Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Not at all.  The onus is on them to ensure that their invoice respects the provisions of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to establish keeper liability.  Which it can't as the area is covered by bye-laws. Spot on. Irrelevant as to whether you entered into a contract with VCS to pay them £100 if you didn't obey what was written on their silly signs. Who cares?  What about their ridiculous generic Particulars of Claim where they deliberately mix up driver and keeper. And where do they mention this?  You haven't shown us anything. Of course you have to prepare a Witness Statement and you'd better get on with it. This is the problem here - you've disappeared for months & months, haven't kept us updated and presumably haven't read other VCS threads.  That needs to change - now. Otherwise you will lose - simple as that. For a start - please upload the court order which fixes the hearing date plus plus where "VCS mentioned my initial defence was generic and clearly copied from the internet".  We're not mind readers.
    • New bank notes featuring King Charles III will enter circulation for the first time today - here are the codes of the very first printed.View the full article
    • 2nd class stamp only , get free proof of posting from any PO counter dx  
    • Hi,  It has been a long time but I have had confirmation claim will proceed to hearing in roughly 1 months time.  I was wondering if anyone could advise on defence please.  A few questions I have are: 1) I didn't notify VCS that I was not the driver of the vehicle and the judge may look negatively on this point.  I did not receive any direction in correspondence from VCS  that I should inform them if I was not the driver and that was going to be the foundation for may argument on this point. 2) The vehicle is stopped at a zebra crossing.  Based on the images from VCS for around 10 seconds.  At that time there is someone standing near the zebra crossing and someone else enters my vehicle.  I was going to raise the point that stopping at a zebra crossing when someone is standing near it is to be expected.  I was also going to ask the question how you can have a no stopping zone when there are zebra crossings where the driver is required to stop. 3) The no stopping zone is clearly signposted, however, no drop off or pickup is not clearly signposted with one small sign at the zebra crossing, parallel to the road and on the passengers side.  I was going to challenge that no-drop off or pickup is clearly signposted.  4) VCS mentioned my initial defence was generic and clearly copied from the internet.  It covered 1) Claimant not being in a position to state if the Defendant was the driver at the time.  2) No evidence that claimant's contract with landowner supersedes byelaws & signage isn't legally binding contract. 3) No contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on speculative charge. I am interested to know if anyone has had success or been unsuccessful with this 'generic' defence. 5) If I should submit an updated defence to the court based on questions 1, 2 & 3.  Or if it is better to only raise these points in court? Thanks.  Any guidance would be appreciated  
  • 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
      • 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

Capquest SD - *** WON + COSTS ***


doony26
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4612 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 all

 

Ok, I recieved an SD from Capquest a couple of weeks ago. It's for an Egg account, going back to dec02. Claiming for 11k, 3k of which is interest Capquest have added since buying the debt in May 06. Now, I am 99.9% sure this is Statute Barred, as no payment has been made in that time, or the debt been achknowledged in any way.

 

Anyway, I wrote a cca letter today and also stating the debt is statute barred, and will post it in the morning. And I have started filling out the set aside forms from the court. Which is where I need some help.. 6.4 is ok, thats easy enough. It's 6.5 I'm having trouble with, as having read the many threads on here (very helpful and informative) I'm a little confused as to what I should write on my affidavit and how it should be worded.

 

A little info...The only correspondance I have had from Capquest if the SD. It arrived via second class post. The particulars of the SD make reference to a credit agreement (this can be used in my defence?).. and there's some 3k of charges on there. I have tried calling the illusive Miss O'keefe, and seems to be unavailable.

 

Anyway.. the only thing I have left to do is fill out 6.5.. which.. havig spent so much time reading on here.. suddenly realised it has to be in the court by Friday..

 

So what lines of defence can I put on my affidavit .. aside from the statute barred? (with the slim chance it is just bordering)

 

Any help would be much appreciated :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did they give you the correct time frame in which to rectify the account? A statutory demand gives a person 21 days warning to pay the debt. After that the statutory demand has runs it course and it can followed by a bankruptcy petition. see Legal Issues Explained - Statutory Demand

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please complain to Office of Fair Trading Immediatly as they are inviting information on companys like Capquest.

 

This is your chance to resolve the SD confetti.

 

IN the meantime if the debt is statute barred fear not nothing will become of it.

