Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 12mph (beyond any UK limit) will certainly qualify for a Fixed Penalty. So you should received an offer of a FP for each of the remaining two offences. Be sure to submit your licence details as instructed when you accept the offer. If you don't your £100 will be returned to you and the police will prosecute you in court.
    • and it will be also now written off under age related criteria anyway.
    • @dx100ukThanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe consequences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points? @Man in the middleI've been searching the forum and you seem very knowledgeable. Would you mind giving a look at my query please? Thanks in advance!!
    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
    • Been perusing the actual figures on the polls above wondering where the '16% claimed for deform comes from? I understand that there are 'weighted' end results based on secret calculations ...   Probably going to repeat this later, but remember that the ukip/brexit/reform/deform party has ALWAYS had poll speculation FAR better than their actual  performance at elections - by large margins. SO: The labor and Tory votes come largely from simply the people who say they will vote for them - sorted Lab 43% Tory 20%, with maybe another small 1-2% coming from the weightings of the 'not sures' Greens largely get what is declared from 'other' , although with another declared green bit from the 'pressed' question   So as the share of the voting displayed in 'other' granted to reform/deform is around 11%, where does the '16% too often being reported come from? Seems that reform has been granted as beneficiary of effectively ALL the don't knows and wont says, who when pressed didn't actually declare for someone else ... effectively adding 40%+ to their reported polling % - rather strange given their consistent under-performance compared to polling - or perhaps that is the cause of the higher rating eh?   Now I admit the possibility (probability?) of wingers being ashamed of declaring their support for the yuckey lemon end of the spectrum ... but surely  that should affect the 'Torys as well? Maybe the statisticians have simply weighted in that deform wingers are simply more likely to lie?   But - without 'weightings' and assumptions that faragits will get everything that isnt declared as a definite and unequivocal 'not that Piers Morgan' - reform is on around 11% it seems.   Add to that the history of polling a lot less than the hype - and the simple fact that faragit wingers seem to be spread across the country (presumably skulking in their moms spare room despite being 45+) and greens and lib dems seem to be community minded - I think two seats will be an epic result for farage. Hardly the opposition - far more raving wingnut party.   and importantly - Has farage got a home in clacton yet?
  • 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

MBNA now Experto Credite issue a statutory demand / **SD SET ASIDE**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5022 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

OK Ron,

 

It might be worth you doing a bit of reading yourself now. Can you put a timeline together for those that will be coming on your thread - gives a single point of reference to start from i.e.>>>>>

 

1st January - DN issued (3 days short) - Post 23.

 

15th January - Letter from Varde claiming ownership of the debt - Post 31

 

Etc, etc.

You may want to do this in a seperate document and then cut and paste it into your thread so you can save it, update it and repost again periodically. Also keeps things clear in your mind as you're bound to have a few questions fired at you.

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Quick update.

 

The court that Fairfax solictors has put on the sd does not deal with bankrupcy or insolvency.

 

I am going to ring the nearest court that does and ask what to do.

 

Ron

Debts settled £135K

discount so far £68K :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update.

 

The court that Fairfax solictors has put on the sd does not deal with bankrupcy or insolvency.

 

I am going to ring the nearest court that does and ask what to do.

 

Ron

 

Well this gets more interesting by the minute!!! Makes you wonder how much of this is bluff and how much is truth.

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have rung the right law court and thay have told me to take my set aside papers to them. Also even though Fairfax have quoted the wrong Law Court the SD is still valid! When you look at the HMCS site the page on the relevant court should say Bankrupcy , if it doesnt then you have to find the nearest court that does.

Debts settled £135K

discount so far £68K :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes , I still need to do the affid , just in case this is not a bluff. If I did go Bankrupt all my creditors would only get a few hundred pounds each, if that after all the costs!

 

So I would actually be financially better off to get rid of it all and go bankrupt. My O/H does not want me to do this so here I am.

 

I still cant work out if its better to make the affid in general terms or very specific or both. I am tempted to do both.

 

Ron

Edited by Ron 2015
typo

Debts settled £135K

discount so far £68K :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes , I still need to do the affid , just in case this is not a bluff. If I did go Bankrupt all my creditors would only get a few hundred pounds each, if that after all the costs!

 

So I would actually be financially better off to get rid of it all and go bankrupt. My O/H does not want me to do this so here I am.

 

I still cant work out if its better to make the affid in general terms or very specific or both. I am tempted to do both.

 

Ron

 

As said before, let others get their mind around what's going on here and i'm sure you'll get some very valid suggestions to help you make your own mind up. Try not to worry Ron (easier for me to say, I know. But bear with it for a bit ;))

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ron,

read some of the following links very helpful. And keep track of those costs.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/230908-help-statutory-demand-costs-6.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/233954-statutory-demand-hbos-capital.html

 

You will win Ron, don't worry and you will get costs. Maybe this will teach them a lesson not to try the same rubbish again. Have you got all the SAR info for both accounts?

 

Pumpytums

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ron, thanks for the PM.

 

I am not up to date with SD's but I assume, and you must check this, that you must put in a defence against the SD, not just saying I don't owe the money.

 

Your agreement.

 

Your agreement is held by many to be a cut and paste and quite obviously looks so. These look as though they were never on the reverse of the document and the printing codes do not match.

 

The other fault with the T&C's is that they refer in section 8 to interest rates as a monthly percentage rate when it must be an anual rate of interest. The only APR's listed relate to Cash Advances. In addition the below comment posted previously, proves that the T&C's are bogus.

 

2. By the customer signature striplink3.gif it mentions condition 11 on the T&Cs which says data protection. If you look at condition 11 on the T&Cs is says about promotional discounts! Is this enough to prove the T&Cs are not the ones I was given ?

