Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
  • 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
      • 160 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

Default


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5520 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

Hi

 

Can anyone help, basically incorrectly linked to an address I know nothing about on Equifax, they state that it must remain as they think I did live at the other address. Anyway, the default looks like this:

 

equifaxbv2.jpg

 

My queries are;

 

1. Can this company put the default on my file as I understand they are a DCA?

2. Even though it isn't me, I think it'd be easier to write direct and tell them it isn't me but also threaten them to remove the info as they are not authorised to place a default if I never took agreement out with them. Is this correct or can they issue defaults? Any letter templates etc that would assist me?

 

I am not too bothered about linked address as i'll add notice of correction to it advising lenders it isn't me (if Equifax Police allow me of course) but in the meantime I do need the default removing. In a nutshell, it relates to a Littlewoods catalogue account which is sod all to do with me, but that's irrelevant because i'd sooner force them to remove details, If I can't do this then I may argue it isn't me!

 

Its complicated as the 'dopelganger' does have same name and date of birth but it is not me lol. I will deal with this issue separately at a later date but need the default removed as it's registered at my current address - not the linked one!

 

Any help would be appreciated. :twisted:

SilverLining.....

There is always light at the end of the tunnel - we just have to beat the CRA's in order to see it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/181773-disputed-account-sold-dca.html

 

several threads on the same issue

 

time do some reading!

 

dx

Edited by dx100uk
missed a bit!

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Thanks :eek:

SilverLining.....

There is always light at the end of the tunnel - we just have to beat the CRA's in order to see it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
How come after it defaulted, they are STILL adding money?! :confused:

 

Haha - sorry????

 

Please tell me you're serious - does that add another cock up to the whole thing apart from the fact, it isn't mine, they are a not the lender, if it was mine I wouldnt have signed an agreement with them would i?

 

Please help..... well spotted and what makes you think they added money? Thanks :-D

SilverLining.....

There is always light at the end of the tunnel - we just have to beat the CRA's in order to see it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha - sorry????

 

Please tell me you're serious - does that add another cock up to the whole thing apart from the fact, it isn't mine, they are a not the lender, if it was mine I wouldnt have signed an agreement with them would i?

 

Please help..... well spotted and what makes you think they added money? Thanks :-D

 

 

Well the default balance is £1400 + but the actual balance now is £1600.

 

Once it defaults, the agreement is terminated and so it shouldn't be going up.

 

Mine have only ever gone down, as I have made payment!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the default balance is £1400 + but the actual balance now is £1600.

 

Once it defaults, the agreement is terminated and so it shouldn't be going up.

 

Mine have only ever gone down, as I have made payment!

 

Hmmm thanks :-)

 

However I wont be paying anything! So because it is only a default does that mean it can stay there for 5yrs and then a day before the 6yr they make it a ccj for another 6yrs>

 

Please help if you know, i'm totally confused.... thanks ;-)

SilverLining.....

There is always light at the end of the tunnel - we just have to beat the CRA's in order to see it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm thanks :-)

 

However I wont be paying anything! So because it is only a default does that mean it can stay there for 5yrs and then a day before the 6yr they make it a ccj for another 6yrs>

 

Please help if you know, i'm totally confused.... thanks ;-)

 

If it's not yours, it has to be removed.

 

If it is yours for an account you have forgotten about, you have to establish that.

 

I would google the company, send a CCA request and say you do not acknowledge the debt :)

 

If it is yours, it will stay there until 6 years from the date it was placed on your file, unless you can get out of it with an unenforced agreement :)

 

And even then, that will be a fight :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Can anyone help, basically incorrectly linked to an address I know nothing about on Equifax, they state that it must remain as they think I did live at the other address. Anyway, the default looks like this:

 

equifaxbv2.jpg

 

My queries are;

 

1. Can this company put the default on my file as I understand they are a DCA?

2. Even though it isn't me, I think it'd be easier to write direct and tell them it isn't me but also threaten them to remove the info as they are not authorised to place a default if I never took agreement out with them. Is this correct or can they issue defaults? Any letter templates etc that would assist me?

 

I am not too bothered about linked address as i'll add notice of correction to it advising lenders it isn't me (if Equifax Police allow me of course) but in the meantime I do need the default removing. In a nutshell, it relates to a Littlewoods catalogue account which is sod all to do with me, but that's irrelevant because i'd sooner force them to remove details, If I can't do this then I may argue it isn't me!

