Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • nothing you can do can product against the very rare judge lottery syndrome.
    • not sure why you added the blue line I've highlighted? that's no in the we gave you.   as for your question... PRAC's roboclaim computer knows when the account was taken out, after all it raised the claim and checked everything carefully first before issuing the request via northants bulk courts equally inept roboclaim computer... 
    • I've been researching in preparation of compiling my particularised defence/WS.    I'm none too happy that some judges still seem to be siding with DCAs and seemingly brushing aside anything that we have assumed to be "necessary" for DCAs to have a winning case.    Reading a recent "summary" from another poster (another thread with case similar to mine - very old, illegible application form, no default notice, reliance on their own software to prove it was ever sent) and the judgment made in favour of the DCA and even suggesting that there was no "agreement with the DCA, they simply owned the debt, not the agreement"  Makes me very nervous.    Especially if cases like this will be judged on "probability" - the probability that if I signed the original application form, then I must have taken out the credit card and racked up the alleged debt as shown in statements enclosed in their WS (and dated some ten years later).   Is it ok to post some "evidence" I've found from elsewhere?    This is in line with my fears that regardless of how hard one tries to rebut the "lack of evidence" produced by DCAs for chasing these very old "alleged" debts, it does appear to come down to the luck of what judge you get on the day and how much they can be swayed by the DCA solicitor.    A quick Google search produced the following - from one case - this related to a credit agreement - which resulted in someone being made bankrupt - that person appealed the bankruptcy order on the grounds of defective credit agreement and default notice and this was the appeal judge's decision:   The necessary formalities for the entry into the regulated consumer credit agreement (which related to the debt in issue) were not complied with; The default notice served in respect of that credit agreement was defective.   The First Ground The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.   Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make.   Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.   The Second Ground The Appellant also argued that the default notice upon which the Respondent relied did not comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice) Regulations 1989 because it stated the full balance of the account rather than the total of the missed payments. The Respondent argued that, as a result of the missed payments, it was contractually entitled to the entire balance subject to the service of the appropriate notice, a requirement which was fulfilled by the default notice itself and, consequently, the sum required to remedy the breach was the entire amount.   Mr Justice Mann agreed with the Respondent and the District Judge, holding that: “If by the time the default notice is served circumstances have arisen which entitle the lender to recover not merely sums which might be regarded as arrears, by which I assume is meant accumulated minimum payments, but also the whole of the sum, then they are entitled to claim that sum, and the sum to require to remedy the breach for non-payment of that sum is the payment of the whole sum due. The bank is not confined, at that stage, to claiming merely the amount of arrears if it has an accrued contractual right to have the whole of the sum.”   Do judgments like these not mean that a lot of what you guys do on here (and for which I and many others are VERY grateful) somewhat redundant. What is happening to judges just accepting "well, the terms must have been there if you signed it" -    Feeling quite nervous now.
    • we know it wasn't done to avoid enforcement we understand completely. but that doesn't take from away the fact that it happened   you can't appeal the pcn's on the basis that 'it was not his vehicle to levy upon'. the law clearly states otherwise.          
    • here is a question for you, is yu house divided up into a retail/business area  and domestic area for business rates purposes? If not why on earth are you paying business water rates? ceertainly not for tax purposes as you can claim any legit expense without having to reclassify your home as a business premises. i would be stopping this nonsense and goping back to whatever water supplier is the domestic one for your area. there is stuff all they can do to get the £40 from you whan you do that.
  • Our picks


Electricity meter and time switch

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4009 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I am on Economy 7 with EDF. My meter and time switch are both dated 1985 with the supplier "Eastern Electricity Board"

I have tried in vain with EDF to get these changed to digital. EDF insists on telling me the meter was changed last August and "Go away"

When I pointed out both appliances were stamped 1985 I was informed that this was irrelevant, they were refurbished items according to their records and this was correct.

My question > if the meter was refurbished would it not have a "REFURBISHED" sticker or some form of test certificate attached ??

I cannot get them to accept NOBODY has been to visit the property to change the items as they keep pointing out.


When I mentioned the time switch was 3 hours out I was informed they would make a visit within 5 days to set this correct. After endless waiting, I was then told they could not visit untiul 2009.

Any ideas ?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

in short, no there would not be a refurbished sticker on the meter and it is common industry practice to recertify and relocate a meter.


There are a few ways to check if the meter has been replaced. On or near the meter there should be a yellow sticker giving the meter exchange date together with the meter serial number of the previous meter and the readings from when the meter was removed and they new meter installed.


Failing this (and im assuming here you have been at the property for some time) check the bills before August and see if there is a different meter serial number on these bills. This would indicate a meter exchange did take place. If you do not have these or dont want to spend too much time looking at this yourself then you can ask the supplier to fully investigate your concerns and explain it to you.


With regards to the appointment, not that i am defending the company with this but they do need to book this appointment with the meter operators in your area that own the meter to check if the timeswitch is operating correctly and correct this if not (they would be the people that carried out this job regardless of which supplier you were with). At this time of year they do opperate with a minimal number of staff (due to the holidays) and emergencies will take priority over this type of job. However on saying that the when the job is carried out the supplier should (if necassary) amend any previous charges to correct the amount you should have paid. this will be based on the avarage percentage usage on the corrected meter. ie if you were using 85% on the day rate and 15% on the night rate on the old meter and 75% on the day rate and 25% on the night rate on the corrected meter the company should manaully credit the amout you have been overcharged. They cannot rebill you as they would need to use the readings on the meter but they will apply a "goodwill" or "ex gratia" payment onto the account to make this right. This should all be explained to you if this is needed.


hope this helps

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning the meter and time switch. An ex EDF/EEB manager ( well actually a retired relation)has looked at these for me and agreed:

(a) the meter calibration date reads 1985

(b) the meter seal reads "Eastern Electricity 1985"

© an original cardboard tag is hanging from the meter dated 12/1/1986

(d) the time switch has a calibrated date of 1985


Assuming a refurbished meter may read 00000 how come since August2009 (4 months) I have used 270Kw in a one bedroom flat.


Conclusion, they are the original eqpt fitted when the house was built.

EDF Customer Services told me to ignore any Calibration stickers, dates or Utility Supplier names as they are irrelevant.

Our EDF manager says this is utter nonsense as all meters must carry a "recalibration date" which normally doesnt exceed 20 years.

With his statement and photographic evidence the problem has now been escalated up the tree with a letter to EDF HQ

We wait and see what happens, hopefully its game. set and match to me but that seems to easy.


Its astonishing what rubbish Customer Services can tell you, especially to ignore any calibration stickers etc.

Its a good job I have friends who work in the industry or I will have just been fobbed off with ridiculous statements.

Edited by laroc

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...