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  
  • 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

Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim


overdone
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4915 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

They will keep getting away with it Shelster, if we let them. Thats why it is VITAL you join the fight. Fire off letters to the OFT and your MP.

 

We need the numbers - 1 or 2 people will struggle to make a difference but thousands will.

 

If Swift have, according to Sparkie, 20,000 customers, I make that approximately 20,000 people who are being bent over and shafted by these low lifes - thats a big number and one that the regulators cannot ignore.

 

COME ON EVERYONE!!!

 

 

HI Marky

 

That's what Swift told the BBC in 2007...they had 20600 customers average of £25.000 loan per customer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Before I see the Barrister this coming week ..Can any really clued up legally minded person tell if the application made by Swift to possess our property is actually properly stated

 

It says on the actual Court document for possession

 

Claimants ...Swift Advances Plc

 

Defendants ...My full name + 1 other.

 

I am pretty certain that it should contain my partners full name............if it has to then this is another argument for addition to our appeal..it could mean technically.................one of our daughters who is staying with us for 3months or so.

 

All other previous court papers had her full name on.

 

Can anyone find out for me please.

Can't seem to find out if this is correct or not.

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found some advice on more grounds for appeal

  1. If you took out a loan or any form of credit were you in receipt of the Default Notice before receiving the summons.

No Default notice was received before we received the summons

 

2. Was the summons taken out against both yourself and another person jointly. If this is so, did you both receive your summons?

 

I received the summons in my name plus..... one other ......my partner did not get one in her name, as stated before

 

Did you receive the summons on time for you to apply to the court. You have 21 days to reply to the court. If the summons was 21 days late then the judgement would have already been taken out against you?

 

Summons was dated 10th November we did not receive it until 13th November ( Date on envelope from the Court 12 th November)

Date of hearing 3rd Dec..... 20 days notice .........1 day short...........but then that's enough in law isn't it.....( I hope.)

Edited by Sparkie1723
Dates posted in incorrect..rectified
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this incorrectly issued?? ANYONE PLEASE.

 

Everyone Knows my name from other posts............... its OK....no need for secrecy any more its public domain now.

 

At the last hearing Swift withdrew the application for possession because we had paid them all the arrears, and the Court just heard our Counter claim, ......also Mark White has confirmed in his last witness statement that as a fact ...............that only our counterclaim was heard.

 

Getting closer to the 28 day deadline............only 15 days to go

 

Nice Xmas present hanging over our heads

 

Although we still haven't received the official court order yet......probably get that monday

 

sparkie

 

 

 

 

CopyofCourtAPPLICATION.jpg

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember I posted that the Judge said that to file a defence witness statemnt 3 to 4 days before the hearing was unacceptable and completely disregared it.

 

I have just found this buried in CPR's another example of how a LIP gets walked over by the JUdges

 

 

Defendant's response......Possession hearings

 

55.24

 

(1) At any time before the hearing the defendant may file a witness statement in response to the application.

 

(2) The witness statement should be in the form set out in the relevant practice direction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sparkie,

 

I think an immediate application for set aside of the possession order is called for.

 

Reasons:

(a) Non-compliance by Court with CPR 55

(b) No compliance by claimant with Mortgage Arrears Protocol

© No receipt by you of Default Notice, Swift to be put to strict proof of the sending of this very important piece of paper, and strict proof of your receipt of same to also be provided by Swift (I know they can't provide this!)

 

Please read the following:

 

'How the Mortgage Arrears Protocol affect mortgage proceedings.'

 

By District Judge Peter Jolly published in Law Society Gazette, 19th January 2009. [DJ Jolly sits at Portsmouth combined court]

 

If you 'google' the title it will bring it up for you....I know you knew that!!

 

I assume you are on or have applied for legal aid - your new barrister will doubtless help you.....so can those of us at CAG - [me at least with moral support!]

 

As always

Kind regards

 

Dougal

 

PS If you wish you can send me the EXACT wording of your possession order. I will be able to compare it to mine and then possibly find a way to stop it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning Dougal and everyone.

 

The Barrister the firm of solicitors use, Specialises in irredeemable consumer credit contracts and Defence of possession cases and contact law.

 

This is the bulk of his work, so it looks as if I am in good hands for once..

Haven't got the copy of the actual order yet Dougal will send you a copy when I get it.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning Sparkie and all. I don't know how you're proceeding with Swift's offer to help (pah!!!) but if you go to the CAB and complete an Income and Expenditure form with them, theirs is an industry wide accepted form and you can send it to whoever. You don't need to keep filling forms in for each and every creditor - just copies of your CAB one. You will have a CAB ref number and a financial advice worker alloted to you. They will update it with you as and if your situation changes. I know how time-consuming these requests are and each company has a different form. The CAB may also be able to help out with the repo business. Sparkie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning Sparkie and all. I don't know how you're proceeding with Swift's offer to help (pah!!!) but if you go to the CAB and complete an Income and Expenditure form with them, theirs is an industry wide accepted form and you can send it to whoever. You don't need to keep filling forms in for each and every creditor - just copies of your CAB one. You will have a CAB ref number and a financial advice worker alloted to you. They will update it with you as and if your situation changes. I know how time-consuming these requests are and each company has a different form. The CAB may also be able to help out with the repo business. Sparkie.

