Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks jk2054 - email now sent to OCMC requesting an in person hearing.
    • You can easily argue your case with no sign on the nearest parking sign
    • Same issue got a fine yesterday for parking in suspended bay which was ending at 6:30 yesterday, next thing I see a fine 15 minutes before it. The sign was obstructed 
    • Hi all, an update on the case as the deadline for filing the WS is tomorrow i.e., 14 days before the hearing date: 7th June. Evri have emailed their WS today to the court and to myself. Attached pdf of their WS - I have redacted personal information and left any redactions/highlights by Evri. In the main: The WS is signed by George Wood. Evri have stated the claim value that I am seeking to recover is £931.79 including £70 court fees, and am putting me to strict proof as to the value of the claim. Evri's have accepted that the parcel is lost but there is no contract between Evri and myself, and that the contract is with myself and Packlink They have provided a copy of the eBay Powered By Packlink Terms and Conditions (T&Cs) to support their argument the contractual relationship is between myself and Packlink, highlighting clause 3a, e, g of these T&Cs. They further highlight clause 14 of the T&Cs which states that Packlink's liability is limited to £25 unless enhanced compensation has been chosen. They have contacted Packlink who informed them that I had been in contact with Packlink and raised a claim with Packlink and the claim had been paid accordingly i.e., £25 in line with the T&Cs and the compensated postage costs of £4.82. They believe this is clear evidence that my contract is with Packlink and should therefore cease the claim against Evri. Evri also cite Clause 23 of the pre-exiting commercial agreement between the Defendant and Packlink, which states:  ‘Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 A person who is not a party to this Agreement shall have no rights under the Contracts (Right of Third Parties) Act 1999 to rely upon or enforce any term of this Agreement provided that this does not affect any right or remedy of the third party which exists or is available apart from that Act.’ This means that the Claimant cannot enforce third party rights under the Contract (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 and instead should cease this claim and raise a dispute with the correct party.   Having read Evri's WS and considered the main points above, I have made these observations: Evri have not seen/read my WS (sent by post and by email) as they would have recognised the claim value is over £1000 as it includes court fees, trial fees, postage costs and interests, and there is a complete breakdown of the different costs and evidence. Evri accepts the parcel is lost after it entered their delivery network - again, this is in my WS and is not an issue in dispute. Evri mentions the £25 and £4.82 paid by Packlink - Again, had they read the WS, they would have realised this is not an issue in dispute. Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency   This supports the view that once a user (i.e, myself) selects a transport agency (i.e Evri) that best suits the user's needs, the user (i.e, myself) enters into a contract with the chosen transport agency (i.e, myself). Therefore, under the T&Cs, there is a contract between myself and Evri. Evri cites their pre-existing agreement with Packlink and that I cannot enforce 3rd party rights under the 1999 Act. Evri has not provided a copy of this contract, and furthermore, my point above explains that the T&Cs clearly explains I have entered into a contract when i chose Evri to deliver my parcel.  As explained in my WS, i am the non-gratuitous beneficiary as my payment for Evri's delivery service through Packlink is the sole reason for the principal contract coming into existence. Clearly Evri have not read by WS as the above is all clearly explained in there.   I am going to respond to Evri's email by stating that I have already sent my WS to them by post/email and attach the email that sent on the weekend to them containing my WS. However, before i do that, If there is anything additional I should further add to the email, please do let me know. Thanks. Evri Witness Statement Redacted v1 compressed.pdf
    • Thank you. I will get on to the SAR request. I am not sure now who the DCA are - I have a feeling it might be the ACI group but will try to pull back the letter they wrote from her to see and update with that once I have it. She queried it initially with 118 118 when she received the default notice I think. Thanks again - your help and support is much appreciated and I will talk to her about stopping her payments at the weekend.
  • 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

RBS/Mint Final Charging Order Help Needed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5534 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

In december 2007 and Feb 2008 Mint issued default notices.

 

Eventually they CCJ'd me on 24 Oct.

 

Because I didnt put in any defence there wasnt an agreed payment plan

 

They contacted me by letter on 13 Nov and enclosed a financial statement to be returned which was completed and sent with a cheque for £35.

 

The cheque was returned and I received an Interim Charging order dated 5th Nov.

 

I rang Green & Co (Mints Solicitors) and asked why they had issued the interim charging order they said because I hadnt paid. I then asked them whether I should defend the claim in my Local court and they said no, it was a formality.

 

Having discovered this wonderful forum now I have since CCA'd mint and surprise, surprise, they immediately came back with an enforceable agreement.

 

What if anything can i do to rectify this situation? Help please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now gone through my paperwork and found the original default notice which I think is probably unenforceable

 

The letter is dated 24th December 2007 and the payment was due on 7th January.

 

It is unlikely that their mail would have been collected on xmas eve or the 25th or 26th Dec. and it is also quite likely that I wouldnt have received it until the 2nd or 3rd January 2008 in effect only givimng me 3-4 days to raise funds.

 

Your guidance on this would be greatly appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are quite correct

 

No matter how they try and swing it, a DN sent on the 24th December cannot have an action date of 7th January

 

The Default notice is invalid and you should apply for a set aside on this basis

 

Hopefullly someone with more knowledge than me can help - try posting a link to this thread on the main consumer credit agreements thread

 

HERE

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add

 

The 14 days given must be CLEAR days

 

That is, not including the day the DN was received OR the day upon which they require action

 

By my calcs, the earliest they can claim you received the DN would be 31st December (and thats being VERY generous and allowing 1st class post) so your "action" date should be 15th January.

