Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Any update here? MET started a court case recently against a Cagger concerning this very site and EV charging - and then bottled it and discontinued the case before the hearing. It would be useful for others to know what happened in your case.
    • The important thing to know is that MET - although they will send you threat after threat about how they will divert a drone from Ukraine and make it fall on your home - hardly ever do court. Even in the very small number of cases where they send court papers, if the Cagger defends, they drop the matter before the hearing.  They have no real intention of putting their rubbish claim before a judge.  The aim is to find motorists who are terrified of the idea of going to court and who will give in when the court papers arrive. Thanks for doing the sticky and well done on finding F18's thread.  Do what they did.  On the first page - I think post 19 - there is the address of the CEO of BP.  Write to them, lay it on thick about being genuine customers in the various premises, mention the small kids, the very short stay time, attach any proof of purchase - and request that they get the invoice cancelled.
    • Thank you for that, I have obviously already been convicted so I think the appeal lodged is for the previous offence? Sorry if that doesn’t make sense. I suppose my only concern is that weds I go there and they don’t let a stat dec happen. If they do then as you say and solicitor says it’s highly likely I’ll be happy with the outcome. But I’m being told there’s no guarantee for the stat dec to be hard Weds as that’s not what the hearing is proposed for. Solicitor has stated that you can put a stat dec before a magistrates at any time so it shouldn’t be a problem.   
    • I re-read the extract from your  solicitor's letter this morning and think I might understand what they have in mind. I believe (and it’s only a guess) their strategy is this: 1.    You will make your SD 2.    You will enter fresh pleas to the four charges (not guilty) but will offer to plead guilty to speeding on the understanding that the FtP charges are dropped. 3.    If this is accepted they will attempt to argue that the two offences were committed “on the same occasion” 4.    You will be sentenced for those two offences (the sentence depending on whether the “same occasion” argument succeeds). They also have a plan in the event that your offer at (2) is unsuccessful and you are convicted again of the 2xFtP charges (and so face disqualification under “totting up”): 5.    They will make an “exceptional hardship” argument to avoid a ban. 6.    If that is unsuccessful they have already lodged an appeal in the Crown Court against that decision. (This is the only “appeal” I can think of). 7.    They plan to ask the court to suspend your ban pending that appeal. If I’m correct, I’m surprised the Crown Court has agreed to accept a speculative appeal (against something that hasn’t happened). The solicitor says this is to lodge it within the normal timescales. But you will have 21 days from the date of your conviction (which will be next Wednesday) to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court, so there is no need for a speculative appeal. I have to say that an application to have your ban suspended pending an appeal is unlikely to succeed. The Magistrates Court is unlikely to agree to it for one very good reason: if they make such an order (suspending your ban until your appeal is heard), all you need to do is not to pursue the appeal and the Magistrates order suspending your ban will remain in place. Hey Presto! No ban and no need for you to trouble with an appeal. Perhaps he will ask for your ban to be suspended for (say) three months or until your appeal is heard (whichever occurs first). This potentially creates a problem because if your appeal is not heard in that time either your ban will kick in or you will have o go back to court to get the suspension extended. But the solicitor obviously knows more about these things than I do. I would want to be very clear about this solicitor’s fees and what he proposes to charge you for. As I said, there is absolutely no need to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court. That can be done if and when it becomes required. But I am still firmly of the opinion that it is overwhelmingly likely that you will not need to progress beyond point 2 above. Point 3 is optional and I don’t know whether he solicitor has made It clear to you that the only thing you will avoid in the event of success is three penalty points. You will still be fined for the second offence and your driving record will still be endorsed with the details, but no penalty points will be imposed. Do let us know how it goes.  
  • 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

Log Book Loans....again !!!..advice Required....


