Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 3 copies court sols your file   no to mediation 1 wit you   the rest is obv.   on the copy to CEL or their sols if they state one do not give them email/sig/phone.
    • usual game by erudio in that the last confirmed deferment was about 2011 but erudio didn't issue a DN until some 5yrs later  so i was thinking of:    alternative whereby claimant intimates SB date=defaulted date and that has been registered months after the last payment . 1 The Claimant's claim was issued on dd/mm/yyyy.  2.The date last payment made was the dd/mm/yyyy   3.The Default Notice was issued dd/mm/yyyy and served several months after the initial breach thus the cause of action delayed by X months and the Limitations period prolonged to 6 years and X months which in effect allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.  4.Therefore the Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980. If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any true cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.  5.The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £x or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.   as we know drydens will claim thus its not SB'd.   sadly this case is somewhat complex in that there was some confusion by the OP upon this being paid off already, so had before they came here filed a defence stating such.    once the story was fully relayed, but which remains somewhat confusing still,  and things sorted out, it transpired this was for an honours student loan settled through Link/Thesis etc and nothing to do with the ones sold to Erudio.   it also transpired that a deferment direct to the SLC before 2013 sale, did not actually happen and SLC kept the details awaiting the OP to resubmit it, which never happened. this resulted in SLC taking payments because the Op's account was in arrears, this also latterly enabled Erudio, without permission nor any contact, to use the existing SLC DD to take payments in 2014 i think. which should not have happened.   i think thats it in a nutshell.    
    • Hi, I just wanted some advice from anybody who may have had a similar problem or might know what's going on please?   Last March, just as this pandemic took hold my  husband lost his job. No furlough, no redundancy pay or anything. Just finished. We knew nothing about claiming benefits but we managed to put in a claim for JSA and then UC (they just deducted the JSA from anything we were entitled to from UC)   later in the year, I made a claim for carer's allowance as I am my mums full time carer. She receives attendance allowance. I waited several weeks to hear anything back but the claim was successful and I reported this to UC.   My husband got a job again in August. This too was reported to them and his earnings meant that we received very little or nothing during that time. He then lost this job in December yet again due to covid and again we reported this and he again claimed for JSA.   He got another job in January and again told UC and JSA. We received pretty much nothing and the last payment we did receive, they deducted everything that was left for a tax credit over payment that we apparently owe from previous years.   We have now received a letter in our journal saying that we have had an over payment due to back pay of carer's allowance that I received last year after all the weeks of waiting. Fair enough, I don't really understand still how all of this works as we have always worked but they told us before that all earnings etc and things from DWP get reported to them anyway so they knew what carer's allowance I had received.   I then replied to ask if we can set up repayments for this and we then had another letter in the journal saying.. DO NOT IGNORE THIS MESSAGE We are carrying out a review of your information, and so I need to speak to you BOTH about your universal credit claim. We'll be checking a few details with you on this call to make sure you're entitled to universal credit. You might also be asked to provide additional evidence but we will discuss that on the call. If we can't get in contact or speak with you, your claim will be suspended and ultimately closed. There will likely be an over payment and this will be recovered from you.   This seems a bit serious is there anything I should be worried about? Or is it purely just a review to maybe close down the account now that my husband is back in work and earning more money? It doesn't mention the over payment so I am not sure if it is about that or not but my husband suffers very much with stress and anxiety and now he is panicking over this because he thinks that they are going to make out we have been up to something when we most definitely have not.   Admittedly, we have struggled with it because we have never claimed before and not been able to attend any face to face appointments etc but as far as I am concerned, we did everything asked of us.   The only other thing is that I now have £2000 in the bank sitting there as we are in desperate need of another car as this one we have is on it's last legs but I was told you only need to declare £6000 and over.   Any advice or anyone had the same please? Pretty confused. Thanks.
    • Using miley_b ob 's great letter as a template, is the below along the right lines:   Dear Civil Enforcement (CEL) Limited   I write in response to your Letter Before Action - Claim for Debt , which I have received in relation to PCN Number: ?????, you have issued in response to a case I have explained is baseless.   I am writing to notify you that I have no intention of paying these ridiculous and made-up sums of money, for allegedly breaking some imaginary contract with yourselves. Expecting me to pay you a baseless fine for not entering my cars registration details amounts to extortion. You already have my £2 for parking in your car park, a fact I'm sure you realise due to the fact you own all CCTV in the carpark. I would also reference the fact that the parking meter that issued me a ticket without entering my registration has since been fixed, which shows that you are fully aware of the problems it has caused.   You have also scored a big own goal by adding a £82 admin fee. Presumably, this admin fee is some sort of unicorn food tax. I suggest that you look at DDJ Harvey’s judgement at Lewes County Court on 05/02/2020 (Claim number F0HM9E9Z). He was not very happy with these made-up amounts, was he?   You can either drop this foolishness now or get a good spanking in court. The choice is yours.   Hopefully we will not be speaking again,   xxxx
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4456 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 had bailiffs (Marston Group) visiting for a congestion charge fine. They visited twice. The actual fine was £185 which I do not dispute but failed to pay as I just didn't have the money.

