Scottish justice and suspect that they may well go ahead and do this. Could anyone suggest any measures, which in the event that the Sherrif's men did unlawfully execute the Attachment Schedule, would provide a very strong case for the owner and the registered keeper of the car in the subsequent civil court case? THX.
×
×
  • Create New...