 

 

Can you scan the DN (removing all personal info) and post it up here?

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well would you believe it I have found a second default notice from Mint dated February 2008 allowing me 17 days to respond.

 

Surely they cant default me twice fro the same debt and surely the only default notice that can stand is the first one using an argument I have seen I think by x20.

 

So therefore by his reasoning I will only owe the arrears on the acount as listed on the first notice as the second default was already on a terminated account.

 

Am i reading this correctly?

 

The only downside I can see to this is that I paid £200 to Mint on the 7th January which is the day AFTER default had to be paid and was not the amount asked for in the original default notice - it was less than half the required payment.

 

Thanks

 

PCD

Edited by pussycatdoll
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PCD,

 

Lookin in as requested........

 

Is this a credit card account.

 

Did you defend your case at all before the CCJ was made against you.

 

Can you post up the Agreement which you say is enforceable, and the 2 DN's.

 

Are there any late payment or over limit charges included in the amount they claimed at court.

Edited by slick132
  • Haha 1

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking through your posts Pussycatdoll, you have to get a set aside due to unlawful charges added to the account. To have your judgement set aside you will need to put forward a reason why. You must keep your reason as clear and simple as possible.

 

If the judgment is set aside, things go back to the start of the claim. You have another chance to reply to the Claim Form, and explain your situation. The CCJ is taken off the County Court Register until a new judgment is made.

 

You need to ask the court for a general application form called an N244. You should fill in the N244 to include the information the court asks for. There is a fee of £35. Meanwhile you need to add up all of the charges going back 6 years and get a figure ready for a defence. Do you already have all of your statements? If not then you will need these for proof and a counterclaim for the charges. You may need to send an S.A.R.(Subject Access Request) for the data they hold on you. There is a letter in the library for you to copy over.

 

If the judgment is set aside by the court, this means that the proceedings go back to the claim stage and any enforcement action is also cancelled. You have a new opportunity to fill in the reply to the claim form, make an offer of payment or put in any defence or counterclaim.

 

Having a judgment set aside does not wipe out the proceedings altogether but the details will be removed from the Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines until a new judgment is made.

  • Haha 1

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

UKAviator

 

Looking through your posts Pussycatdoll, you have to get a set aside due to unlawful charges added to the account. To have your judgement set aside you will need to put forward a reason why. You must keep your reason as clear and simple as possible.

 

I have taken your advice onboard and will send off a SAR today as this will definitely reinforce my case. However, and I am not sure about this, I would have thought that I should be able to get a set aside based on the initial default not allowing enough time to comply and that they have used this default in their POC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you apply for the set-aside on the basis of unlawful penalty charges AND the DN(s), you will have a better case.

 

Better to have the 2 points to contend as the court may not be impressed that you fail to defend at all when the case was heard.

 

Do you not have recent statements to show if penalty charges were made to the a/c.

 

Also, see what you can find to back up your contentions about the DN's.

Edited by slick132
typo

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you not have recent statements to show if penalty charges were made to the a/c.

 

Have now found some relevant statements quite a few £12 charges and one at £20 further back - I would imagine that when I SAR them I will find a few more.

 

I dont suppose the £12 charges would be classed as penaltie - or are they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would get a set aside based on unlawful penalty charges, Default notice, CCJ was not defended at the time. That will buy you some time to get your charges information and stop any further action by the claimant. Should be interesting to see how much they have charged.

 

Roughly how much is owing on the account?

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont suppose the £12 charges would be classed as penaltie - or are they?

They most certainly are penalties - unlawful ones too, which must be repaid in full !! Send the SAR ASAP.

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They most certainly are penalties - unlawful ones too, which must be repaid in full !!

 

Well thats a shock I must say - I thought that I couldnt claim those back - brings a whole new meaning to my claim against Citibank - I will have to redo my figures!!

 

I will get SAR off first thing in morning.

 

So what is the reasoning - I have been defaulted for the wrong amount or that the amount they claimed at court was incorrect.

 

A short explanation would be useful and perhaps some links so that i can read up on it.

 

PCD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your Application on form N244 for Set-Aside of the Judgement againt you will rely on:-

 

1. The inclusion of unlawful penalty charges in the Default Notice(s) rendering it incorrect.

 

2. The inclusion of unlawful penalty charges in the Claimants POC rendering it incorrect.

 

Until the N244 is Filed at court, if you receive anything from RBS/Mint, their solicitors or a DCA, write and tell them:-

 

Dear sir or madam,

 

Claim No: 5XY12345

 

I refer to your letter of xxdate.

 

Please be aware that it is now my intention to apply to the xxxxxx County Court for a Set-Aside of the Judgement made against me on xxdate.

 

I have taken advice in this matter and realise that I had valid grounds on which to defend against the claim. I will also ask the court to reconsider the Interim Charging Order made in this respect.

 

Until this matter is dealt with and heard in court, you should withhold any collection activity.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

PCD

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks slick you have been a great help on this I will do the SAR this morning and get it posted.

 

This is a great site and I am sure that you guys must have answered these questions many times before. I feel so much better now that I have some support and my depression is beginning to lift.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good. There is a way to go yet, but its a start to getting this debt sorted out. Shout if you need anything. .

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...