Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. 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 only contracted 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. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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
      • 160 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

Consumer Credit Agreements - A letter from the Parliamentary Under Secretary Of State


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5398 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

For those of you who need to know about Consumer Credit Agreements and why they MUST be produced.

 

I recently wrote to my local MP to inform him of my case against my forced bankruptcy. Yesterday I received a letter from my MP with the response from Gareth Thomas MP (Parliamentary Under Secretary Of State For Trade And Consumer Affairs)

 

It says

 

Thank you for your letter regarding your constituent.....blah blah about problems with debt collection agencies. However I am unable to intervene in disputes of this nature. His best course of action is to seek independent advice or go to his local Citizen's Advice Bureau.....

 

I can however provide some clarity on the point Mr (me) makes about his request for a copy of the credit agreements in question. Sections 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 provide that a consumer may request a copy of any credit agreement they entered into. The Act requires that the lender must comply with any such request within the prescribed period of 12 working days. If a lender cannot comply with the request, they cannot enforce the credit agreement whilst this default continues. Mr (me) may wish to pursue this point further if and when he seeks further advice about the dispute he is engaged in.

 

A lot of us on these forums know about this, but this hopefully will confirm to a lot of people who didn't know this fact, just how important it is to ask for the agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

OK when I get time I will post it up....in the meantime if you need the specific regulations in the Consumer Credit Act then these are they...

 

Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations

1983 (SI 1983/1569)

 

2 Prescribed period

The period of 12 working days is hereby prescribed for the purposes of each provision of the Act specified in Column 1

of the Schedule to these Regulations relating to the duty indicated in Column 2 in relation to regulated agreements

 

 

SCHEDULE

SECTIONS OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF WHICH A PERIOD OF 12 WORKING DAYS IS PRESCRIBED RELATING TO DUTIES IN

RELATION TO REGULATED AGREEMENTS

Regulation 2

Section of the

Act

Duty

(1) (2)

77(1) Duty to give information to debtor under fixed-sum credit agreement.

78(1) Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement.

79(1) Duty to give information to hirer under consumer hire agreement.

 

and section 78 for running credit

 

 

78.

Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement.

— (1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of [F1 £1], shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

(a)

the state of the account, and

 

(b)

the amount, if any currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and

 

©

the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.

 

 

(2) If the creditor possesses insufficient information to enable him to ascertain the amounts and dates mentioned in subsection (1)©, he shall be taken to comply with that paragraph if his statement under subsection (1) gives the basis on which, under the regulated agreement, they would fall to be ascertained.

 

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to—

(a)

an agreement under which no sum is, or will or may become, payable by the debtor, or

 

(b)

a request made less than one month after a previous request under that subsection relating to the same agreement was complied with.

 

 

(4) Where running-account credit is provided under a regulated agreement, the creditor shall give the debtor statements in the prescribed form, and with the prescribed contents—

(a)

showing according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer, the state of the account at regular intervals of not more than twelve months, and

 

(b)

where the agreement provides, in relation to specified periods, for the making of payments by the debtor, or the charging against him of interest or any other sum, showing according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer the state of the account at the end of each of those periods during which there is any movement in the account.

 

 

(5) A statement under subsection (4) shall be given within the prescribed period after the end of the period to which the statement relates.

 

(6) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

(a)

he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;

 

 

(7) This section does not apply to a non-commercial agreement, and subsections (4) and (5) do not apply to a small agreement

Edited by 42man
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Just a thought but if you want to screw with their minds when you next write refer to a letter you have not yet sent.......just as they often do

 

You know the sort of thing

 

"As you have failed to respond to my Letter Before Action dated ??/??/?? I will have no alternative but to issue proceedings against you unless I hear from you by (put yesterdays date)"

 

At the very least you will have the satisfaction of knowing that some Muppet has had to spend time furiously searching through a file

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought but if you want to screw with their minds when you next write refer to a letter you have not yet sent.......just as they often do

 

You know the sort of thing

 

"As you have failed to respond to my Letter Before Action dated ??/??/?? I will have no alternative but to issue proceedings against you unless I hear from you by (put yesterdays date)"

 

At the very least you will have the satisfaction of knowing that some Muppet has had to spend time furiously searching through a file

 

Reminds me of a book I once read called " How to annoy Bureaucrats" worked wonders when I had a run in with the Inland Revenue :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

How to annoy debt collectors.........sounds like a great title for a similar book

 

A number of us get our heads together & compile a number of perfectly legal strategies.........have them checked by our peers.....then publish them on as many free sites as we can.........after all romancing the stone isn't the preserve of the debt collectors & their ilk

 

You know the sort of thing

"letter what letter"???

default! what default????? or

"that MUCH you cannot be serious"..or

"no he she is working on a rig...in a brothel overseas (you takes your pick) & I have NO idea when they will be back......could even by never".....or

"sorry no ones home I'm just the hired help & they have all gone to the regatta.....don't you know......byeeee"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct Andrew but the Judgment has implications for lenders who don't pursue debtors in a timely fashion....even mortgage lenders.........also had the guy acquired any assets after discharge they could have secured them against the original outstanding debt.....so in that sense he's now debt free

 

Far too many lenders just sit back in the hope you will acquire some wealth before they pounce often years after the fact.

 

It's like Damocles Sword hanging over someone & grossly unfair when a debtor has, often against much adversity, worked hard to turn their life around to then find that the problems of the past are not in fact the problems of the past but of today here & now

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

That legislation IMHO means jack!

I have had 3 disputes with Halifax, Cit and RBS. None has sent a copy of CCA since jan 08.

All three have defaulted me. I wrote to the ICO ( no reply) I wrote to TS ( No reply) and I wrote to my MP who wrote back saying I should take it up with the two jokers above.

Consumer legislation does not protect the consumer and creditors can contravene consumer law with no consequences.

Odio los bancos con una venganza

Link to post
Share on other sites

The legislation does actually mean something, it means without a Consumer Credit Agreement, they cannot get any credit debt enforced...If you want to complain ask for the official complaints procedure of the company in question, if they either don't respond or the procedure is not to your satisfaction then report them to the Financial Ombudsman Service....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The legislation does actually mean something, it means without a Consumer Credit Agreement, they cannot get any credit debt enforced...If you want to complain ask for the official complaints procedure of the company in question, if they either don't respond or the procedure is not to your satisfaction then report them to the Financial Ombudsman Service....

 

 

AND the OFT as to try & enforce the unenforceable is contrary to OFT guidelines & COULD (some hope) bring a companies fitness to hold a licence into question

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like i said in my post above, the Information Commissioners Office has done nothing, not even acknowledged my letter. I have used their complaints procedure. 2 have not replied, 1 replied and I have started the procedure with them.

The 'regulators' have no teeth at all.

Why should credit card companies be allowed to flout regulations in the first place? why should we have to fight tooth and nail to reverse something that should not have been done anyway?

 

Like I said--- that legislation means Jack! They don't have to stick to it and, looking at a lot of posts, they don't, but are allowed to get away with it

Odio los bancos con una venganza

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...