Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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

London Underground


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4449 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

Its probably because court time is limited & in short supply & that they would rather put the more serious cases through.

 

Yes, SRPO does make a very valid and important point here

 

There is a fine line to be run in 'managing' Court time and whilst it may be desireable to prosecute all offenders, the Courts and the TOCs certainly have many more cases than there is time to hear.

 

I suggest that is very much a sad reflection of the high level of offending, but does mean those cases deemed less serious are likely to escape prosecution where an alternative disposal may be achieved.

 

Some may see that as resulting in a 'justice lottery', but I'm afraid it is a sign of our times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Replies 533
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 3 weeks later...

Is this a general question?

 

There are a number of different ones dependent on where a traveller is reported.

 

In general terms it may be TfL's own prosecution team or London Underground,

 

It might be one of several TOC's operating services in the LUL area such as SE Trains, FCC, NEX E Anglia, Chiltern Railways, LOROL or,

 

The DLR prosecution team etc,

 

If you have been reported, whatever you do, you must write to the specific team who have written to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a general question?

 

There are a number of different ones dependent on where a traveller is reported.

 

In general terms it may be TfL's own prosecution team or London Underground,

 

It might be one of several TOC's operating services in the LUL area such as SE Trains, FCC, NEX E Anglia, Chiltern Railways, LOROL or,

 

The DLR prosecution team etc,

 

If you have been reported, whatever you do, you must write to the specific team who have written to you.

 

Sorry, I mean London Underground prosecution team. However, I can't find it out on tfl's website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would really appreciate someone's help.

 

My circumstances are that I accidently used my fathers freedom pass whilst on my way to work. It was a genuine mistake as my father had worn my overcoat a few days prior and had left his pass in my pocket (it was in a little blue LU wallet-just like mine). When I pulled it out of my pocket and used it on the machine an inspector stopped me and starting questioning me as to used oyester card it was, inevitably I said it was mine. He responded to me "no its not" and asked me my employee number. At this point I was feeling very intimidated and confused as to what was going on. I replied that i didnt know what he was talking about, he then took the card out of the wallet and I realised by the colour that it was not my card.

 

The inspector proceeded to take down my details and caution me and confiscated the card. Despite my profuse aplogies that there had been a huge mistake. I was late for work and I had to go but i later went back on my lunch break to try and explain what had happened but the guy said that it was already in the system and i would be recieving a letter in the post.

 

I like everyone else work in an industry where I believe a criminal conviction would be detrimental to my future. I have a clean record and I think I only used it once or twice (I believe this happened on a tuesday so there is a chance i had the card on the monday too).

 

I have received a letter from LU stating the same as MikeS1000 above.

 

What can I do or say?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I mean London Underground prosecution team. However, I can't find it out on tfl's website.

 

I'm in work tomorrow, I'll find out for you.

 

Someone may come along before that though!

 

Regards

UNDERGROUND :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for not being around lately, had some on-going computing problems, and been busy!

 

Anyway.......

 

 

locotoro

 

A few questions:

 

- Was your journey entirely on London Underground?

 

- Do you have proof that you held another valid ticket or Oyster card

for the journey you made? Is so, what was it?

 

- Did your father not realise his Pass was missing for two days?

 

UNDERGROUND :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Thanks for the responses

 

- The inspector asked me what my employee number? (I had no idea at the time) but I now understand that by saying that the oyster card was mine he must have assumed that I worked for London Transport. My father later taold me that all London Transport personnel have a employee number that they memorise. Obviously I didnt have a clue what he was talking about?

 

I was travelling from Seven Sisters to Harrow. But I did have my own oyster card.

 

My dad works on the buses and drives to his garage so I guess he doesnt use it unless someone can shed some more information as to whether he would need it to use it to sign in?? He made no mention of his card being missing to me.

 

I have just drafted a very apologetic letter to the prosecutions department and told them i would be willing to pay any charge or fine. I am so worried that i may get a criminal record over this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One other thing is that the incident happened in mid March. and I have only recieved the first letter from London transport. Is there a chance that this could drag on beyond a six month window which would be in approximately one months time??

 

or am i clutching at straws :S

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, you are talking about a Bus Operators pass, the purple coloured card?

 

I must say that it is quite possible your father will have his Pass withdrawn permanently. LT Staff Travel take the misuse of TfL employee passes very seriously.

 

What ticket or Oyster card did you hold that was valid on the day of travel?

 

UNDERGROUND :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry, thats what I meant. Employee pass. It is the purple one thats how i realised it wasnt mine when the inspector took it out of the plastic wallet.

 

The issue of the pass being permanently withdrawn isnt really an issue as my father has since left.

 

I have my own normal payg oyster card but i dont think i had it that day. i thought i had my own but i obviously had my dads

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be honest here, I don't think you've got a leg to stand on should this come to prosecution.

 

It is your responsibility to ensure that you have a valid ticket or Oyster card for your journey, and the excuse that you managed to use your fathers pass by mistake is unlikely to wash when it comes to the 'balance of probabilities' in a courtroom. Especially the story that you and your father share a coat.

 

I realise that this is not what you want to hear.

 

All I can suggest is that you write to the LU prosecutions manager and plead your case.

 

UNDERGROUND :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your honesty underground.

 

I have written to the prosecutions manager and explained to him (in a very apologetic way) that this was a completely innocent mistake.

 

For the record we dont share a coat, my dad just uses my coat on the odd occassion. Still Not sure it makes much of a difference.

 

I will await a response from them with fingers crossed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Civil law uses the balance of probabilities, criminal law is proof beyond reasonable doubt which is a higher standard of proof.

 

If you are prosecuted under Sec 5(3) of the Regulation Of Railways Act they will have to prove it was your intent to avoid payment.

If they prosecute under the byelaws they only need to prove you were there & you didnt have a valid ticket.

 

Quite, SRPO - Thank you ;)

 

UNDERGROUND :D

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also in similar position to locotoro. I've written a letter to settle out of court. However, I hadn't decided on my plea yet and only have a couple of days to send it off. I haven't received a reply from london underground. Is it worth ringing up the magistrates court to ask for an adjournment given that there's been a postal strike?

 

B

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can ask.

 

It's always worth trying to settle out of Court although the rail company is not obliged to agree to any offer and it may just delay the resuilt that would have been arrived at in any case.

 

On the other hand, you may get the opportunity to pay an administrative penalty and save the likelihood of being ordered to pay a fine & costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4449 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...