Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Afternoon all Looking for advice before I defend claim for car tax payment that the DVLA claim I owe £68 from an idemity claimback from my bank and unpaid tax  So brief outline. Purchased car Jan 30th ,garage paid the tax for me after I gave them my card details so first payment £68 out in Feb 24  followed by payment of £31 from March due to end Jan 24 Checked one of my vehicle apps and about 7-10 days later car showing as untaxed? No reason why but it looks like DVLA cancelled it ,this could be because I did not have the V5 and the gargae paid on my behalf but not sure did not receive a letter to say car was untaxed.  Fair enough I set up the tax again staight away in Feb 24  and first payment out Mar 31st , and each payment since has come out each month for £31 , this will end Feb/Mar 2025 so slightly longer than the original tax set up so all good. I then claimed the £68 back from my bank as an indemity refund as obviously I had paid but DVLA had cancelled therefore it was a payment for nothing?  Last week recieved a SJP form dated 29th May stating that DVLA were claiming for unpaid tax and a false indemity claimback which of course is the £68. It also stated that I had received two previous letters offering me the oppotunity to pay that £68 but as I had not responded it was now a court claim that I must admit guilt for or defend. My post is held for weeks at a time from Royal Mail ( keepsafe) due to me receiving hospital tretament at weeks at a time that said I did not receive any previous letters from DVLA. So I am happy to defend this and go to court but wondering what CAG members think? In summary I paid an initial amount of £68 and then a DD of £31 , tax cancelled so I set up a new DD at £31 a month all in the month of Feb 2024, I claimed the £68 back from my bank. DD has been coming out each month without issue and I have paperwork to show the breakdown for both DD setup's plus bank statements showing the payments coming out . The second DD set up has extended payments up to Feb/Mar 2025. DVLA claiming the £68 was ilegally claimed back despite the fact they cancelled the original DD for reasons unknown. Is this defendable ? I will post up documents including the original DD conformations 
    • That doesn't look like clacton ... Former Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage buys coastal home in Lydd-on-Sea WWW.KENTONLINE.CO.UK Former Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage bought a coastal home in the county, it has been reported.  
    • It's not a private road.  It's a small public street (with Resi houses) that leads into and from public road/ highway. The garages have land in front of the doors.  Then there's a yellow line. So there's a clear marker on what is private and what is public.  These people keep parking on the private land side
    • Do you also own land the garages on and the private road? Or is it shared freehold with right of access to all freeholders or why?  Dx  
    • I may try cheap plastic bollards (traffic cones) first just to see if they get moved.  I will look into the cost of fixed bollards.
  • 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

MCE/mortimer claimform - old British Credit Trust car finance debt


mcuth
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5231 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

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hmmm, now I've received another AQ to complete - strange...

 

Even stranger - it's an N150. Spoke to the Court this morning and they said they thought it was strange, but it's what the Judge wanted..... :rolleyes:

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I received a Without Prejudice (save as to costs) letter from Mortimer Clarke the other day, providing a "true copy" of the agreement (with Ts&Cs, but unsigned by me) and offering to settle for £3k all in.... yeah, riiiiiiiiiight. Anyone want to see it?

 

Not heard anything from the court yet though...

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well, finally got a chance to post the links to the offer letter scanned in & on photobucket:

 

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/wpo01.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/wpo02.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/wpo03.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/wpo04.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/wpo05.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/wpo06.jpg

 

Not sure if I should respond or not? I'm definitely not accepting the offer :lol:

 

Also received the latest order from the Court (finally):

 

Upon considering the allocation questionnaires filed, it is order that:

 

1. The matter is stayed for 28 days.

2. The Claimant to inform the Court of outcome of stay by the 15th Septemebr [sic] 2008 and provide draft directions for consideration by Court if settlement not achieved.

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm so they have sent you an unsigned credit agreement then

 

Well, they have previously sent a signed copy, without the Ts&Cs:

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/scan0002.jpg

The latest one must be their attempt to provide a "true" copy without the sigs - I bet they don't have the Ts&Cs attached to the original signed copy (if they actually have the original signed copy!)

 

great, and how exactly were they hoping to convince the court to enforce it?

 

Pot luck? :D :D

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still wondering whether I should reply along the lines of "I don't believe I have a case to answer, so I respectfully decline your offer" or not..... oh decisions, decisions!

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

So, after not hearing anything for a while, I got home from work to find the following order from the Court (yeah, I've scanned in Mortimer Clarke's copy, don't worry :)):

 

080921_MCE_order1.jpg

 

With the following attachment:

 

080921_MCE_order2.jpg

 

 

Interesting - I've heard nothing about any application, should I have done? The Court says the CMC is ok for a teleconference but then makes no order regarding arranging it, etc... - what gives here? Should I write to the Court about it all??

