Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you Andy/Dx   UPDATED Defence, 3 days remaining.   Not sure where to mention invalid PAP. I put it under number 5. Please check if this is good to go.   Defence   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claims are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) – failed to serve a letter of claim pre-claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   1. I have in the past had financial dealings with Lloyds Banking Group. I do not recall the precise details of the agreement and have sought clarity from the claimant.   2. However, I do not recall ever receiving a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974.   3. I do not recall ever receiving this notice pursuant to sec136 of the Law of Property Act 1925.   4. I do not recall ever receiving a letter of assignment from the Lloyds Banking group advising the debt was assigned to the claimant.   5. Claimant served the invalid PAP with no connection to their court claim,   6. On receipt of this claim I sent CPR 31.14 and section 77 request. The claimant failed to provide a valid copy of the agreement and therefore remains in default of said request.   7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-   a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and c) Show or evidence service of a Default Notice/Notice of Sums in Arrears, d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.      
    • no.   i wonder if the OP is entitled to CTAX benefit, thats only available from the relevant council...most on UC can get it..   but your MP is by far the most successful route to sorting these issues we've seen here to work.
    • dx100uk  unclebulgaria67   OP is on UC.   Could the council apply for weekly amounts to be deducted from UC claim ?
    • I suggest you start reading around this forum about the steps involved in taking a small claim in the County Court. It's very straightforward but you should understand the steps before embarking on it so that you are confident. We will help you all the way. Once you have done this basic reading then come back here and we can begin the process if you are happy to go ahead. On the basis of what you say, I expect that your chances are better than 90%. I also expect that West Cheshire Facilities Management will want to put their hands up before it goes to court and get a judgement against them. We would want to see your letter of claim before it sent off but I suggest that it is made clear that Social Security's have already been informed and that when you get a judgement against West Cheshire Facilities Management, you will make sure that social services and the health service generally are all circulated with copies of the judgement. If West Cheshire Facilities Management really want to take that risk with all of the reputational and business risk that accompanies it, then they are being extremely shortsighted.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4672 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

A friend and neighbour is facing repossession, and it looks as if she won't be able to save the situation.

 

Some of us got together last night to discuss the situation and see what we could do ... one possibility under serious discussion is that we - (as a community) set-up a company and buy the house ourselves and rent it back to her.

 

Whilest brain-storming we came up with quite a few very constructive ideas. One was that while the house is empty we all tend the garden - as a tidy garden will benefit us all. (What is the new owner to do? Complain to the police that we have cut the lawns and tidyied the borders LOL ?)

 

Another idea was that if we see anyone viewing the property we pop round and make sure they are fully aware that they will NOT be welcome ! (None of us will be too pleased if a similar neighbouring house is bought at a knock down price when others are struggling to pay their bills). We also think its important that the message gets across that if people repossess - they will have difficulty disposing of the property.

 

We're also thinking of launching a website to collate ideas and encourage others. If anyone has any other suggestions please list them here, or let me know if you'd like more info when the website is launched.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Old_andrew2018
A friend and neighbour is facing repossession, and it looks as if she won't be able to save the situation.

Hi are you sure she that she can't avoid repossession, could you not get her to post on the site there may be someone who has worked through a similar situation and can advise.

Some of us got together last night to discuss the situation and see what we could do ... one possibility under serious discussion is that we - (as a community) set-up a company and buy the house ourselves and rent it back to her.

Well what happens if in the near future one of the shareholders themselves need to sell their house or their share in this co-operative, or your friend for some reason needs to move.

It does sound good, although you will need to consider how the capital would be raised, and how to spread the liability.

 

Whilest brain-storming we came up with quite a few very constructive ideas. One was that while the house is empty we all tend the garden - as a tidy garden will benefit us all. (What is the new owner to do? Complain to the police that we have cut the lawns and tidyied the borders LOL ?)

 

Another idea was that if we see anyone viewing the property we pop round and make sure they are fully aware that they will NOT be welcome ! (None of us will be too pleased if a similar neighbouring house is bought at a knock down price when others are struggling to pay their bills).

 

How could you do that without offending an individual, or face legal action from the seller, or even criminal charges if they could prove harassment.

Who knows someone will buy for the hell off it, then what all out war!.

 

We also think its important that the message gets across that if people repossess - they will have difficulty disposing of the property.

The mortgage company would really not be too concerned, how would you get the message across.

 

We're also thinking of launching a website to collate ideas and encourage others. If anyone has any other suggestions please list them here, or let me know if you'd like more info when the website is launched.

 

Sorry to sound negative, I seen friends, and neighbours close to being evicted, some have worked things out sadly some haven't.

Regards

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

 

We are still looking at options but she now has no income, so I don't really see how the Court could let her keep the house.

 

The company would be no different from any other company - shareholders will be able to sell and buy shares within the group when it suited them.

 

Regarding putting off potential buyers - I think it would only be neighbourly to "check" who was visiting the property, don't you? When you discover its a potential buyer they can be made to realise that the previous occupant was well liked etc? I think there are "ways" to get the message across !

 

Sorry to hear that some of your friends have not worked things out - maybe they would have done better if they had NOT kept things to themselves?

 

With the explosion of debt about to hit Britain - something I have been warning of for some time - everyone will be in the same boat.

 

As for the website - you may be right ... but there are plenty who come on here and discuss their debts / bailiffs / repos etc .... so why would people not also go to another self-help site?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Old_andrew2018
Hi Andy

 

We are still looking at options but she now has no income, so I don't really see how the Court could let her keep the house.

I still think she might get advice, if she posted on this or another site.

The company would be no different from any other company - shareholders will be able to sell and buy shares within the group when it suited them.

I was thinking in terms of repayment; for example if some "shareholders" themselves fell onto hard times.

Still as you have discovered by thinking out of the box, you can find unique solutions to a problem.

Regarding putting off potential buyers - I think it would only be neighbourly to "check" who was visiting the property, don't you? When you discover its a potential buyer they can be made to realise that the previous occupant was well liked etc? I think there are "ways" to get the message across !

 

Sorry to hear that some of your friends have not worked things out - maybe they would have done better if they had NOT kept things to themselves? I'm not sure that they kept things to themselves, they simply ran out of options its was sad we miss them, although you try to keep in touch it rarely happens.

With the explosion of debt about to hit Britain - something I have been warning of for some time - everyone will be in the same boat.

 

As for the website - you may be right ... but there are plenty who come on here and discuss their debts / bailiffs / repos etc .... so why would people not also go to another self-help site?

My statement, "The mortgage company would really not be too concerned, how would you get the message across", meant what actions could your group employee that would be effective.

I see no problem with the site, I would also argue that you won't see as many trolls as some other sites have.

 

Good luck with what ever your group decide, who knows if this works out, another house could be purchased.

 

Regards

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember the "shareholders" would have put-up their cash at first (just like buying shares) and if they wanted to sell them they would have to find a buyer.

 

My statement, "The mortgage company would really not be too concerned, how would you get the message across", meant what actions could your group employee that would be effective.

 

If the MC got the message that people were being "put off" from buying cheap properties then they may not repossess as many (as getting a bit of cash from the existing person would be better than having an empty house, and no income at all).

 

It would be slow to start with - just as banks took little notice of the first few who claimed back bank charges - but when that became a flood .... ?

 

Its just an initial thought. Like you say these are strange times and you have to "think outside the box". I think the message board (on the site) could generate other ideas that we can try out too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...