 

Have a look here:

 

http://consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/609-mbna-agreementsapplication-forms

 

Your Default Notice.

 

The DN is defective, as has previously been pointed out. They send these ukmail, second class and you must always quote deleivery as second class. So much better if you have the envelope.

 

9the October was a Friday, so date for service, second class, would be 15th October. Earliest date to rectify would be 29th October, so DN fails on this point. Also if they have demanded the ballance in full rather than arrears, then this also scuppers them.

 

They also refer to term 8f of your agreement in your DN, this term relates to APR's, further proving the terms are bogus.

 

As soon as they demanded the ballance in full, they unlawfully rescinded the agreement. I understand that you have accepted this. The agreement no longer endured.

 

They have also rescinded the agreement before the date of rectification, by selling it. Another no no.

 

There is plenty there to sink them, but I think you need professional advice and help, quoting the points above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Vint

 

All valid points.

 

Anyone know of any good solicitors in London ( south east ) that are familiar with credit.

 

If the site rules dont allow it ,them pm me the details.

Debts settled £135K

discount so far £68K :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This bit that Pumpytums dug out is pretty useful too>>

 

 

To successfully get a statutory demand set asidelink3.gif one or more of the following must be satisfied:-

  • The amount stated on the statutory demand is disputed.
  • The person issuing the statutory demand also owes money. This is called a counterclaim.
  • The person issuing the statutory demand is holding security that equals or exceeds the amount owing.
  • The demand was issued in error.
  • The amount owing is less than £750
  • Execution has been stayed on a judgement debt.
  • The debtor is complying with an instalment order. This would mean the debt is not actually owed as it is being paid back.
  • The creditor failed to comply with the rules and prejudiced the debtor in the process.

 

Hi vint :)

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks M&M Pumpy and Vint

 

Well I not only dispute the amount , I dispute the whole debt. I do not owe Experto anything. I think its Varde that have taken assignment.

 

This is the problem.

 

If I go specific and show the D/N , LOA ect , It should clearly show that Experto are not the creditors.

 

If I go general terms then it might slip by the Judge.

 

Think I need a solicitor............

Edited by Ron 2015
typo

Debts settled £135K

discount so far £68K :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they took this to litigation/court, I think they may be in trouble as well.

Mbna say they sold the debt to experto, experto say it's owned by varde.

I don't think varde have a uk credit licence, so cant chase,so they use experto. But, experto don't own the debt so can't litigate.

 

Surely if this went to court, it could be struck out on the basis, of who actually owns the debt and has the right to litigate....:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi M&M,

 

Well point one is obvious and relevant. Point 2 also as if the UR letter was issued, there will be a counterclaim. Also the last point, the creditor failed to comply with the rules.

 

I thought that they had to get a CCJ first, before SD, unless you admit the debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ron,

read some of the following links very helpful. And keep track of those costs.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/230908-help-statutory-demand-costs-6.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/233954-statutory-demand-hbos-capital.html

 

You will win Ron, don't worry and you will get costs. Maybe this will teach them a lesson not to try the same rubbish again. Have you got all the SAR info for both accounts?

 

Pumpytums

 

I have SAR's for both up to Oct 2009. I requested both again recently but have not come yet. They sent me someone else's CCA , which I refered to the ICO , got the confirmation today.

 

I wanted recent SAR's to see what they say about assignment and default ect , to back up what I already have.

Edited by Ron 2015
typo

Debts settled £135K

discount so far £68K :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks M&M Pumpy and Vint

 

Well I not only dispute the amount , I dispute the whole debt. I do not owe Experto anything. I think its Varde that have taken assignment.

 

You actually don't owe them anything, if the agreement was unlawfully rescinded and you accepted it, to MBNA. The agreement no longer endured

 

This is the problem.

 

If I go specific and show the D/N , LOA ect , It should clearly show that Experto are not the creditors.

 

If I go general terms then it might slip by the Judge.

 

Think I need a solicitor............

Vint

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi M&M,

 

Well point one is obvious and relevant. Point 2 also as if the UR letter was issued, there will be a counterclaim. Also the last point, the creditor failed to comply with the rules.

 

I thought that they had to get a CCJ first, before SD, unless you admit the debt.

 

I think you can SD without a ccj

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they took this to litigation/court, I think they may be in trouble as well.

Mbna say they sold the debt to experto, experto say it's owned by varde.

I don't think varde have a uk credit licence, so cant chase,so they use experto. But, experto don't own the debt so can't litigate.

 

Surely if this went to court, it could be struck out on the basis, of who actually owns the debt and has the right to litigate....:confused:

 

Hi Hatesdebt ( like you user id )

 

MBNA did not inform me of anything , they just sent a dodgy DN.

Experto sent me a letter saying that Varde has had the debt assigned to it.

If Varde have no CCL then they can't chase it ( so I am told).

I can't see why Varde can't litigate , whats to stop them?

Debts settled £135K

discount so far £68K :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's because they are classed as offshore, coupled with the fact of no uk licence, that's why they use experto. But as experto only have an equitable right, I don't think they can litigate.

 

I'm sure someone got taken to court by experto and it got thrown out on this basis, as they could not prove thier right to litigate....:D

 

PS.

Mbna should have sent you a notice of assignment, re experto

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's because they are classed as offshore, coupled with the fact of no uk licence, that's why they use experto. But as experto only have an equitable right, I don't think they can litigate.

 

I'm sure someone got taken to court by experto and it got thrown out on this basis, as they could not prove thier right to litigate....:D

 

PS.

Mbna should have sent you a notice of assignment, re experto

 

Well that could be really useful , I like the logic.

 

I will look for the thread , If you remember where you saw it let me know.

 

Thanks ron

Debts settled £135K

discount so far £68K :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...