Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In short you never communicate with a Debt Collector, they have no power here at all. The snotty letter is only used to respond to a properly worded Letter Before Claim. The only time you would be recommended to contact the PPC is to send the snotty letter. You do nothing but keep the tripe they send you unless you receive a letter before claim.
    • Probably to do with the Creditor accepting the reduced payments claim as part of the IVA. - Thats my guess anyway.  As for the mount outstanding... 60k is incredible and im pretty sure a DRO wouldnt cover that much even after the new legislation.    For you @Alfy - Please stay headstrong and stop worrying. My viewpoint on debt with debt collectors is simple. You are a figure on a spreadsheet loaded into a database for them to run a collection cycle through.  They dont care about emotions or your situation, they just care about paying off their shareholders and trying to turn a profit.  They use varying tactics to increase the pressure on you to the point where you will break. People then fall for this an either cave in to DCAs before doing their own due diligence on the debts that are purchased or turn to IVAs like you have.    They are better ways to handle this and Im glad you feel better after a good nights sleep - I hope you can keep it up. 
    • Good afternoon,    I am writing in reference to the retail dispute number ****, between myself and Newton Autos concerning the sale of a Toyota Avensis which has been found to have serious mechanical faults.    As explained previously the car was found to be faulty just six days after purchase. The car had numerous fault codes that appeared on the dash board and went into limp mode. This required assistance from the AA and this evidence has already been provided. The car continues to exhibit these faults and has been diagnosed as having faults with the fuel injectors which will require major mechanical investigation and repairs.    Newton Autos did not make me aware of any faults upon purchase of the vehicle and sold it as being in good condition.    Newton Autos have also refused to honour their responsibilities under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires them to refund the customer if the goods are found to be faulty and not fit for purpose within 30 days of purchase.    Newton Autos also refused to accept my rejection of the vehicle and refused to refund the car and accept the return of the vehicle.    It is clear to me that the car is not fit for purpose as these mechanical faults occurred so soon after purchase and have been shown to be present by both the AA and an independent mechanic.   Kind regards
    • Commercial Landlords are legally allowed to sue for early cancellation of the lease. You can only surrender your lease if your landlord agrees to your doing so. They are under no obligation even to consider your request and are entitled to refuse. You cannot use this as an excuse not to pay your rent. Your landlord is most likely to agree to your surrendering the lease if they want the property back in order to redevelop it, or if they wants to rent it to what they regards as a better tenant or at a higher rent. There are two types of surrender: Express surrender in writing. This is a written document which sets out the terms of the surrender. Implied surrender by conduct. (applies to your position) You can move out of the property you leased, simply hand your keys back and the lease will come to an end, but only if the landlord agrees to accept your surrender. Many tenants have thought they can simply post the keys through the landlord's letter box and the lease is ended. This is not true and without a document from the landlord, not only do you not know if the landlord has accepted the surrender, you also do not know on what basis they have accepted and could find they sue you for rent arrears, service charge arrears, damage to the property and compensation for your attempt to leave the property without the landlord's agreement. Unless you are absolutely certain that the landlord is agreeable to your departure, you should not attempt to imply a surrender by relying on your and the landlord's conduct.  
    • I had to deal with these last year worst DCA I have ever dealt with. Just wait for the constant threats of CCJ and how you'll lose in court and how they won't do mediation and they want the judge to question you with a load of "BIG" words to boot with the letter. My case was struck out in the end, stupidity on their part as I admitted to owing the debt in the end going through the court process was just a formality as they wouldn't let it drop despite me admitting the debt regardless. They didn't send the last part of the court paper work in so it ended up being struck out     .
  • 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

URGENT Parking firm taking me to court and demanding my insurance docs? WHAT!?????


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5720 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

Yawn. Really, really boring now. Clearly an ongoing [problem]/attempt to deceive people into believing a set of troublesome consumer affairs sites is involved. The silence/ridiculous innuendo of the latest posting says it all.Regards being banned on pepipoo, the mod probably has a low boredom/bull****ter threshhold and more power to him. The only cowards on here are CPS trolls who lurk on this site (because they have nothing better to do) trying to deceive others into paying unenforcable invoices. Regards questioning people, this troll has not answered any of the questions that have been put to him. Fairly clear to me who should be ashamed but some people have no shame it seems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 169
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest courtupdater
More Edit . Judgment (which will include reference to defence) can be posted at anytime appeal or not

 

A judgement would NOT reference a defence .. what are you going on about ??

 

The judgement will be 1 piece of paper which will state how muich has to be paid and when.

 

 

Anyway .. the reality is this ... When a poster comes on here who has received a ticket from a PPC the advice is always to never disclose anything in public as it could help the other side .. but keep people informed of the progress (and you all bahh like sheep when it goes your way).

 

So, Why would any PPC (or any company) give too much information ?? Does not make sense, in the same way as the "experts :rolleyes:" on here would not dream of posting the defence they have assisted someone with or their case details !!!!

 

The "experts :rolleyes:" on here and PePiPoo have assisted others and say 'a good defence will always win' .. but they have never posted it .. why do you think that is ??

 

Come on .. this is a game to which presently every case results in a win for the PPC (Excel parking put aside, but I asked the question earlier if anyone knows the FACTS of the case or only what they have read in the quality local paper .. oh and the daily mail ... and the silence answered my question)

Edited by saintly_1
removal of an already edited quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is a filed defence not a public document available to anyone who requests it at the court? Where is the prejudice? This is beginning to sound like "the dog ate my homework" territory (if I recall correctly the last CPS troll was unable to post the transcript of the case they lost in Olham due to some equally spurious reason). What I want to know is - if this is the level of their (lack of) legal expertise how did the defendant lose. Suggests he may not have turned up fore the hearing and CPS had a free run that even they could not lose (another question that has suspiciously not been answered).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest courtupdater
it would be very nice to see all the information posted... :-)

 

I can guarentee in the goodness of time all will be revealed, there are good reasons why they have not passed everything to be posted.

