Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Firstly, I would like to thank everyone for their help in this matter. Since my last post I have received a reply from Plymouth Council Insurance Team concerning my wife’s accident (please see enclosed letter and photo of the offending Badminton post) which they deny any responsibility for the said accident. I feel that the Council is in breach of their statutory duties under the following acts: The Leisure Centre was negligent in its duty of care and therefore, in breach of the statutory duty owed under section 2 of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (the Act) to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all their employees, and others who might be affected by its undertaking, e.g. members of the public visiting the Leisure Centre to use the facilities. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 that requires employers to assess risks (including slip and trip risks) and, where necessary, take action to address them. The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) require the risk to people’s health and safety from equipment that is used at a Leisure Centre be prevented or controlled. I would like some advice to see if my assumptions are correct and my approach to obtaining satisfactory outcome to this matter are accurate. Many thanks   PLM23000150 - Copy Correspondence.pdf post docx.docx
    • Talking to them does not reset the time limit, although they will probably tell you it does, they'd be lying. Dumbdales are the in-house sols for Lowlife, just the next desk along. If Lowlifes were corresponding with you at your current address then Dumbdales know your address. However, knowing that they are lower than a snake's belly, you would be well advised to send them a letter, informing them of your current address and nothing else. Get 'proof of posting' which is free from the PO counter, don't sign it, simply type your name. That way then they have absolutely no excuse for attempting a back door CCJ.   P.S. Best course of action, IGNORE them, until or unless you get a claim form......you won't.
    • A 'signed for' Letter of Claim has been sent today so they have 14 days from tomorrow... Lets wait and see what happens but i suspect judging by their attitude they wont reply 
    • I am extremely apprehensive about burning our files.... I do not know why, so it is becoming an endless feedback loop. Scared to pull the trigger to speak in the desire not to mess up my file. 
    • Hi All, So brief outline. I have Natwest CC debt £8k last payment i made was 7th November 2018 Not a penny since. So coming up to the 6 year mark. Can't remember when i took out the  credit card would be a few years before everythign hit the fan. Moved house 2020 - updated NatWest as I still have a current account with them. Then Lowells took over from Moorcroft and were writing to me at my current address. I did get a family member to speak to them 3 years ago regarding the debt explained although it may be in my name I didn't rack it up then went contact again. 29th may received an email from overdales saying they were now managing the debt. I have not had any letter yet which i thought is odd?  Couple of questions 1. Does my family member speaking to lowell restart statute barred clock? 2. Do you think overdales aren't writing to me because they will back door CCJ to old address even though Lowells have contacted me at current address never at previous? ( have no proof though stupidly binned all letters  ) Should I write to them and confirm my address just incase? Does this restart statute barred clock? 3. what do you think best course of action is?   Any help/advice is appreciated I am aware they may ramp up the process now due to 7th December being the 6 year mark.   Many Thanks in advance! The threads on here have been super helpful to read.  
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5836 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

Hello everyone:)

 

I had a visit from a Rossedales bailiff just over a month ago regarding council tax debt of just over £1000.

He pulled into my drive and I went out and spoke to him.

To cut a long story short, he issued me with a Walking order on my car.

I discussed with him about my finances (I am currently on Maternity allowance) and he assured me they would be sympathetic and allow me to pay 'whatever I could afford'

So I wrote to them including a means test form offering to pay £20 pm as this is the most I can afford.

They wrote back saying that I have to pay £40 pw.

I phoned them and had a discussion about my circumstances...explaining our situation (Mat/Allow and WFTC is my only income at the moment..my husband looks after the children we have a 14yr old Autistic child, a 10yr old and a 6 month old baby...I am self employed and only started my business a month before I found out I was pregnant...they said that because we don't claim any benefits other than Housing/council tax, we HAVE to pay £160pm, or £40pw end of discussion.

 

My question is, is there any way I can get them to accept a lower payment?

or can I get the council to accept the debt back?

 

 

I was paying the council off nicely until last year one of them told me to stop my standing order as the debt was clear...I took their word but it obviously wasn't as it was covering a couple of debts...I had been paying every week without fail for 6 years!!!...instead of letting me know, they passed the debt to rossendales....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the vehicle subject to any finance, or required for your work ?

