Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
    • Have to agree with the above Health and safety legislation is specific in that the service provider in so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees and those not in the employ of the business. You claim is like saying you slipped in the swimming pool area while taking a dip. As rightly stated by by the leisure centre, a sports hall has dedicated equipment and you yourself personally have a legal obligation in mitigating danger or injury to yourself by taking account of your immediate surroundings. Where your claim will fail is if it is reasonable and proportionate to impose liability of the Leisure Centre? The answer has to be no.
  • 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 5731 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 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi have sent 2 letters of and emails to both council and bailiff company. Do these sound ok. Thanks

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing with regards to a text message I received Monday 15/09/2008, headed Bailiff will call. My 11yr old daughter who was using my phone that day received that message, no doubt it had the effect that you wanted.

I HAVE NEVER REFUSED TO PAY MY COUNCIL TAX BILL

After contacting CAB and national debtline, I have been informed that the high repayment plan you have imposed on me of £466.00 a mth is unrealistic, doomed to fail because of other financial commitments. Which therefore justifies more charges being imposed. My mortgage because of this repayment plan which you set, and I felt that I had to agree to, is now in arrears. Two occasions have arisen where either I’ve had no food to feed my child, or the fuel on my pre pay meters to cook it. This situation is not acceptable.

I STRESS ONCE MORE I HAVE NEVER REFUSED TO PAY MY COUNCIL TAX

As of 01/10/2008 payments will be reduced to £200.00 which you will receive every four weeks. Payments will be made via your auto system and not via phone, as your staff like to hammer home how I can go to prison. But that’s only if I refuse to pay, I haven’t.

I wish it to be known that no bailiff will gain peaceful entry to my home. My child is now frightened to go to school. Scared that because I’m at home with a long term medical condition COPD that something may happen.

I am formerly requesting all true copies of taped telephone conversations, and all future communication in writing. Any further texts that consists of intimidating context, can and may be used in evidence. I refer to your debtor leaflet enclosed with the illegal levies on 2 cars which I don’t own and have never owned. Quote “I AM SCARED/EMBARRASSED TO SPEAK TO NEWLYN” your reply don’t be, we are a professional company. I’m sorry that doesn’t fit the bill..

Link to post
Share on other sites

SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST

S A R

 

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Further to my earlier email, I am requesting a full breakdown of charges & payments applied to the above ref number.

I am of the belief that any debit/credit card surcharge that your bank impose on your company, should not be passed on to the debtor. Can you please refund and credit my account accordingly any card surcharges. On the 15/09/08 my son used his card to pay £30.00, if any charge was imposed on this day Please refund back to his bank.

Can you please supply name/s of bailiff/s who have attended my property and court where their certificates were issued. Screenshots containing dates of these visits to my property will also be required as will all true unedited copies of telephone conversations.

 

Failure to provide this information may place this account in serious dispute, and your rights to collect this debt may be revoked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No he paid the £30, they then asked him for the rest. You can imagine what his answer was. He was so angry when he read the text. Told me to phone him no matter what if bailiff comes, but i know my son he's very hot tempered. Dread to think what he'd do, his words "no one threatens my mum & kid sister"

Dbs do my letters sound ok. Council have aknowledged them and aim to get back to me within 5days. Newlyn remain quiet so far. Should i have enclosed a fee or something for my SAR? as i didn't send any as i don't have the money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A very big and overdue thank you to everyone who offered help & advice. Special thanks to DBSPIDER & TONYCEE . The last few weeks have been tiring to say the least. There were times when i felt that i couldn't take much more, having no gas/electric & having to go without medication due to no money in the pot. After complaining to council & bailiff company repeatedly last week via emails & letters. I am relieved to say my situation has now drawn to a amicable conclusion.

This morning i received a " WITHOUT PREDJUDICE" letter from bailiff company stating that after contacting council they will now agree & accept my repayment plan. Whilst they cannot be held responsible for anyone who reads my "TEXTS" they apologise for any distress caused to my child, who had my phone that day, and got the message whilst at school. All charges have been removed, and should i need their help do not hesitate to contact them.

Their letter accepts no blame, but somehow can't help but think that maybe, just maybe the council gave them a ticking of.

Thank you all for your help, as soon as i have any spare cash, however small i will make a donation, without the support of this site i truely wouldn't have managed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bingowings.

 

Great result.

 

Ive just got back from the Royal Courts of Justice.

 

Ive been playing with the " Big Boys " today.

 

And im still standing.

 

My belief here, to anybody reading, is that they must act within the law, just as we must by paying our Council Tax.

 

We must stand up to them.

 

Nice one,well done.

 

TC.

  • 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

Thanks Tony, i can now get a good nights sleep, knowing that there will be no more letters or threats of visits. I told my council that their workers were safe from threats of intimidation, and that as a resident in their borough they had a duty of care in allowing me the same. I sat & cried this morning with relief. Anyone who's going through the same situation as i have. Don't give up, keep writing and complaining, your council has to take notice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...