Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • while politicians trough at subsidised bars and canteens, claim thousaands in expenses while letting out their properties and tories vote to leave UK children hungry That ALL needs to stop
    • J&P Credit Solutions are specialists on debt recovery. Either way they seem to be swapping between the JandP and IDR whatever their exact definitions are.
    • Primary and secondary teachers are supporting pupils with their own money, buying food and warm clothing. Eight in 10 primary teachers in England spending own money to help pupils | Education | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Increasing numbers of children hungry and lack adequate clothing, with two-thirds of secondary teachers also supporting pupils  
    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

COPE'S Solicitors - Have they sent you false demands?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5361 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

It has come to our attention that Cope's Solicitors (who act on behalf of Arrow Global and others) have recently sent out letters to people who are in the middle of court action with them.

 

Essentially, they are claiming, falsely, that they have been awarded judgment in your case and are demanding payment of £50 per month. They then continue to threaten an attachment of earnings order.

 

If you have received such a notice, will you please post here. We will then be in touch to advise you what action you should take.

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself 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

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

High, got my letter last week claiming judgement and that they WOULD be granted an attachment to earning. Offered to accept the £50 a month (for now) routine.

 

All a load of rubbish as my case was stayed 18 months ago due to no CCA or NoA. Court confirms case remains stayed and unlikely to re-open due to delays.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have sent you a PM with some details... Thanks for your response everyone.

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself 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

hi i received one of these last week and rang them about it they apologised and said it had been sent in error, but i am still awaiting my cca from them which i requested back in july.
you MUST report them to the Solicitor Regulation Authority, this is a professional conduct issue which they MUST be taken to task for
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep - I got the same letter from them last week even though my case was stayed at the end of last year.

After checking with the court that the case was still stayed, I phoned Cope's to ask what was going on. They said that my letter was part of a batch produced and sent out in error. I don't believe the [edited] for a minute. What should I do??

Edited by jonni2bad
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Well done.

 

I highlighted the case to the SRA the other week and we have had a response by email and now letter, saying they are going to appoint one of their team to the case and investigate this.

 

It may take up to 6 weeks though...

 

However, the ball is rolling folks! :D

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself 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

However, the ball is rolling folks! :D

 

Was that Cope's left or right one ?

Be good to those who give you advice that helps - click the star to give them your thanks by way of a reputation credit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could just mention this is not only a breach of the rules but it may also I strongly expect be a breach of the Fraud Act 2006 which of course is a serious criminal offense. To demand money using false claims is without doubt a major plank of the Act

 

However no doubt this firm will argue a mistake & the CPS may well accept that argument - nevertheless if can be proven that even after being warned one assumes by disgruntled consumers that such demands had been sent yet they continued to do so that may be enough to make the CPS consider a criminal prosecution

Link to post
Share on other sites

The content of the letters sent out appears too specific to suggest an 'administrative error'. To allege judgment has been entered when it hasn't is one thing, but to specify repayment schedules supposedly determined by the court takes things to a much higher level of detail.

 

In each case the amounts are different, so it would be disingenuous in the least to suggest some kind of automated or even clerical/rogue error. IMHO they are bang to rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites

furthermore no court would make an award of monthly payments without first obtaining a list of income and expenditure from the defendant so there is no way on earth that a precise monthly repayment figure can have mistakenly been obtained by copes or cohens

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent point, diddydicky (haven't been called that myself since public school - where did you get that name?). Your analysis of the court process shows this up for the outrageous [problem] it is. I have a bad feeling that a knuckle-rap and an apology for an unfortunate admin error is all that will emerge from this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For reference, here is a copy of the letter they sent out (this one being to me).

 

I have seen others and the only difference is the specifics of the person involved - name and address, claim number and debt value etc.

 

COPES.pdf

 

My complaint to the SRA was based upon there being multiple examples of this letter, rather than specifically about my own letter, so hopefully it will act to highlight the true nature of Cope's tactics.

 

As the great Jim Royle would say, "Admin error my ****"

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...