Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm at work now but promise to look in later. Can you confirm how you paid the first invoice?  It wasn't your fault if the signal was so poor and there was no alternative way to pay.  There must be a chance of reversing the charge with your bank.  There are no guarantees but Kev  https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09766749/officers  has never had the backbone to do court so far.  Not even in one case,  
    • OK  so you may not have outed yourself if you said "we". No matter either way you paid. Snotty letter I am surprised that they were so quick off the mark threatening Court. They usually take months to go that far. No doubt that as you paid the first one they decided to strike quickly and scare you into paying. Dear Chuckleheads  aka Alliance,  I am replying to your LOCs You may have caught me the first time but that is  the end. What a nasty organisation you are. You do realise that you now have now no reason to continue to pursue me after reading my appeal since you know that my car was not cloned. Any further pursuit will end up with a complaint to the ICO that you are breaching my GDPR.  Please confirm that you have removed my details from your records. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I haven't gone for a snotty letter this time as they know that you paid for your car in another car park. So using a shot across their bows .  If it doesn't deter them and they send in the debt collectors or the Court you will then be able to get more money back from them for  breachi.ng your data protection than they will get should they win in Court-and they have no chance of that as you have paid. So go in with guns blazing and they might see sense.  Although never underestimate how stupid they are. Or greedy.
    • Thank you. Such a good point. They did issue all 3 before I paid though. I only paid one because I didn’t have proof of parking that time, only for two others.    Unfortunately no proof of my appeal as it was just submitted through a form on their website and no copy was sent to me. I only have the reply. I believe I just put something like “we made the honest mistake of using the incorrect parking area on the app” and that’s it. Thanks again for your help. 
    • They are absolute chuckleheads. You paid but because you entered a different car park site also belonging to them they are pursuing you despite them knowing what you had done. It would be very obvious to everyone, including Alliance that your car could not have been in two places at the same time. Thank you for posting the PCN so quickly making it a pity that you appealed since there are so many things wrong with it that you as keeper are not liable to pay the charge. They rarely accept appeals since that would mean they lose money but they have virtually no chance of beating you in Court. Very unlikely that they will take you to Court given the circumstances. Just in case you didn't out yourself as the driver could you please post up your appeal.
    • Jasowter I hope that common sense prevails with Iceland and the whole matter can be successfully ended. I would perhaps not have used a spell checker just to prove the dyslexia 🙂 though it may have made it more difficult to read. I noticed that you haven't uploaded the original PCN .Might not be necessary if the nes from Iceland is good. Otherwise perhaps you could get your son to do it by following the upload instructions so that we can appeal again with the extra ammunition provided by the PCN. Most of them rarely manage to get the wording right which means that you as the keeper are not liable to pay the charge-only the driver is and they do not know the name and address of the driver. So that would put you both in the clear if the PCN is non compliant.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Welcome Finance **WON**


postggj
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5124 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

not being legally trained in any way, I do not really understand 'the claimants claim be dismissed' does this mean the case is just over following the statement made by the Judge.

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 428
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Maybelline

It Just Means Both Parties Have Agreed Settlement In Front Of The Judge

Welcome Must Have Realised They Were On A Looser And Accepted The Judges Recomendations

I Agreed And Withdrew My Claim

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats great, so WF backed down completely! what happened about costs?

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

Relieved Is An Understatement

This Has Been Going On For Six Years

Would Not Have Been Able To Do It Without Your Help Mabelline, And All The People Looking In On My Thread

You Can Now All Add A Welcome Scalp To Your Sucesses

Link to post
Share on other sites

I Understand A Lot Of Welcome Fighters Are Thinking, I Wish It Was Me,

All I Can Say Is That I Had To Start Some Ware

Welcome Will Go Right To The Courts If A Mr Orill Has Anything To Do With It

Stand Your Ground And Dont Be Put Off By Any Sort Of Underhand Tactics. It Rattled Me, But Thanks To Words Of Encouragement From Maybelline, I Continued.