I Wish you everything you wish yourself.

 

NatWest Claimed £1,639. Accepted £1,344.

Natwest Paid me again as GOGW £1,656. Yes they can have it back if they say please.

Barclays 1 Claimed £1,260. Won by default. Paid in full

Barclays 2 Claimed £2,378. Won by default. Paid in full

Birmingham Midshires. Claimed £2,122. Accepted £2,075.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK.

You need to go in person to the council and ask them to take the debt back on the strength of your payment history, and your childs needs.

Also, send this letter ASAP to Rossendales.

If they return, they will try and intimidate you, so you need to be strong.

Refuse point blank to have anything to do with them. Do not let them in your house, and do not sign anything EVER.

 

 

Vehicles and Assets Required for Your Business

 

NOTE: This letter can be adapted to suit your own circumstances and could be used to advise the company, in advance, that a motor vehicle is necessary both for your use personally, and is required for your business/employment. If you are self employed, it would be advisable to provide proof of self employment by enclosing maybe a business card or letter of confirmation from an accountant. This letter could also be adapted to refer to other assets necessary for your use personally in your employment/business or vocation.

To: The Bailiff Company

Date:

 

Dear Sirs,

Re: Account reference.

I refer to your letter/visit dated
(enter date)
informing me that your company have been instructed by
(enter local authority)
to enforce a warrant/liability order etc against me, in respect of
(a parking charge notice/council tax etc).

In your letter you state that you will be visiting/returning to my home to
(seize/auction etc my goods.)
unless full payment of
(enter amount)
is made by return.

I am aware that statutory regulations provide that certain items are exempt from seizure, and that these include:

"Such tools, books, vehicles and other items of equipment as are necessary for use personally in employment, business or vocation”.

Could you please note that I am employed as
(see note)
and that my vehicle is for my own use personally in my employment/business. As evidence of this, I am providing photocopies of
(enter details).

I can confirm that I am willing to pay this liability at a rate of
(enter amount).

For the reason stated above, if your company attempts to seize the above vehicle and/or charge me additional fees to do so, I will consider making an official complaint about your bailiff’s conduct to both the County Court and the Local Authority.

Could you please confirm safe receipt of this letter.

 

(ensure that you keep a copy)

 

Yours Faithfully.

 

I Wish you everything you wish yourself.

 

NatWest Claimed £1,639. Accepted £1,344.

Natwest Paid me again as GOGW £1,656. Yes they can have it back if they say please.

Barclays 1 Claimed £1,260. Won by default. Paid in full

Barclays 2 Claimed £2,378. Won by default. Paid in full

Birmingham Midshires. Claimed £2,122. Accepted £2,075.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It wont be easy, and you have to be tough, but remember there are laws to protect us from these scumbags, its just that they dont think they have to abide by them.

 

Good Luck.

  • Haha 1

I Wish you everything you wish yourself.

 

NatWest Claimed £1,639. Accepted £1,344.

Natwest Paid me again as GOGW £1,656. Yes they can have it back if they say please.

Barclays 1 Claimed £1,260. Won by default. Paid in full

Barclays 2 Claimed £2,378. Won by default. Paid in full

Birmingham Midshires. Claimed £2,122. Accepted £2,075.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I went to the council first thing this morning, and within 10 mins they had got hold of Rossendales and told them that the offer of £20 pm was acceptable:D

 

Result....thank you Tony;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

And don't forget, you only have to pay what is written on the magistrates liability order. Not a penny more. You can leave Rossendales high and dry on this one. Their fees will not be included on the liability order, so they are legally unenforceable.

 

Once the amount on the liability order is discharged that is the end of the matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great result.

 

Please get it all in writing from the council.

 

Im so pleased for you.

 

Another bailiff bites the dust.

 

Well done TEAM.

I Wish you everything you wish yourself.

 

NatWest Claimed £1,639. Accepted £1,344.

Natwest Paid me again as GOGW £1,656. Yes they can have it back if they say please.

Barclays 1 Claimed £1,260. Won by default. Paid in full

Barclays 2 Claimed £2,378. Won by default. Paid in full

Birmingham Midshires. Claimed £2,122. Accepted £2,075.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...