Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Honestly you are all amazing on this site, thank you so much for your help and time. ill keep an eye out and only return when i receive a claim letter for sure also, i updated my address with amex and tsb before i even missed payments. the initial address was my family home but i dont reside there. to avoid a bombardment of letters there i have now updated my address, will they send all threats etc to the new address? Or old address?   do you reccomend i send both tsb and amex my update in address via a letter?
    • Your point 4 deals with that and puts them to strict proof .....but realistically they are not in a position to state that within their particulars they were not the creditor at the time of default but naturally assume the OC would have...so always worth challenging and if you get a DJ who knows his onions on the day may ask for further evidence from the OC internal accounts system. 
    • I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory. Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance
    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 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. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
  • 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

Help sent MD Vehicle to court dodgy car dealer. Need help filling out forms (notice of part admission)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5214 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

I purchased a peugeot 106 gti from MD vehicle solution on the 14th of January 2008. I part exchanged it for my peugeot 306 xsi for the amount of £400 and purchased the car for £1000 cash. Darren Nicholson t/a MD vehicle solutions gave me a 3 month parts warrenty for the amount of £250 per claim with me having to pay the first £50 each time.

 

As soon as i got the car back to Swindon the gearbox packed up on me, abs sensor, leaking oil from the rocker cover, gearbox and gasket, breather pipe broken, amongst over faults. Also the speedo wire had been cut which i did not notice until i got home. This car has 124k miles fair enough there is going to be faults but as a trader to sell a car in this condition is unacceptable to say the least.

 

I contacted Darren and stated the faults and he said go though the warrenty. I contacted the garage that checked it over and he said the cost to repair the car would be £900 so the warenty given to me was pointless and i would have to end up paying £200 + because that cost was just for the parts etc and the labour was not included.

 

I contacted consumer advise and they advised me to write a letter stating the problems and what i want for the issue to be resolved. I did indeed do this all recorded delievery. I got a letter back stating that the parts would be replaced in due course (never got them) and that he wanted the mechanic to write a detailed report regarding the gearbox. Also he stated that he would of carried out a pre-delivery inspection to prevent this from happening but if he needed to carry out his pre-delievery inspection before selling the vehicle he could have refused sale of the vehicle to me at the time or sold me the vehicle afterthee pre-delievery inspection. Either way thepre-delievery inspection does not matter to the legislation. The mechanic done this for me and i sent this bac to md vehicle solutions.

 

I then recieved a letter back a month and a half later, the 15th April stating that £100 was enclosed as a goodwill gestue and the warrenty will cover the unknown fault with the gearbox?! The warrenty conviently ran out the day before the date of the letter, even thought this would not cover the gearbox, and £100 where the hell would that get me 2 hours labour? i refused the cheque returned it and stated that a reasonable amount would be £600 which he can do this refund the money paid for the vehicle or for him to collect the vehicle and repair the vehicle which had been at the garage since january! (still is)

He never replied for over a month, i wrote another letter stating, that i tryed resolving the situation amicablly and this was the last correspondence he would hear and the matter would now go to court.

 

I went to my local small claims court filled out a claim form and enclosed all the correspondence and stating that i wanted £1400 for the repairs of the car as i went to the garage again and the total cost to repair the car including passing an mot is £900, i then asked £500 compensation, this was worked out as i had no car since january, i was a student and had to travel to cheltenham via a train daily up until june and also for inconvience.

 

I sent this of in september, i recieved a letter from the court to say that Mr Nicholson has until the 23rd of september to write a defence. He did this and he has twisted everything i have said, i could throttle him arrrrgggghhhh!!! He has offered me £600 and to pay this £50 a month, so i have to wait another year for the money to be completly received when ive already been with out a car for 10 months, i dont think so! As well as this he stated in the defence that he wants correspondence sent to his home address as MD vehicle solutions will no longer operatfrom the 20th of October due to financial difficulties, says alot i guess!!!

 

The thing i am stuck on is filling out the notice of part admission. I will be accepting the £600, because ive got no fight let, i just want this over with and if the business is seizing on the 20th of october and i take this to court i could get nothing?

 

Ive ticked the box, i accept the ampunt admitted by the defendant in satisfation of my claim.

 

It then has three boxes to pick from regarding how i accept the payment i think.

box 1: I accept the defendant's proposal for payment complete all the judgement details at D. The court will enter judgement in accordance with the offer and will send the defedant an order to pay. You will also be sent a copy.

box 2: The defendant has not made any proposal for payment complete all the judgements details at D. Say how you want the defendant to pay. you can ask for the judgement to be paid by instalments or in one payment. the court will sedn the defendant an order to pay. You will also be sent a payment.

box 3: I do NOT accept the defendant's proposal for payment complete all judgement details at D and say how you want the defendant to pay. Give your reasons for objecting to the defendant's offer of payment in the space opposite. (continue on the back of this form if necessar.) The court will fix a rate of payment and send the defendant an order to pay. You will also be sent a copy.

 

I think i tick box 3 but not to sure. The judgement bit states the following:

D Judgement details

If you are not accepting the defendant' proposal for payment, say how you would like the judgement to be paid.

 

I would like the judgement to be paid:

box 1 (immediately)

box 2 (by installments of £ per month)

box 3(in full by )

 

Considering ive been with out a car for 10 months i obviously want the money in full asap but do i tick box 1 or box 3?

Im bit confused.

 

Ive had nothing but trouble from MD Vehicle solutions, do not buy anything from that garage, they rip you off and if you have a problem they basically dont care. would be great to hear from a local newspaper or national to let other people know what hell ive been through and i would not want anyone else to go through this atal.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know nothing about this so Im sure someone will be over to help further but my gut feeling would be option 3

And then appeal/explain why you are declining their offer... simply because you want a refund as quick as you paid...they didn't expect you to pay £50 for a month ... nor do you for a refund!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

pug306 .. consider yourself very fortunate. I purchased a Peugeot 206 from JTR Cars in Croydon,Surrey which turned out to be a pig. 15 misrepresentations on the advert, several faults and a false mileage. I been through the hoops with contacting the dealer, trading standards, county court summons,warrant of execution, bailiffs and VOSA ... I have got absolutely no where

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...