Its A Long Battle, But You Will Get There In The End

 

Above All

 

Fight Injustice

 

Keep Fighting

Link to post
Share on other sites

congrats postggj

 

i've got to face mr orribble in a couple of weeks so looking forward to the challenge.

 

did they produce the caligraphy/graphology report or what ever it was??

 

i too think that the documents they submitted to court for my claim are a bit dodgy so looking forward to making them squirm

 

would it be possible to post any judgements or judges comments in case they help others claims

 

well done... it gives me a boost when others have won

 

CAGer's 1 - 0 welcome

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will Post Judgement When It Arrives From Court

Take My Word For It Mr Orill Is Not A Nice Chap

I Know He Has A Job To Do But Dont Take It Personel

The Forensic Graphologist Report Was Not Needed

Judge On My Side All The Way

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its Strange Though

I Have Not Come Across Any Threads Where People Have Taken On Welcome And Won In Court

They Normally Settle Before Court

Are We Seeing A Change Of Tactic By Welcome

 

JUST GOES TO SHOW

THEY CAN BE BEATEN

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done postggj, I was waiting for your case to be over before starting mine against unwelcome finance.

 

The CD with phonecalls on it welcome sent me, is a bit dubious, as a friend in the recording industry has listened to it and it appears to have parts missing.

 

I look forward to seeing your judgement, when you receive it - usually takes a few days.

 

Well Done again :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

"By Consent It Is Ordered That The Claiments Claim Be Dissmissed."

 

Correct me if I am wrong... Lack of legal knowledge and all that... but if you were the Claimant, and Welcome Finance were the defendant, and your Claim was dismissed... Doesn't that actually mean that you lost...?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, because the defendant also admit he owes no money.

 

Meaning, they can't chase him ever again for this account, or file crap in his credit reference.

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmm... not really a wain then, more of a score draw...

 

But the way I understand it, the claim was never about chasing him for payment, it was about removing defaults from his credit file... so were they removed? He hasn't said yet.

yes, they were.

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm... so they agreed that you don't owe anything?

 

Have they removed the default?

 

post 372

I Can Confirm Default Gone

Mr Orill Can Threaten All He Wants The Court Has Decided So Welcome Cannot Bring Any Further Litigation

Ref Judgement Above

You Just Have To Pick At There Weakness And Use It To Your Advantage

Helps To Have A Decent Judge On The Day

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay... officially confused now... Like I said, legal knowledge is a bit sketchy...

 

I have followed this thread for quite some time. But please tell me:

 

if...

 

a) his default was removed

b) there is no money owing to welcome

 

...then how come his claim was dismissed by the Judge? If his claim was dismissed he lost. Period. End of. So if his claim was dismissed, how come he won?

 

Sorry to be a pain, but this is making my brain hurt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

His claim was for damages.

 

He will not get these damages.

 

the consent order states he does not owe welcome anything... at all... and they will never be able to take enforcement action against him.

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

after reading several threads and from my own experiences, it seems as though there is real doubt in peoples minds as to the information being provided by welcome during complaints.

 

my own case highlights missing documents, documents which contain information which doesn't relate to my loan, inaccurate documents which cannot be originals or copies of, documents which appear to have been made to look like originals but contain incorrect info. it also has witness statement supposedly from the person who sold me the loan (but no longer work for welcome) stating that they did not tell me PPI was compulsary (now i know and everyone else who has dealt with welcome knows that they tell people the PPI has to be taken out).

 

but what in reality can we do about it....

 

i could not use any judgements or comments made in Postggj's case to help my claim as welcome would argue that each case in unique.

if i do manage to convince the judge that documents they submitted in my claim shouldn't be considered, i will probably win the case and convince the judge that aren't to be trusted but it won't help others as it won't lead to a formal investigation into their practices or who has submitted this false info and it wouldn't set precident.

 

so what can we do....

 

these forums are full of people who have all gone through the same experiences and are all claiming the same thing about the same companies and we all go off (with each others help) and prepare our cases for court. then we go off to court and on the day it's each person against the institution. but i get the feeling that there must be something we can do as a group to add weight to each persons complaint in the eyes of the courts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...