Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks 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 concenquences 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?
    • 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?
    • "as I have no tools available to merge documents, unless you can suggest any free ones that will perform offline merges without watermarking" (which you don't) ... but ok please upload the documents and we'll go from there
    • Please go back and read my message posted at 10:27 this morning @jk2054. I didn't say that I wasn't going to provide documents, only that I will upload them to an online repo that I am in control of, and that I would share links to these. You shall still be able to read and download them no different from if they were hosted here. And, the issue I have is not so much with hosting, but using an online pdf editor to create a multi-page pdf, again I have discussed this that same message.
  • 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

Invalid Default Notices


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4981 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

  • Replies 5.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

On Saturday I received this letter from DG Solicitors threatening court action and placing a charge on my property. HSBC sent me an invalid DN and then terminated my contract and I accepted unlawful recission.

 

Please could someone advise what steps I should take next. I received a lot of help from Diddydicky and hope someone will be able to help further. Thank you

 

http://i450.photobucket.com/albums/qq223/sophiak_bucket/HSBCDGSOLICCOURTWARNING.jpg

 

Hi Frett

 

I do not think that DG are in fact a firm of solicitors. They are not listed by the Law Society and are not members of SRA.

 

Have a look at this;

 

http://www.ukbusiness.hsbc.com/public/ukbusiness/pdf/en/litigati.pdf

 

The letter you have received threatens proceedings on the basis of documentation and actions issued/made by HSBC which do not comply with CCA, the regulatory statute under which you agreed to buy their services. They have since breached their contract with you as well, which you have accepted. There is simply no lawful basis for any of the threats within the letter and so I would write to ask DG why it is that HSBC is exempt from s88 of the Act and why DG does not need to consider the contents of OFT664 (Debt Collection Guidance) and feels able to pre-judge the outcome of any court hearing.

 

It might also be amusing to ask for the names of the solicitors themselves at DG and, if they are provided, cross reference with the SRA's various tribunals. It's not acceptable to receive threats in this way from anyone other than someone qualified to make them.

 

HTH

LA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks LA, how you doing buddy.....long time no see. Your advice is appreciated as always and glad to see you again. Hope your doing well. Yes I will do what you have advised makes great sense and will be very helpful and useful for others who are in a similar situation.

 

I will pm you the latest with whats going on with my other things.

 

Take care

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had a look at my default notices - and actually think that they are prob ok (with regards to the web site link posted). However, could someone who knows what they are looking for have a look at let me know what they think. Many thanks - have posted the DN above.

 

MrA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Frett

 

I do not think that DG are in fact a firm of solicitors. They are not listed by the Law Society and are not members of SRA.

 

Hi Frettful, the description of the solicitors M.O. is printed at the bottom of your DN. Also, there are two named individuals printed there too.

 

Bill.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Frettful

 

I had very similar letters from various firms in the past - but they never followed up by the threatened action.

 

The most recent series of such threats lasted for over 2 years elapsed time - from a firm of solicitors called Spratt Endicott acting for RBS/Direct Line. They never took any further action - would not negotiate any F&F or affordable monthly payment.

 

Your letter does not say they WILL take the action threatened - it's probably just an empty threat if this is the first one you have had.

 

It's still with the in-house tame salaried "solictors" - so they are not yet at the stage of throwing real money at it and getting a "proper" firm of real solicitors to deal with it - may never get to that stage either if they think their chances of winning or getting paid quickly afterwards (in full) are not high.

 

Eventually my RBS case was handed over to another DCA and a 40% F&F agreed within a week of the new DCA taking over.

 

Hope this helps

 

BD

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Frettful, the description of the solicitors M.O. is printed at the bottom of your DN. Also, there are two named individuals printed there too.

 

Bill.

 

I have had a look at the bottom of my DN Bill but no sign of the two individuals that you mentioned?

 

http://i450.photobucket.com/albums/qq223/sophiak_bucket/barristers%20advice/downloads/HSBCDN1-1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Frettful, sorry, its not the DN. Its the sols letter.

 

Alan M.B. + Paul K.

 

The letter states that the "firm" is a "practicing name"

 

 

Bill

 

 

Thanks Bill I did see that just after I posted my last post. Very strange set of people hey?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had a look at the bottom of my DN Bill but no sign of the two individuals that you mentioned?

 

http://i450.photobucket.com/albums/qq223/sophiak_bucket/barristers%20advice/downloads/HSBCDN1-1.jpg

 

Just an obersevation: DN dtd Tue 19 May 2009 - 4 working days if UK Mail (as per Bickford Smith directive) = Fri 22 May 2009, then 14 clear days = 5th June 2009 effective 6 the June 2009 - minus 2 days if sent 1st class.

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

They've made the classic mistake of demanding the payment within 14 days of the date of the DN - ignoring any time delay required for postage.

 

Also does "BY" 2 June not mean the same as "before" 2 June and "on or before" 1 June?

 

BD

Edited by Bigdebtor
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also does "BY" 2 June not mean the same as "before" 2 June and "on or before" 1 June?

 

BD

 

2 june would mean the last clear day, effective day to have been 3 june (your default) (time you had to correct arrears was 2 june) according to them, but the date seems short if taken to the letter of DN regs?

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4981 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...