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5175 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

cheers actionblusox for the reply but i think i have prob with my computer....i cant see anything to let me start a new thread......it does say erroron pagein bottom left of my screen but even when i re log on it does the same......HELP>....i only want someone to advise on what constitutes a loan agreement breach or not....my loan agreement from the ex franchisee of log book loans i took loan with has at the top of his loan agreement his company name t/a logbook loans which is exactly what it says on his consumer credit licence after checking....BUT at the bottom of the agreement it say his company name trading as logbook loans ltd which is the company he had a franchise with....this is not the name on his consumer credit licence......surely this is not legal wording?????

also to do with this agreement he bought it into my work place and just asked me to sign on the dotted line on the 2 pages......he then handed me the cheque.......now I have the coies of the paperwork and he has dated and witnessed the transaction which you can clearly see was done different time due to duifferent pens used......surely this is not right as well.

From speakng to CAB they tell me the loan agreement as part of the CCA must be word perfect...if so this is not and then becomes non valid.......

I look forward to hearing from anyone as to their views on this.....

many thanks

bullyuk

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Bully

 

Your Back!!!!!

 

Nice to hear from you at last...... : )

 

Bully.... I know I keep harping on... but don't get too tied up in the 'detail'

 

Stick to the FACTS - He had no licence at the time of initiating the loan - END OF.

 

OFT Guidelines are clear - familiarise yourself with them - no licence = no right to offer credit.

 

You say you have proof that LBL know nothing of this 'trader' - so get onto crimestoppers and report him.

 

I re-call you saying that he has since got a licence??? but even so - it's a different Trading name, isn't it?... so whilst OFT may have now granted him a licence, I feel sure that it would only cover any Agreements that he has outstanding in the name he has registered with them - not any other.

 

I'm more than sure you have a strong case Bully : )

 

Nice to know you are not giving up mate... : )

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Evening all.....just a quick note to anyone who has followed my dealings and posts ....... i went into court today against the ex franchisee of logbook loans and won....the case was thrown out of court with the ex franchisee getting a good bollocking along the way.

Its all over and sorted now............a long long journey but with thanks to eveyone from this site we have won.

Many many people to thank which I will be doing over the next few days......had a few too many beers at the moment........what a great day !!!!

cheers

gary also known as bullyuk

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

hello, i bought a car a year ago from a registered garage and about 3 months ago i got a knock on the door from a bayliff saying he was from logbook loans and that he was coming to reposses the car and that it had a bill of sale on it from a previous owner. i basically told him were to go and he left without the car. i spoke to the garage owner and he said he did not know anything about the bill of sale and that he would contact the previous owner. i gave the garage owner a few days then got bk to him to find out that the previous owner had moved . after that i did get another knock on the door and a second bayliff saying the same as the first bayliff. i told him were to go to. i then contacted lbl and the way they spoke to me on the phone was terrible.. i have since been speaking to the garage owner and now he wont speak to me at all about the situation . so i have got my soliocitor on to. but why should i have to pay a solicitor for someones elses loans. i have a copy off the bill of sale ect from lbl and could do with some advise about what to do. i have the car inhiding at the moment but why should i have to hide my own car that i bought. what should i do, should i go round the car traders home and kick his head in.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi RollsRoyce 1967 .... No, dont kick anyone's head in.

 

I would get your solicitor to write to LBL advising them of the Law on 'first innocent purchaser' (HP Act 1967 - i think) ... In the letter ask the solicitor to point out that you were not shown/left with or given a copy of any court order as required by the Bill of Sale Act 1882 section 7A and advise them that without such a document, the Bill of Sale does not and cannot legally stand alone in giving them a right to seizure of your vehicle.

 

Don't take your car out of hiding tho - because they are such numbskulls, they will still try to take it... having said that if they do take it and lose in court (which I understand they are beginning to lose more cases than they are winning these days) then my understanding is that they will have to pay you back and replace your car anyway.... so it would be pretty foolish of them to persue your vehicle once you let them know these facts.

 

Your solicitor is best placed to assist you further, but I hope this helps : )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...