Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The case against the US-based ride-hailing giant is being brought on behalf of over 10,800 drivers.View the full article
    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Equita cannot cancel direct debit ?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6069 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

My girlfriend has a direct debit with Equita of £200 a month for council tax owing.Today the guy phones up saying he must have all the money by Friday or they will turn up at the door etc etc.

 

He says the direct debit will be cancelled and that she must pay the full arrears of £700.

 

I am aware they cannot cancel a direct debit ( which has been honoured /paid for the last few months) as it is a contract. I know he can't get in as he hasn't been in before and she won't let him in or sign a walk in possession etc. I know as the debt as dragged on for a while if he closes it quickly he gets a bonus from his boss ( know this from another bailiff! ).

 

So he is using intimidating tactics. Can someone tell me what she can tell him on the phone please? e.g. 'You cannot request this money or cancel the direct debit as such and such ruling dated 19** states etc'??

 

Many thanks in advance folks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically no he cant do this, he has entered into an agreement/contract, if you have not defaulted then he has no grounds to demand the rest of the money.

Out of interest how much was the initial debt for the council tax, has he ever entered the premises do to a levy or Walking possession order. I suggest your girlfriend writes to the council explaining what this bailiff has done and that he is threatening to come round even though she has been paying an agreed amount on time and has not defaulted any agreed payments, The council may just take back the debt, its worth asking.

Unless this bailiff has done a WPO in the property then he cannot force his way in.. so dont let him in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you need to check the position of the certificated baiiff before Hm Courts offices open at 10 let me know and I will l search for you.

 

I am very surprised that the durect debit was cancelled. In additon I am surprised that the bailif agreed to it without at least trying to gain entry into the property and listing items on a walking possession.

 

 

I am usure of the position of the direct debit being cancelled. The payer can cancel at any time and should inform the bank and the Originator (Equita). Whether the Originator is able to cancel I do not know.

 

Have any of the payments been refused by the bank? i

 

f so this is the most likely reason and is therefore more difficult to resolve. Once I know the answer I can advise further.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for replies. However I have now had my girlfriend explain it properly.

 

No was NO direct debit, it was meant to be £200 a month originally bit when the first payment became due she had no money in the account and subsequently cancelled the direct debit ( to stop bank charges etc ).

 

The bailiff then started ringing her in the late evening every Sunday demanding money. She paid my maestro card over the phone, a couple of £80 payments and £200 at end of July.

 

Now the alarming bit ..... He took £200 from her account via the original maestro card details at the end of August!!! He had obviously kept the card details from the earlier agreed payments with my girlfriend. On this occassion he just helped his self.

 

She never agreed to this although I suppose he will claim she did.

 

 

Yes cheers mate if you could look him up - Equita - his name is (EDIT) many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't get PM from Tom but not too worry.

 

My girlfriend phoned the council and has a meeting with them today at 4pm. No women was horrified and said she will sort it all out with the legal dept. So hopefully a happy ending and thanks for all your help.

 

I cannot believe however that the bailiff took £200 without permission from previous card details. Is there any recourse there?

 

The bank actually honoured it despite there not being enough in the account. Got a £12 charge though of course!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this on Drakes 'code of practice'

 

I think this may cover all debt/bailiff agencies

 

Receipts - A receipt must be issued on every occasion where a payment has been made, regardless of whether the amount is £1 or £1,000. Each receipt must contain all relevant details of the defendant/debtor and the issuing client, any applicable reference number(s), amount(s) paid, whether credit/debit card, cash, other form of payment, and any outstanding balance. Your and the defendant/debtor's signatures are required on the receipt to demonstrate that both parties agreed to the terms and details of the transaction. When a payment is taken via the telephone, a receipt must be either hand delivered or sent by post to the defendant/debtor as soon as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have checked the register for you and can confirm that he is certificated. His certificated was due to expire on 15th August but was renewed early in June 2007. The cert is valid for 2 years.

 

The course of events that you have descibed above would be normal, in that the bailiff will cancel the arrangement because a payment has been rejected.

 

The situation concerning taking money from the bank account IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN, but is sadly quite common place.

 

I am going to be posting a recent newspaper article about this that was featured in the Mail on Sunday a few weeks ago.

 

In order to get the payment arrangement back. I would suggest that a letter is sent ASAP to both the bailiff company AND local authority complaining about the way this payment was taken and to say that you are now considering making a FORM 4 Complaint to Northampton County Court ( where he was granted his certificate).

 

You could either ask that payment arrangements are set up again but at an afordable level WITHOUT a direct direct mandate being agreed or ask that the debt be returned back to the council.

 

Personally, I would go the council route.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...