Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. 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 simply contracted by the landowner 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. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

DCA heavy-handed over increase of repayments - advice needed, pl.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5209 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

Thanks again, Ida.

 

As for the unenforceable ones, I just wish they would hurry up and take them to court. I am being pestered every week by mail asking me to settle in full or call to arrange payment instalments. I think bank/DCA policy is to shove as much correspondence at you if the hope you will just cave in. The bank, in particular, seem keen to keep the correspondence going and I feel they are trying to trick me into agreeing with them that I accept the so-called agreements they sent and that the accounts are indeed enforceable.

 

They don't want to let go of their little bit of coin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

if they think it's enforceable you wonder why the don't take you to court sooner!

 

 

because they know

 

ida x

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I'm aware of. TBH, I haven't been keeping an eye on that, but a quick glance at recent missives from the DCA show the oustanding amounts remaining the same. Must llok into that. I will dig the paperwok out and post back tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has there been any interest added since the accounts were passed to DCAs ?.

A debt collector doesn't add any interest to a debt.

HALIFAX: 13/01/07 Sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter (marked as rec'd 16/01)

Paid in full in March 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, I know that but any bank correspondence doesn't show the outstanding amount so that's what I look at to see if it changes.

 

Have been reading some horror stroies on other threads where Caggers down in England have been having a hard time getting to see their agreements even using the CPR31.16 tool that we don't have. Some of their creditors are dragging out the whole process as far as going to court! Others are being ordered by the sherriff to produce the agreement, failing to do so and applying to court for extension of time allocated to next hearing.

 

They're all at it, aren't they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

a dca can add interest.

 

it's all dependant on the original agreement

 

ida x

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you signed an agreement that was passed to a dca and on the original agreement it stated that if account is defaulted they can pass to a dca and this would include fees or interest etc but only ever seen one before like that.

 

most agreements do not have that provision in them (was many years ago)

 

ida x

  • Haha 1

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Advice, please! One of my wife's unenforceable ebts has been passed to Morrcroft. They've been told the status of the account and have just sent out the usual waffle. Today, however, we recieved a letter stating that they have deducted £5 from an account that we supposedly supplied them with in agreement with a telephone call my wife has had with them. At no time has my wife spoken to them nor authourised any deductions from our bank account. A deduction has been made from somewhere as the account balance is showing as £5 less.

 

HAs anybody come across behaviour like this? Naturally I am contacting police, for if they have removed it from our account, then isn't that fraud? Letter was dated 31 July; no monies showing leaving the account, as yet.

 

Here is the scan:-

 

Scans :: Moor1 picture by kakkadoo - Photobucket

Edited by FlyboyAgain
Link to post
Share on other sites

a lot of dca's 'credit' £5 to the accounts when they get them to try an fool folk that it's not stautue barred when it is. It will be a ploy if you have not given them any card details

 

did you send the bemused letter?

 

Ida x

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

More than bemused, my Fife chum! Their letter is, with a covering letter from me, winging its way to Lothian's Finest and also to the OFT.

 

Thx - again - for commenting. I was perplexed as to how they'd gotten the fiver!

 

Scales banged!

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks,

 

if you think about it,

 

they have asked you to call and you haven't, they think well we will say you have paid by cc/dc, even tho you know you haven't gave them any card details, if you get that letter most folk would call them to say the have not supplied card details but they have you on the phone!

 

that's probarbly their intentions, to get you to call.

 

Ida x

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Now getting calls from a crowd calling themselves 'Preston'; anybody heard of them?

 

The clown I got this morning tried to get me to answer security questions without even telling me who he was and where he was calling from and when I asked him this he told me and then said that I MUST reply to the letter he was sending out. I told him to P*** off, as i've had enough of this. It seems that the accounts that the BOS weaklings have failed to resurrect are being sold on. No matter, that's me changed the home number just now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. With all due respect, I don't think it's really worth it, cos after I saw off Blair, Oliver and Scott (with thanks to Caggers and Trading Standards) these other clowns don't scare me. Just fed up of it. But the big gun - the tied loan and PPI and the asssociated court case that I will have to instigate myself - will be the benchmark for turning their collective gas off.

 

They are ****, these people, and I shudder to think of the poor souls who are near the end of their tether because of DCA intimidation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it legal to sell debts on? I know that Blair, Oliver & Useless are owned/run by HBoS, but one of these unenforecable accounts has now been passed to this bunch of monkies called iQor. I had a bit of fun with them, these past few days before the number gets changed.

 

So, can these debts be sold on? And if so why doesn't the selling monkey tell the buying monkey whay the debtor isn't paying up?

Edited by FlyboyAgain
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

why doesn't the selling monkey tell the buying monkey whay the debtor isn't paying up?

Basically because they don't care IMO, as long as they get the money.

HALIFAX: 13/01/07 Sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter (marked as rec'd 16/01)

Paid in full in March 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh of course. Like the little old lady who gives her Jack Russell free to a good home but doesn't let on it rips up the carpet :D:p

HALIFAX: 13/01/07 Sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter (marked as rec'd 16/01)

Paid in full in March 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...