Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You will probably get a couple more reminders followed by further demands fro unregulated debt collectors with even increasing amounts to pay. They are all designed to scare you into paying.  Don't. It's a scam site and they do not know who was driving and they know the keeper is not liable to pay the PCN. Also the shop was closed so they have no legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear. So to charge £100 is a penalty as there is no legitimate interest which means that the case would be thrown out if it went to Court.  Keep your money in your wallet and be prepared to ignore all their letters and threats. Doubtful they would go to Court since a lot more people would not pay when they heard  MET lost in Court. However they may just send you a Letter of Claim to test your resolve.  If yoy get one of those, come back to us and we will advise a snotty letter to send them.  You probably already have, but take a look through some of our past Met PCNs to see how they are doing.
    • Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
    • hi all just got the reminder letter, I have attached it and also the 2nd side of the original 1st pcn (i just saw the edit above) Look forward to your advice Thanks   PCN final reminder.pdf pcn original side 2.pdf
    • The airline said it was offering to pay $10,000 to those who sustained minor injuries.View the full article
    • The Senate Finance Committee wants answers from BMW over its use of banned Chinese components by 21 June.View the full article
  • 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

Defending a claim/judgement/CO advice


daw
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5996 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

So where do you think this leaves me, I still need to know the appropiate action, how best to fill in the N244 and what sections of the relavant law to quote. Can you point me in the right direction?

 

Once I have got the set-aside for the default judgement AM I THEN ASKING FOR 'ANOTHER' SET-ASIDE FOR THE CLAIM this is something i don't get?

 

 

@sequenci

I would like to point out payments were made to the bank account BEFORE court action started, since it did NO PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty clear on how to approach the set-aside, the judge himself said this would be a formality on his advise, to give us a chance to defend.

 

It's defending the claim I really need to understand, and do I do it at the SAME TIME as submitting set-aside, as supporting evidence or should I wait until the set-aside is granted before filing a defence?

 

I'm worried if the set-aside is granted and then the claiments solicitor gets a new judgement before we have a chance to defend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, well I need to do something today or Wed at the latest so my plan of action is to send in the N244 for the set aside with regards the screw-up by the solicitor as the main reason. I will also send a witness statement to support a intended defence of the original claim, as I have not received the documents from the SAR request It looks from the answers given above its the best I can do at this time.

 

If anybody sees any problem with this please say something.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks pt2357, that would be very gracious of you.

 

As above I will outline an intent to defend based on the points I mentioned above.

 

It seems to me to be quite clear that S10 of the CCA 1974 applies as the overdraft limit set by the bank was not exceeded and thus all subsequent actions including interest claimed under S69County Court Act are all to pot!

 

Like you say it might be difficult but I think its worth a try.

 

 

one last question: I presume the court will notify us in writing if/ when the set-aside is granted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what i'm putting on Part C of my N244. If anybody can see anything wrong please say so.

 

 

xxxxxxx the Claimants representatives, while in receipt of the Admission on the 25th August (see attached sheet lab led Proof of Postage) 3 days before the date of service (MCOL case details attached), did not to file it with the court before the due date of 28th August 2007. A default judgement was filed on the 30th August. I personal spoke with ‘xxxx’ of xxxxxxxxxx on the 3rd December and was told xxxxxxxxxx filed my admission on the 31st August. This has also been confirmed with ‘xxxxxxx’ of xxxxxxxxx.

 

I believe under the Civil Proceedure Rules: Section 13.2(a) applies and judgement must be set aside.

 

Cases where the court must set aside judgment entered under Part 12

 

13.2 The court must set aside a judgment entered under Part 12 if judgment was wrongly entered because –

 

(a) in the case of a judgment in default of an acknowledgment of service, any of the conditions in rule 12.3(1) and 12.3(3) was not satisfied;

 

 

Conditions to be satisfied

12.3 (1) The claimant may obtain judgment in default of an acknowledgment of service only if –

 

(a) the defendant has not filed an acknowledgment of service or a defence to the claim (or any part of the claim); and

 

(b) the relevant time for doing so has expired.

 

12.3 (3) The claimant may not obtain a default judgment if –

 

© (i) the claimant is seeking judgment on a claim for money; and

(ii) the defendant has filed or served on the claimant an admission under rule 14.4 or 14.7 (admission of liability to

pay all of the money claimed) together with a request for time to pay.

 

 

Outline of defence to claim.

 

That the overdraft facility and limit set by the claiment was not exceeded, therefore the overdraft falls under Section 10 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as ‘Running-account credit’. The claiment has not abided by set procedures with regards the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in suppling the required information or service of documents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...