Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Urgent help re: settlement figures


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5959 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

You may have seen my other post about my nightmare debt!

 

Anyway today I have taken some advise from CCCS and also spoke to my mortgage company. I feel a bit better now!

 

They have offered me a loan that is basically an extension of my mortgage - it is secured on the house, but am just adding to the mortgage, but I can do it for 5 years only, rather than the mortgage term.

 

They've offered me a deal at 6.39% because unbelievably my credit rating was good, so I am going to put 70K onto the mortgage and pay it off over 5 years - we have done our calculations and it works out well for us.

 

Now for the question and help I need from you guys.......when I get the money I will need to sort out what cards to pay. I was wondering if I could pay a settlement on any of them and if they would accept it. None of them are with DCA's and I have maintained the monthly payments, and do still have equity in the house, so they may well think I can afford to pay the full amount outstanding. But, because I have paid them horrendous amounts of interest of the years I wondered if there was any way of doing this - I have seen that people have done it before and settled for 70% of what they owe etc, but did they have to prove they were struggling to pay them? On paper I can afford it, but just want some back of what they have fleeced me!

 

How would I go about asking for a settlement figure - do I tell them I am about to pay it off in full? And do I suggest a figure, or do I just pay the whole amounts? It has to be quick as if i write to them and await a reply it will be at least another month before it is sorted and I was hoping that I could call them and ask them and just pay it then if they gave me a settlement. I want to get these debts paid off within the next couple of weeks if possible and move on with my life after years of misery.

 

Sorry again for the ramble, I just need some quick advise if any of you can help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CCA the creditors, see what comes back. If they cannot prove the debts are enforceable they may accept a very low settlement figure. I must also add that for the vast majority of people turning unsecured debt to secured is a very, very bad thing to do. I've lost count of the amount of clients that have done this and then had a massive change of circumstances which has led them to losing their property completely. Please be careful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the response.

I have looked in depth at this, and if you read my other post will see that it is the only viable action for me. It will reduce my payments from 3K a month to £1300.

Yes the debt is unsecured at the moment, but if I cant continue to pay it then they also have a right to make a charge on your property, so whichever way it needs to be paid. I have also reduced the risk of having to find 3K a month to finding 1300 by doing this, should the worse happen.

I think the response you gave is quite scarey and could put people off doing things - there isnt a blanket case that suits all. In my case this is a very very good thing to do rather than a very very bad thing.

I have not gone into this in a rash way, I've spent months looking into things and deciding. I am very unlikely to lose my house even if the worst happened. It is also not a secured loan I have taken out, it is an extension on my mortgage really. Basically I am borrowing money that is already mine anyway from the equity in my house to pay off debts that have crippling interest rates. How can that be a bad thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really glad you have done your homework, you are quite correct that there isn't a blanket solution for all and I would agree that for certain situations a secured loan *may* be the best option. I have, however, had clients who have lost their homes due to them not being able to keep up with the repayments on their secured borrowing, you seem to have investigated all possible options and not made a rash decision so I'm sure things will be all good for you.

 

An extension on your mortgage is surely secured against your home, no? A secured loan is no different to a mortgage as they are subject to a charge against the house.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, it is secured on my home, but even with the additional amount added to it, the bank only own 36% of the house - i.e the mortgage outstanding is only 36% of the house value.

 

Feel so relieved now that I have sorted something out.

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, from what I understand from reading through this site and others, the only way creditors are likely to accept a reduced full and final settlement is if you have defaulted and have been paying a reduced amount ie. on a DMP.

 

I was in a DMP for 12 months, by this time all cc debts had been passed to debt collection agencies who at first accepted payments on a DMP, but then out of the blue started to threaten charging orders, which Egg successfully obtained.

 

Further on, I was able to offer all creditors an equal percentage (in my case 65%) to settle the account and all but one accepted. The thing I understood is that all creditors have to be offered the same percentage. There are template letters on the National Debtline website. I have been told by various people that the longer you have been paying a reduced amount the more likely a full and final settlement will be accepted. I would add that Egg told me they never accept full and final settlements unless the debtor has a terminal illness, very nice people I don't think.

 

Hope this helps a little.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...