 

On the 2nd visit they warned that they would be back to take goods...still there was nothing I could do.

 

Then yesterday morning I woke up at 6.30am to the sound of a large vehicle outside. I looked out of the window and they had my car on the back of a truck! I ran downstairs and spoke to them and they said I had to pay £775.73 or they would take it. I had no choice. I can't be without a car. I phoned my Mum and she paid it on her credit card but I only did that because I had no other choice.

 

I'm so angry that these people are allowed to do this. It's so unfair! The fine was £185 and I had every intention of paying it. Where did the extra charges come from and what are they for??? Are thay allowed to do this to people who are clearly already struggling financially???....I now cannot pay other bills because I will have to pay my Mum back the money (with interest probably because it will take me ages. Is there anything I can do?

 

Any advice would be very welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the bailiff provide a Notice of Seizure of Goods and Inventory and in which case what were the charges?

 

It is very important that you get a breakdown. If you do get this can you post here please.

 

In any event, these fees are simply WRONG and I am shocked that Marston are charging this amount.

 

Did the bailiff provide proof that he was certificated and did you see a copy of the warrant of execution?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am shocked that Marston are charging this amount.

 

TT, I don't believe you! You've been in this business long enough to know that this type of behaviour is quite normal.

 

:):)

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I opened the door on the morning they had my car on the truck they handed me a Notice of Seizure of Goods and Inventory (I think they were going to post it through the door).

This was the first I knew about them taking my car and they wrote on it that the vehicle had been impounded...they were about to take and had already written that.

Previous to this the bailiff had visited twice. On the first occasion the amount owing was 399.06. On the second occasion the amount had gone up to 474.28 and he gave a final notice.

 

The charges of the final amount are listed as:

Penalty Charge inc court fee - £185

Bailiffs attendance costs - £335.56

Attendance to Remove - £184.50

VAT - 48.08

Card Handling Fee - 22.59

 

TOTAL - 775.73

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any advice would be appreciated. Myself and my partner are both self employed and struggle to make ends meet. We have two small children and a whole load of bills to pay!

Something like this will seriously affect us financially. It will mean that we will fall behind with other payments and bills.

I don't dispute that we owe the fine, but these other charges just seem so unfair. Why are these people allowed to do this? Its wrong!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then when you write complaining, include an email copy to your local councillor and your MP - unless they think it's important to them staying in office they won't do anything about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TT, I don't believe you! You've been in this business long enough to know that this type of behaviour is quite normal.

 

:):)

 

You are quite right about this...and long enough to know that this company were in Court recently and the Judgment was only handed down 3 weeks ago and the Judge made it VERY CLEAR that bailiff's CANNOT charge a fee to immobilise a vehicle and he went even further by saying that the fee was UNLAWFUL. That is why I am SURPRISED that this company would CONTINUE charging these fees.

 

The fees charged are NOT CORRECT. You need to write to the company to ask for a detailed explanation for the charges that they have made to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't know where to start with regards to complaining and I have no idea whether these amounts of charges are allowed or not. I have made various phonecalls to numbers given to me by the CAB but have been told that I am not entitled to free legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the process of writing to the Marston Group re. charges. I'll keep you posted.

I have been told by the Financial Ombudsman the it's my local council that regulate these bailifs so I will send a copy of my letter to them.

Thanks for replies x

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...