** Credentials **

 

10 Years Finance Fraud Investigator

 

5 Year High Court Sheriffs

 

2 Years Tip Staff Royal Courts

 

Currently : HMCS Enforcement Officer

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was me in your shoes, I would get it set aside and claim your costs back in court....and PLEASE COMPLAIN TO THE OFT....Capquest will know this is statute barred - You will find plenty of info here - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/165140-received-statutory-demand-capquest.html#post1775590

Link to post
Share on other sites

ye, I'm in the process of filling the court forms out. I sent off a ccs request and statute barred letter to them today. But just need some help on how to word my affidavit, and other forms of defence I can use as well as the statute barred.

 

In regards to the time limit, is it 18 days from the reciept of the SD, or 18 from the date printed on the SD(it came in the post).. if it's the latter, I have to get my forms into the court by tomorrow....

Edited by doony26
Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to the time limit, is it 18 days from the reciept of the SD, or 18 from the date printed on the SD(it came in the post)..
It's 18 days from the SD being served, so from when you received it.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah brilliant thanks, and thanks for the other replies. So based on that assumption, how are the courts, or Capquest, supposed to know when i recieved it. It's not a biggie, but I'd like the weekend to get the court forms correct and as strong as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Service is deemed to occur after 2 business days (Saturdays and Sundays are not classed as business days) by first class post, so I would imagine you can add a couple more days for second class post.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just read somewhere that service is deemed to have taken place 7 days after being sent by 1st class post.. is this correct? Also, does it make a difference if they have spelt my name wrong on the SD?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doony....although i'm not 100% I believe service is usually (although it can vary from judge to judge) deemed as 2 days after posting.....and in answer to your question about the incorrect name, unless it is RADICALLY different it won't make too much difference (although it is still worth mentioning in court).....I would also URGE you strongly to report this whole affair to the OFT too....1st Credit have had a stern ticking off about their statutroy demands and it won't be long until Capquest get the same too, so please report this situation to the OFT....

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah thanks.. although a bit more searching, and i found this on the government insolvency website..

 

45.98 Date of effective service

Where the demand is advertised, the time for compliance runs from when the advertisement first appears. Service is deemed to have taken place 7 days after sending by first class post. If service is effected after 4pm on a weekday or 12 noon on a Saturday, then it is effective from the following working day.

Notes: [r6.3(3)]

 

just want make sure, as 2 days, would mean i have to have it in by tomorrow, where as the above would give me till the end of the week, and would be 8 days gone after i sent the CCA. The name isn't radically different no, but just thought it was a bit stupid of them not to even spell my name right. I will mention it though. And once my set aside as been filed, i will complain to the OFT. No problems there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah cheers for that.. I've read them all loads.. hence i'm nearly late putting the sd application in.. Ok so I'm gonna put the application in this afternoon.. This is what I've put on the form, does it look ok? anything else I should add/take out.. many thanks..

 

1. The alleged account is to my knowledge statute barred. No payment has been made on this account for 6 years or more.

2. The alleged creditor states that the sum is due under an agreement - no agreement has been attached to this demand. I have on 26th Febuary requested a copy of the credit agreement on the alleged account, along with a statement of account and a copy of the deed of assignment. The production of a credit agreement is a legal requirement under The Consumer Credit Act. The alleged account can only be enforced under the Act by producing a copy of the agreement, to date this has not been produced.[/font]

3. Any amount stated as owing would be disputed due to unlawful and excessive charges levied on the account.[/font]

4. I have not received any Default Notice for this account. The serving of a Default Notice before any legal action is taken is a requirement under the Act.[/font]

5. I have received no Letter before Action. I believe that Capquest are using court as a first resort. Furthermore I believe that this is an abuse of process and Capquest are vexatious in their litigation.[/font]

6. The contact person listed on the statutory demand is unavailable for contact. This makes the statutory demand unenforceable. [/font]

 

Can I print this off and attach it to the 6.5, or do I have to hand write it out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The debt is totally disputed.

 

The alleged creditor has provided no proof whatsoever that the alleged debt is barred by the Statute Of Limitations Act 1980

 

The alleged creditor has provided no statements for the duration of the account (it not being uncommon that some debts are made up entirely of excessive charges)

 

The alleged creditor has provided no notice of assignment for the debt.

 

The alleged creditor has provided no valid default notice in the prescribed format.

 

The alleged creditor has provided no deed of assignment for the debt.

 

The alleged creditor states the claim is in relation to an 'agreement' No agreement has been attached to the demand and neither have they supplied one.

 

I request the judge dismisses this claim. I also request the judge order the alleged creditor to pay my costs as litigant in person, and in light of the upset and inconvenience this has caused myself and my family, I would also order the judge to make an indemnity award in my favour. I refer to.

 

Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch)

 

In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made:-

 

27 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...