Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Cabot - Charging Order


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5823 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

Hi there -- first post on here and why didn't I know about you guys a couple of years ago.

 

Lots of issues with debts the biggest one is a charging order over my house for about £13500 with Cabot. First question is do I have any real chance of this being overturned. Original debt goes back to 1992 with an ex partner for £4000.

I wont go into to much detail just yet but any thoughts please ??

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that I now know that it may have been statute barred at the time of granting. Although Cabot were trying to catch up with me no payments agreed payment plans were put in place---- they just tracked me down.

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of interest, what is your equity? If you have owned it for 15 years it must be rather impressive!

 

I dont think thats relevant is it

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only been in my current property since 2002 and taken out further mortgage and loans etc so basically no equity. Your saying that if I don't agree a payment plan that a sale could be forced anyway if they wanted to.

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why I think I have nothing to loose by looking at the possibility of the order being rescinded. I appreciate that it would need to be looked at in depth, but if you still think not then thats fair enough.

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,Beau-don't mean to hijack your thread but would just like to say a HUGE thanks. Have learnt quite a bit about charging orders from you & Theo in the last hour or so & although it's not something I'm ecstatic about, it doesn't seem as bad as I first thought. When I found out yesterday my son had one of these from Eversheds I promptly burst into tears:o (Sorry its a mum thing-he may be 26 but he still worries me). Until then I'd never even heard of a charging order-interim or otherwise. Now I realise that as long as he keeps his payments up to date he should be OK-I think:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem moggieb I am a complete novice when it comes to this sort of thing and had to ask. Still this is a very serious matter and your son cannot sell the asset that the order is against without telling these leeches I would love to be able to wriggle out of this because they have me in line for another debt but I will make it alot harder for them to get this far next time.

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

A Charging Order is a creditors way of protecting their interests i.e. money.

 

If you go to the Official Land Registry website there will be publications on Charging Orders.

 

Its unlikely it will be removed from your title deeds as when the Land Registry receive the application to register the Order its already signed and sealed by the court. Though you should of been served notice of any court action and thats when you should of objected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh thanks BTB as I said when I started this thread I wish I had known about this forum 18 months - 2 years ago I perhaps would not have allowed it to get this far.

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still this is a very serious matter and your son cannot sell the asset that the order is against without telling these leeches.

 

hi again-he doesn't want to sell in fact he's trying his best to keep it. Like you if I'd known about this sooner I would have tried to help him. I've read somewhere that we could maybe have objected on the gounds that they weren't his biggest creditors and it would have been unfair to grant the charge to Eversheds. Still I guess its too late to cry over spilt milk as they say:) He has no equity yet so hopefully as Theo said a Judge would not order the sale if Evershed applied. (Fingers crossed!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Re-activating this thread due to some interest expressed by andrew1,

 

Original second charge on a property taken out with "Nationwide Credit Corporation Ltd" of London SE1 in March 1990 for £4k, the paperwork that I have even has the original T&C's.

I have statements for the account from inception to April 1995. From then onwards until May 2002 I have nothing. May 2002 Cabot served a default notice for in excess of 2k arrears. Then I have nothing until Dec 2005, during this period I was making Nominal payments per month.

 

December 2005 letter from Hodsons Solicitors having been instructed by Cabot Financial Europe Ltd who were administering the account on behalf of "Morley Ltd" explaining that although I was making payments that this was not enough to prevent their client issuing procedings.

 

Later that month procedings issued (head in sand time), I have still got original POC.

Not until May 2006 did I receive a Judgement notice asking for payment "Forthwith".

 

Sept 2006 Hodsons inform me that on xx August 2006 a charging order was granted and that on xx November 2006 this order will be made final.

 

No further contact until March 07 when Cabot start asking for payments against the account.

 

April 07 I receive a "Notice of Transfer of Procedings" to my local court for enforcement.

 

May 07 an AEO was asked for by "Morley Ltd" which I managed to fight off as I am self employed.

 

Feb 08 agree to start making nominal payments again which I now pay by SO.

 

So there it is I can probably fill in any gaps from memory but the main point I tried to raise in post 1 still applies today. I dont want false hope.

 

It would appear to me that unless I have missed something really dramatic that Cabot did illegaly then there is not much I can do.

 

BB

 

 

 

 

 

F

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...