Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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 
        • 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

Locked in car park


Patma
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4607 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 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just back from dropping kids off to Gatwick, and off to tribunal of my own shortly, just wanted to catch up...

 

May I suggest that once this is put to bed, you guys create a 2nd thread with the whole timeline and developments you can't discuss now so us plebs can have a clear idea of what went on? :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just back from dropping kids off to Gatwick, and off to tribunal of my own shortly, just wanted to catch up...

 

May I suggest that once this is put to bed, you guys create a 2nd thread with the whole timeline and developments you can't discuss now so us plebs can have a clear idea of what went on? :-D

 

 

It's men so have that top blouse button undone - easy win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

good luck fred.

 

i take it this development is what i think it is...

 

 

just kidding im as clueless as the rest of us

Please note:

 

  • I am employed in the IT sector of a high street retail chain but am not posting in any official capacity,so therefore any comments,suggestions or opinions are expressly personal ones and should not be viewed as an endorsement or with agreement of any company.
  • i am not legal trained in any form.
  • I have many experiences in life and do often use these in my posts

if ive been helpful kick my scales, if ive been unhelpful kick the scales of the person more helpful :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be rather embarrassing if a barrister were to lose a case against a litigant in person? Especially if the case was well known among his/her peers? Would that extend to the law company involved? Would they somehow lose face, at least to a small degree?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be rather embarrassing if a barrister were to lose a case against a litigant in person? Especially if the case was well known among his/her peers? Would that extend to the law company involved? Would they somehow lose face, at least to a small degree?

 

 

Yes it is conceivable that such embarrassment will be in abundance especially if the theory I forwarded to Patma last night concerning the involvement of the barrister and the subsequent progression of the case turns out to be correct.

They have already been ordered by the Court to effectively explain themselves over reneging on the deal brokered by the Judge on the 1st July, one must assume that this small matter alone will have caused some huffing and puffing in chambers.

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be rather embarrassing if a barrister were to lose a case against a litigant in person? Especially if the case was well known among his/her peers? Would that extend to the law company involved? Would they somehow lose face, at least to a small degree?

 

It depends, barristers dont get to pick and choose cases, they cant refuse a case, so if they get handed something that is never going to win in a million years, then there isnt a lot they can do. If the barrister is involved in unethical conduct, then that is a different story completely.

If you find my post helpful please click on the scales at the top. Thank you

FAQ SECTION HERE

 

Halifax Bank Claim filed and settled

Halifax Credit Card settled

Argos Store Card settled

 

CCA requests sent to

Halifax Credit Card

LLoyds TSB Credit Card

Capital One

Moorcroft (Argos)

NDR

18/06/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck today with the police Fred and Pat.

 

starting early today are we? Daresay you have a lot of work to get through huh?

If you find my post helpful please click on the scales at the top. Thank you

FAQ SECTION HERE

 

Halifax Bank Claim filed and settled

Halifax Credit Card settled

Argos Store Card settled

 

CCA requests sent to

Halifax Credit Card

LLoyds TSB Credit Card

Capital One

Moorcroft (Argos)

NDR

18/06/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think TLD & Patma should open up their private investigation company, you guys are so good. I am reading this thread with interest, the plot gets deeper and deeper.

 

keep the good work up:D

How about it TLD, we could do well?

You can cover the midlands and I'd take care of the southwest. Any offers for the northeast and south east? and there will be vacancies for Wales and Scotland too?:D

 

We can arrange to close down for test matches:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your good wishes everyone. We'll be setting off before too long because it'll take a while to get there and we want to be sure we can find it.

I'll get a message via TLD with an update about it as soon as it's over.

Enjoy the cricket, TLD and anyone else who's a fan.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about it TLD, we could do well?

You can cover the midlands and I'd take care of the southwest. Any offers for the northeast and south east? and there will be vacancies for Wales and Scotland too?:D

 

We can arrange to close down for test matches:D

 

 

It's certainly a good idea and I particularly like the thought of stopping work for cricket but I fear that 'Private eye' companies like Beaumont Consultants of 16A Broadway, Peterborough, PE1 1RS might have already cornered the market, certainly where Lyons-Davidson are involved. :cool:

Edited by Toulose LeDebt

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

A thought occurs to me (that TLD might like to consider) about the admissibilty of an caution, as section 11 of the Civil Evidence Act 1968 provides only for admissibility of convictions "by or before a court"

 

That is an outstanding point to make. Thank you very much.

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite amazing how many businesses have become embroiled in this case. Not surprising the costs are in the region of £10k and counting....

 

Lyons-Davidson ran a covert means test on Fred, checked out his house, checked out his vehicle(s) etc. So at least we know who these mysterious visitors really were now.

Edited by Toulose LeDebt

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

They ran a covert means test on Fred, checked out his house, checked out his vehicle(s) etc. So at least we know who these mysterious visitors really were now.

 

 

They weren't really very covert, since they stuck out like canine gonads. Still 16A Broadway is hardly Thames House.

 

The actions of the en forces in this case seem to me to be excessively unsavoury, even by the standards of the lower end of the legal profession. However, I'm certain it will all be brought before the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm certain it will all be brought before the court.

 

 

Me too!!

 

The breakdown of costs claimed by Lyons-Davidson reads like a diary and in itself contains a plethora of information about the claimants representatives behaviour, the behaviour and involvement level of certain employees of PCAD, and some not inconsiderable attempts at communicating with a company on what strangely turned out to be its last day of trading.:eek:

 

And amusingly what appears to be flurries of activity in response to certain key posts on this thread.:-D:-D

Edited by Toulose LeDebt

You have the right to food money.

If you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation, and if you cross your fingers rehabilitation..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

They ran a covert means test on Fred, checked out his house, checked out his vehicle(s) etc. So at least we know who these mysterious visitors really were now.

 

Probably the same people who staked out my house. They're so good they described my husband as 6ft tall, in his mid forties and of medium build. He was furious their 'evidence' wasn't used in court as he's 5ft 9", in his late fifties and decidedly rotund :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4607 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...