Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If that was the reason then that is good news. The whole reason that being able to charge £100 for breaching private car park rules is because the law Lords decided in a celebrated case that the rogues had a legitimate interest in keeping their car park spaces available for all motorists . {parking Eye v Beavis]. However when the business is closed then there is no legitimate interest in keeping spaces free so to charge £100 is a penalty. As such any Court would automatically throw out the case when the penalty charge is accepted.
    • gives them a feeling of grandeur. dx  
    • yep they can be a bit like the TV licencing lot. for 4yrs ive been getting a series of about 8-10 diff letters that just go round a loop. currently upto 61
    • thread tidied. new thread for the court claim is here  
    • new thread created for this claimform please post here now for anything to do with it now . 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.  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 CCA Request running to the claimant . https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/ .. Leave the £1 PO unsigned and uncrossed . get a CPR  31:14  request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant] ... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ . .use our other CPR letter if the claim is for an OD or Telecom Debt or Util debt]  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ on BOTH type your name ONLY Do Not sign anything .do not ever use or give an email . you DO NOT await the return of ANY paperwork  you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count] ..............  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

VG - Vs Northen Rock - Charging Order


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3182 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

VG, do you have a psychiatrist at the moment, if so, ask him/her to provide a letter for you.

I did have, but was transfered to a NHS psychologist and received 5 years intensive psychotherapy threatment, which was confirmed within the letter supplied by my GP to the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 614
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Is it posible to get someone else as well as your GP to supply an official letter or to help you with this matter VG?

I'll contact my ex psychologist tomorrow.

 

As previously mentioned your MP would be the ideal person.

I've tried my MP re an issue I had about Moorcroft harassing me, i got the feeling he was not really intrested (You've had the money impression)

 

I went back when a CO was being applied for, and agian his attitude didn't really change, like I mentioned above, he didn't even know what a CO was.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll contact my ex psychologist tomorrow.

 

 

I've tried my MP re an issue I had about Moorcroft harassing me, i got the feeling he was not really intrested (You've had the money impression)

 

I went back when a CO was being applied for, and agian his attitude didn't really change, like I mentioned above, he didn't even know what a CO was.

 

Your MP is there for one reason only and that isn't for his/her benefit, it's for yours. Can you get someone to help you with this as MPs are very good at getting things done ;) With a little help...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your MP is there for one reason only and that isn't for his/her benefit, it's for yours. Can you get someone to help you with this as MPs are very good at getting things done ;) With a little help...

OK, I'll concentrate on the appeal first as that must be in by this friday, I'll deal with the MP issue after that

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you not appeal under the Disability Discrimination Act? You tried to tell the judge your position with regards to your illness, he dismisses it without even hearing you out?! Mental Health is covered under this act, including depression; if its severe enough to have an inpact on someones daily rountines then its likely to be covered.

The fact he dismisses you and proceeds with treating you as someone without an illness that may affect judgement is outrages and definately needs pursuing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't efect me severly as I'm on daily medication, but i do have off days, if that makes sense.

 

But without that medication it would? I would seek the opinion of your doctor/psychiatrist or take a look at the Equality and Human Rights web site and see if they are of the opinion you would be covered by the act.

 

'The court must consider whether it is reasonable to make a charging order. Under The Charging Orders Act 1979 the court has to consider all the circumstances of the case and in particular:

  • The personal circumstances of "the debtor"
  • Whether any creditor would be "unduly prejudiced". This means the court has to decide if making a charging order would disadvantage other creditors.'

By dismissing your personnal circumstances he didn't abide to the first one did he.

 

If someone who is more knowledgable in this area could comment, it could help OP a great deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we've discussed this before VG, and I don't think I can add anymore. I think that the whole circumstances of this (including the fact that payplan (?) acted for you and handled the original claim) means that the judge may be unsympathetic.

 

Right or wrong I think they will look at it from a point of view that you did take the money and do owe it. You therefore need to surmount the initial admission, the fact that you were being represented and then argue the DN. I tnink that each one of these will be challenging.

 

Remember that an order for sale is very unlikely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right or wrong I think they will look at it from a point of view that you did take the money and do owe it.

I don't deny that, what is in question is, has the claimant the right to bring a case against me?

 

I breached my agreement by not maintaining the agreed payment, so, they have a right to bring a claim, I don't deny them that right.

 

However, they've breached legislation laid down by parliment in bringing this claim, by not adhearing to legislation when issuing a defeault notice, and terminating my agreement before the offical date, I therefore have a right to question there actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

agreed, but as you have seen many DJ's don't necessarily look at it that way. I sometimes think that they like to look at the big picture and look at who is the worst 'offender' in their view and rule accordingly.

 

There is a legal principle that reads - de minimis non curat lex - the law does not concern itself with trifles* and I feel that many of the DJ's looking at these type of issues take this to heart.

 

Whether they should or not is another debate, but I think that you need to focus on what might happen as opposed to what should happen, especially before investing too much money or time. The advice you received on your other thread was decent.

 

 

 

 

* does not refer to those of sponge/jelly/cream construction

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need a doctor to be able to say that you could have signed the form admitting the debt without realising the consequences.

 

Also hope you don't mind me saying it but from what you say I suspect you have Bipolar disorder which would explain your behaviour re the N1.

 

This condition is so often mis-diagnosed so may I suggest you speak to your GP again

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jon

Also hope you don't mind me saying it but from what you say I suspect you have Bipolar disorder which would explain your behaviour re the N1.

I'm not offended at all, believe it or not, it's taken me 20+ years to get to the stage where I'm at now, partially due to being messed around (if that's the right word) within the health service.

 

I'm not going to state openly the issues / difficulties I've experienced, but if the judge was aware of my full psychological history, it would go some way to explain why I reacted the way I did, this is difficulty to put into words.

 

Please, please, please, it's very important for anyone reading / contributed to this thread to understand I'm in no way after sympathy / attention, that's not what this is about.

 

As regards to your comment re Bipolar, I've heard of it, but no idea what it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think it's worth speaking to your MP. Have you got someone who could go with you?

Baby, when I spoke to my MP about this CO before, he said he cannot become involved in court proceedings, however, I will call his secretary tomorrow and see if I can make any progress.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty strong to suggest someone has Bipolar Disorder when you know nothing about them or their medical history and I don't see a description of "off days" as suggesting anything like Bipolar Disorder. I think the medical diagnosis is best left to his GP and specialist, if he is referred to one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...