Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About thefunkymonk

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Sure but if I was them i would ignore that and simply rely on the law as it relates to selling breakdown cover and other insurances alongside a HP for a car. That is all that will matter in front of a judge.
  2. MC position is that the outstanding amounts are a personal loan and those sums are due. So there is no offer to negotiate or settle. Obviosuly if I am going to take them to court I need to be extremely sure that breakdown cover etc is as you say not recoverable by them once a vehicle has been Voluntarily Terminated.
  3. OK so IF i owed them the 47 quid ......presumably they couldnt just say .. oh well the ccj should still stand .. we just adjust the amount ....
  4. I remember ringing Welcome not long ago and asking re PPI to be told I didnt have PPI. It is what these insurances are and whether they are reclaimable as though they were PPI plus the matter of this 47 quid and its potential to bite me on the bum re the dispute/original CCJ, that is the issue for me. MC seem sufficiently set up to be incapable of dealing with this and negotiating around the facts of the case no matter the facts likely to be raised in any court action on my part.
  5. Spoken to them today. Advisor informed me the debt being referred to as a "personal loan" but they had taken no action re getting information internally and want me to email in some bits and pieces. It is like wading through a sea of morons with front line advisers talking generalities and escalation not much better and no continuity from one call to the next. I have essentially emailed them what was posted above.
  6. Bad luck Tis better to have fought and lost, Than never to have fought at all.” ―Arthur Hugh Clough
  7. Ok... lets see how the next round goes. They are after payment number 2 and threatening to go back to court for the AOE order to be enforced according to the letter I got this morning.
  8. I have not read everything up on this but IME there is a fine line to be drawn between requiring the other side to come up with what you as the Defendant consider to be strong evidence/absolute proof and what the judge believes what has happened taking into consideration all the evidence they have seen. Judges have wide ranging powers and an over riding remit to "do good" so it doesn't go in your favour to appear too smug. As a Lay person a Judge will give you a reasonable margin and not expect you to know the law in a lot of detail. Use that to your advantage. You dont want to
  9. Ok. I dont think I had PPI with them. Aren't they other insurances which may or may not be an issue as far as that S18 is concerned. I have had a discussion with them already about it being a VT but obviously not this section 18 stuff. Since then I have had all the SAE request stuff back that supports the position. So they are expecting me ...and were asking me to send them my evidence (because presumably they couldn't get it direct from their own client)
  10. Ok I understand that s18. Now So if I apply to have the CCJ set aside/stayed and fork out the court fee/get a fee remission, the risk to the other side is that they will have to defend it/something at some stage thus incurring extra costs ? So that is my leverage on top of the s18 argument ? Otherwise why would they just walk away ? Also you mention above that they would have gotten a sum of £ for selling the car at auction. Why is this relevant (other than it shows they got some £ on top of what I had paid them) ? Thanks again.
  11. Yes it is signed in both by me. So I negotiate with them , then if they wont drop it I take them to court ?
  12. Here we go...pdf uploaded Not spoken to them for a while..but will be doing in a few days to make second payment of 30 and to discuss rest of it. docs1.pdf
  • Create New...