 

Morning all,

 

Brilliant advice...I wish I'd said that!

 

Well done SJ!!!

 

As always the very best to each and every one of you

 

Dougal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this not a little worrying?

 

It appears that more than likely that SWift... do not like what I for one is posting .............I have found out too much and they have most likely protested and sent out the threat of proceedings against the site.

 

The site has to be protectected because it helps and guides so many, they now have to be carefull on this issue and forum

 

Swift are .............in my personal opinion more than a little worried.

 

However my Dad used to say,,"THE TRUTH HURTS LAD" so allways tell it.!! and I truly believe I have done so in this issue and dispute, and all be be heard in the High Court.

 

I have a meeting with Counsel on Wednesday.

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that more than likely that SWift... do not like what I for one is posting .............I have found out too much and they have most likely protested and sent out the threat of proceedings against the site.

 

The site has to be protectected because it helps and guides so many, they now have to be carefull on this issue and forum

 

Swift are .............in my personal opinion more than a little worried.

 

However my Dad used to say,,"THE TRUTH HURTS LAD" so allways tell it.!! and I truly believe I have done so in this issue and dispute, and all be be heard in the High Court.

 

I have a meeting with Counsel on Wednesday.

sparkie

 

if that is the case sparkie you must have the **** really rattled

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, how interesting. Firstly, for my 'bots' can I say to AlanfromDerby how sorry I am for taking up so much of your time having to edit all these posts - that's not what one likes to think you people in the site team are required to do.

 

However, this just demonstrates quite clearly that Swift are just a little bit disturbed at the fact nerves are being touched and the fact that they have no doubt called in lawyers to attack the site as they don't like seeing a mirror image of what they do on a public forum.

 

The trouble is, from what I know of what is posted ALL of it can be substantaited with documentation or recorded telephone calls so if ever the site was threatened with action please feel free to come to we on this thread and we will provide you with all the documentary evidence you need to support what is said. That, my friends in Brentford is something you can do nothing whatsoever to repudiate no matter what threats you make to the site. What you can't handle is the fact that those who you previously took to the cleaners as sole account holders who knew nothing have been suceeded by a whole load of people who discuss the information you peddle to the courts, share that information, compare that information and expose that information for what it is. To counter it, you cry wolf. Tough. and for you it's going to get tougher.

 

 

You can bott away all you like Alan, it will make no difference to the final outcome. Save the reputation of the forum, but many a campaign has lead to nerves endings getting extremely raw and that's because it's getting too hot in the Brentford kitchen. :D

 

 

SC

Link to post
Share on other sites

To site team

 

Please do not send me any more PM's about posts just delete or edit them as you see fit it is causing me a lot of work emptying my in box and my e-mail box, and I have enough preparing all docs and evidence for Counsel on Wednesday .......because I have a lot to sift through to get the most damaging ones to Swift for Counsel to peruse

 

Would appreciate this small favour

 

Thanks

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you dudes on about? whats botted?

 

 

DUDES??? :eek::D

 

Botted means CagBotted, which effectively is a sensorship or the editing of our posts because the site may have been threatened with legal action and possible site close down because the post contains 'risky' words such as 'fraud' 'thief' 'Liar' 'conspiracy' or any other potentially liabelous word attributed to an individual or organisation which might jeapordise the whole forum.

 

We do have to respect the site and the fact it could be sued, so we have to be careful what we post. That's why we only ever post the truth so as not to upset the balance on this level playing field between finance companies and consumers...;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can bott away all you like Alan, it will make no difference to the final outcome. Save the reputation of the forum, but many a campaign has lead to nerves endings getting extremely raw and that's because it's getting too hot in the Brentford kitchen. :D

 

 

SC

 

Obviously you will gather that numerous posts have been edited or removed for legal reasons. Whilst we do not consider that the majority of the posts concerned are unlawful, we prefer to err on the side of caution.

 

I would add that some of the posts highlighted to us have not been moderated as we do not consider that there is any valid legal reason for them to be edited or removed.

 

Please could I ask that members stick to the facts, and not name specific individuals unless there is a valid and proportionate reason for doing so.

 

CAG does not like to have to remove or edit posts where a valid dispute exists, and there are consumer based issues that the company needs to be addressing. Unfortunately we are sometimes left with no choice where threads start to deviate towards personal opinion and reports from unverifiable sources.

 

Whilst it is likely that the views expressed are within the bounds of freedom of expression, as I said above, we do have to err on the side of caution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just received some more damming information off another Swift victim............. I am not posting it they will be hit with this in Court..................I can say IT IS GOOD STUFF:D:D:D in fact I would say Brilliant stuff.

 

The person is sending this info and supporting docs through the post

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4915 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...