 

Its complicated as the 'dopelganger' does have same name and date of birth but it is not me lol. I will deal with this issue separately at a later date but need the default removed as it's registered at my current address - not the linked one!

 

Any help would be appreciated. :twisted:

 

My personal advice under your circumstances is first write a letter to Equifax and make a section 10 demand under the Dta Protection Act and demand that they remove the entry they will most probably refuse, but at least you have taken the first steps, make sure that you also add failure to comply, will result in you applying to the Couirt for an enforced section 10 order ( look up section 10 in the Data Protection Act available from the ICO website ).

 

Ram it home that you will take them to Court it will cost you £85 to issue an application, they will have to convince the Court that it is you....if they can't then you can claim damages.

Hopethis is of some help.

I will help you as much as I can.....but I am no laywer I can only give advice/views from my own experiences.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal advice under your circumstances is first write a letter to Equifax and make a section 10 demand under the Dta Protection Act and demand that they remove the entry they will most probably refuse, but at least you have taken the first steps, make sure that you also add failure to comply, will result in you applying to the Couirt for an enforced section 10 order ( look up section 10 in the Data Protection Act available from the ICO website ).

 

Ram it home that you will take them to Court it will cost you £85 to issue an application, they will have to convince the Court that it is you....if they can't then you can claim damages.

Hopethis is of some help.

I will help you as much as I can.....but I am no laywer I can only give advice/views from my own experiences.

 

sparkie

 

Sparkie, thanks mate appreciate your reply.

 

assuming it is me for a moment, it isnt but just assume it is (I cant be paying for things just yet so i'm arguing the illegality of the default in the first place)

 

The cra think i'm the other guy cos he lives near me and i'm not on electoral roll at old address (didnt want to pay council tax thats all...)

 

Anyway, I live at diff address to the link they have and I applied for a littlewoods account - got declined straight out then noticed this default on my file. They say it is at X address but my previous address is nothing like it. See my problem?

 

So, what i'm asking is;

 

1. can the dca add a default?

2. why has the default increased?

3. I never signed nor received a default

4. they only got my address when I applied to them for a product

5. I never had an account in the past - they should prove it surely?

6. my personal details will not match what they have on record.

 

Is this an illegal default?

SilverLining.....

There is always light at the end of the tunnel - we just have to beat the CRA's in order to see it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sparkie, thanks mate appreciate your reply.

 

assuming it is me for a moment, it isnt but just assume it is (I cant be paying for things just yet so i'm arguing the illegality of the default in the first place)

 

The cra think i'm the other guy cos he lives near me and i'm not on electoral roll at old address (didnt want to pay council tax thats all...)

 

Anyway, I live at diff address to the link they have and I applied for a littlewoods account - got declined straight out then noticed this default on my file. They say it is at X address but my previous address is nothing like it. See my problem?

 

So, what i'm asking is;

 

1. can the dca add a default?

2. why has the default increased?

3. I never signed nor received a default

4. they only got my address when I applied to them for a product

5. I never had an account in the past - they should prove it surely?

6. my personal details will not match what they have on record.

 

Is this an illegal default?

 

 

If a default has been registered in your name and you can prove it 100% that it is not you........you have an extremely strong case for libel actionagainst both the DCA and the CRA, if you are sure you prove this by documentary evidence, then I would tell them both that you intend to sue them in the County Court under the Libel & Defamation Acts, providing that you claim no more than £10.000 you can sue in the County Court.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Silver

 

You already have another thread on this:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/credit-reference-agencies/172948-help-credit-ref-agencies.html

 

You aint gonna get anywhere going over the same stuff, get stuck into them :)

 

Spark

 

Thanks mate - I couldn't find that thread!!! Cheers.....

 

I am still thinking it's best to wait the time period then everything will drop off. Its hard (almost impossible) to prove I am not the same guy, in a nutshell a close friend done it. Thus I want no legal action taken, but for the sake of the law it was not me.

 

Can you see my dilemma? If I sue/take it further then it means grassing up my friend who i've already beaten black and blue!

 

Bottom line he applied for stuff in my name using my details but said I lived at the house, obviously it was only recently I found out how bad things were but cannot go to police - I don't work like that.

 

So if it means it stays with me for 6yrs so be it. I was hoping, because I never signed for anything etc that I could have it removed.

SilverLining.....

There is always light at the end of the tunnel - we just have to beat the CRA's in order to see it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...