 

Yesterday, I then received the amended PoC (which aren't stated as amended, so that's the first thing I'll pull them up on) and exhibits - I'll just give links to these:

 

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/080921_MCE_PoC.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/080921_MCE_CCA1.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/080921_MCE_CCA2.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/080921_MCE_DN1.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/080921_MCE_DN2.jpg

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q157/mcuth/mce/080921_MCE_NoA.jpg

 

I don't see any new information that's been supplied, relied upon or anything - just wondering what the hell's going on really and what MC are trying to achieve.....

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking that their use of "agreement terminated" in the new PoC means that they'll be attempting a Rankine-esque Reply to my Defence whenever I get chance to rejig it a bit....

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting - I've heard nothing about any application, should I have done? The Court says the CMC is ok for a teleconference but then makes no order regarding arranging it, etc... - what gives here? Should I write to the Court about it all??

 

BUMP....

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Interesting - just received the Reply to Defence, which in some respects is similar to this one, but has a lot more in it, including....a print of this entire thread! Lots of thinking to do....

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

**YAWN**

 

Do they really have nothing better to do than reading these forums?

 

i like the reference in the quoted thread to the Rankine Judgment, dont they realise that House of Lords and Court of Appeal overrules the High Court, the donkeys

Link to post
Share on other sites

**YAWN**

 

Do they really have nothing better to do than reading these forums?

 

Aye, looks like it mate - I think they're a little scared of the wave of consumer revolution taking place :)

 

i like the reference in the quoted thread to the Rankine Judgment, dont they realise that House of Lords and Court of Appeal overrules the High Court, the donkeys

 

I don't think so :D

 

I'll scan in the RTD, hopefully at some point this weekend - but while we're here, is the other side supposed to send a copy of any application to me? I've had this happen a couple of times now, where an application has been made to the Court, but I've seen nothing of it until I receive the order from the Court??

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
is the other side supposed to send a copy of any application to me? I've had this happen a couple of times now, where an application has been made to the Court, but I've seen nothing of it until I receive the order from the Court??

 

I take it no-one knows the answer to this at all?

 

I now have the Reply scanned in (without the benefit of this thread being printed & attached, and the copy of the Rankine judgment of course :rolleyes:) wondering whether I should post it or not? Paul?

 

BTW, the Court originally scheduled a CMC for telephone hearing, but MC wrote to the Court and got it changed to a hearing in person. I'd like to get that changed back, given that I have to take a 1/2 day off work for it! :mad:

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
I now have the Reply scanned in (without the benefit of this thread being printed & attached, and the copy of the Rankine judgment of course :rolleyes:) wondering whether I should post it or not? Paul?

 

Paul - did you get a chance to look over that reply at all?

 

I didn't get to appear at the CMC hearing thanks to being called into work, but the case has now been transferred to my local court and a CMC called for April - MC have written saying that "from the hearing report" (presume that's their own report), they note that the DJ was minded to give them judgement, but as I wasn't there he was concerned and transferred it for another CMC. As a result, they've made a part 36 offer :rolleyes:

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I hereby invoke my rights to intellectual copyright in respect of any post I may author or may already have authored on the Consumer Forum known as The consumer action group, website address www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk

 

The right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law and subject to the following:

 

Private individuals- A private individual is free to use or reproduce any part of any posting of mine in any manner which they deem fit without prior authorisation from myself, the rights to all usage by private individuals is granted freely and without condition in perpetuity by myself the Author known on this forum under the pseudonym mcuth.

 

Commercial Organisations - The right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law and subject to the following:

The Author reserves the right to refuse permission without supplying a reason for so doing.

The Author requires written application in advance from the business wishing to use the authors work, such application should contain the following:

(i) The reason for wishing to reproduce the authors work.

(ii) The manner and extent of rights to reproduction sought.

(iii) A licensing application fee of £1000 per post or article (In the event of such application being refused this fee minus reasonable costs will be returned to the applicant).

 

Unauthorised usage of any work authored and published upon this website shall constitute an offence of breach of Copyright and in the event the author becomes aware of any unauthorised usage the author reserves the rights to pursue the offender under any laws of this Country such as the author sees fit in order to claim compensation for the unauthorised usage of works covered by intellectual copyright.

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Interesting.

 

I understood that in registering as a user one agrees to the forum rules, one of which is:

 

1.10 Copyright Information: All information contained in this website, associated websites, and forum posts are copyright Reclaim The Right Ltd. If you wish to use the information on this site for publication elsewhere, then please email the administrators for permission.

 

So who owns the copyright to your posts?

 

Discuss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to MCE/mortimer claimform - old British Credit Trust car finance debt
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...