 

I would ask, and I hope the site admin team will support me on this ...

 

There is no need for insults against me or anyone else on this thread ... I know its a bitter pill for some hardened anti-PPC posters to accept when a case goes against them ... but its not personal, just business ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "experts :rolleyes:" on here and PePiPoo have assisted others and say 'a good defence will always win' .. but they have never posted it .. why do you think that is

 

This is getting really weird now. If these experts that you continually refer to have never posted the defence (100% contrary to what you said this morning), how do you know it is a "pepipoo/CAG defence"? Is it that "you just do"? These arguments have more holes than a sieve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest courtupdater
Is a filed defence not a public document available to anyone who requests it at the court? Where is the prejudice? This is beginning to sound like "the dog ate my homework" territory (if I recall correctly the last CPS troll was unable to post the transcript of the case they lost in Olham due to some equally spurious reason). What I want to know is - if this is the level of their (lack of) legal expertise how did the defendant lose. Suggests he may not have turned up fore the hearing and CPS had a free run that even they could not lose (another question that has suspiciously not been answered).

 

Because the case is ONGOING ..... no one lost anything - a new hearing has been set .. after that I am sure it will be posted on here.

 

No a filed defence is NOT a public document in a small claims hearing, where you get this from I do not know !!!

 

If a person, not party to the claim wishes to see the documentation they need to make an application (and pay the fee) to the court stating the reasons why and a judge will decide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Court [edit] is complaining about being insulted............. what a bleeding nerve.

 

also you don't want to be insulted either pee off or stop insulting our intelligence

Edited by GuidoT
Please do not use foul language
Link to post
Share on other sites

A judgement would NOT reference a defence .. what are you going on about ??

 

The judgement will be 1 piece of paper which will state how muich has to be paid and when.

 

 

Anyway .. the reality is this ... When a poster comes on here who has received a ticket from a PPC the advice is always to never disclose anything in public as it could help the other side .. but keep people informed of the progress (and you all bahh like sheep when it goes your way).

 

So, Why would any PPC (or any company) give too much information ?? Does not make sense, in the same way as the "experts :rolleyes:" on here would not dream of posting the defence they have assisted someone with or their case details !!!!

Because the entire point of your thread is that this case was lost due to the defendant allegedly following the advice of posters on this and other forums.

 

Your inability to substantiate your claim damages any credibility that you might have.

 

The "experts :rolleyes:" on here and PePiPoo have assisted others and say 'a good defence will always win' .. but they have never posted it .. why do you think that is ??

 

Come on .. this is a game to which presently every case results in a win for the PPC (Excel parking put aside, but I asked the question earlier if anyone knows the FACTS of the case or only what they have read in the quality local paper .. oh and the daily mail ... and the silence answered my question)

Could you not just take you own advice and apply to the court for a transcript of the Excel hearing?

 

Having read this, and other threads, it would seem to me that the claim being made by the "experts" (not that they profess to be - that appears to be your own particular straw man) is that no PPC has won in a properly defended case, and each time this claim has been made, it has been substantiated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest courtupdater
Yeah but we only mean the victims shouldn't always disclose their intentions not the perps. they can say claim & say what they like.:p

 

Of course a Judgment refers to the defence. Now either put up or shut up.

 

Eh !!! The judgement is a 1 page document ... I suggest you look at some judgements:

 

Here is a judgement: http://www.combinedparkingsolutions.com/downloads/morris.pdf

 

Do you mean a transcript of the hearing ... Judgement transcript ... I think you are getting confused :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest courtupdater
This is getting really weird now. If these experts that you continually refer to have never posted the defence (100% contrary to what you said this morning), how do you know it is a "pepipoo/CAG defence"? Is it that "you just do"? These arguments have more holes than a sieve.

 

The "experts :rolleyes:" assist persons/defendants in private and then they are sent ...

 

The "experts :rolleyes:" are currently assisting 2 other people (at least to my knowledge) with claims - if not then 2 posters who have came on sites for help, been advised to PM and then send in almost identical defences is uncanny !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest courtupdater
The case is ONGOING now that's news

 

I thought CCPS won. Why did I think that I wonder ...................Oh I know I was told by someone.........who was that do you think??????? must have been an eeejit

 

Youre getting confused again ... The OLDHAM case is still ongoing.

 

Yes some idiots said it was over and CPS lost as the result of a robust defence given by CAG/PePiPoo and everyone beleived them .... but alas, no its still an ongoing case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest courtupdater
Because the entire point of your thread is that this case was lost due to the defendant allegedly following the advice of posters on this and other forums.

 

Your inability to substantiate your claim damages any credibility that you might have.

 

Could you not just take you own advice and apply to the court for a transcript of the Excel hearing?

 

Having read this, and other threads, it would seem to me that the claim being made by the "experts" (not that they profess to be - that appears to be your own particular straw man) is that no PPC has won in a properly defended case, and each time this claim has been made, it has been substantiated.

 

I have a transcript of the HEARING and JUDGEMENT - So I know exactly why it failed.

 

Thats why I want to know if anyone else has any facts rather than the drivel in the local news & daily mail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...