Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Unenforceability Cases on hold until further notice


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5298 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 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Absolutely , there is already sufficient established case law that sets the ground work out clearly

 

the problem is that the agreements we see, they contain all manner of different combinations of errors, for most of them, there is established case law to show the law on misstated prescribed terms etc, so i fear that staying all claims will only serve to help the creditors who will be left with the ability to expect repayment of loans while the debtor is left with no recourse

 

Forgive the ignorance of a novice, Pt, but could people lodge a claim against their creditor on the grounds of unenforceability, even whilst claims are stayed, in order to suspend loan repayments? :confused:

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged post
Link to post
Share on other sites

'PPI and Unenforceability Claims'

 

The letter from 'ultimate law' does seem a little suspect, but then again I am no expert.

It certainly rings as though its written in favour of those collecting debts and intended to deter those paying from taking any legal action, but as I said I am no expert.

But very interested as I am currently going through lega proceedings with RBS.

P.

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged post
Link to post
Share on other sites

subbing

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged posts

Im happy to help with support and my own opinions but as i have no legal qualifications If I offer any thoughts to your problems please take it as from my life experience only and not of any legal standing. Always take further advice from the legal experts in your final action,

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just been told about this apparently they are one of the "duff" variety of claims management companies that have sprung up and I am told it only applies to their claims for their clients, I have been given the impression that the solicitors in question are perhaps not as good as some at making claims.....

 

This comes to me from one of the big claims management firms who are rubbing their hands at another copycat company going out of business, or certainly out of their business arena.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just been told about this apparently they are one of the "duff" variety of claims management companies that have sprung up and I am told it only applies to their claims for their clients, I have been given the impression that the solicitors in question are perhaps not as good as some at making claims.....

 

This comes to me from one of the big claims management firms who are rubbing their hands at another copycat company going out of business, or certainly out of their business arena.

 

 

Daniella from Ultimate law seems to be a busy girl with an agenda see this

 

**EDITED**

 

I understand she used to work for another claims company and set off on her own a short time ago with big ideas and an over inflated ego and has now been found out.

Ooops

Edited by car2403
commercial links
Link to post
Share on other sites

Court has confirmed the letter is genuine

Edited by citizenB
title amended on merged posts

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is only in relation to any claims that they are handling. A Judge has placed a 'Stay' on THEIR client cases only. This will be down to that particular company's lititgation tactics.

 

It does not mean that all cases are on hold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it just goes to prove you are better dealing with it yourself rather than use one of these companies!!

A banker is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining and wants it back the minute it begins to rain.

- This quote has been attributed to Mark Twain

Link to post
Share on other sites

feels like the 'bank charges' fiasco all over again ...

 

test case .... no refund or write off .... debtors still obliged to pay .... 2 years down the line ....

Edited by tifo
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting that its Chester and MBNA area....

 

I was recently talking to someone about claims and saying I was putting mine in and she told me her friend works for MBNA and they have been told that no-one has had a successful claim with MBNA.....

 

Funny that! Not what I've heard form actual people making claims

 

Seems to be a bit of internal PR going on too!

 

Are MBNA worried?

 

Should be from me, they have admitted no agreement available on one account, yet are still chasing me and "threatening" my house!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the first part of the fight back we all knew would come but I did not expect them to have the courts in their pockets

courts in their pockets?

 

come on, this is nonsense, ive just spoken to Chester High Court, yes there is to be a stay in place on CCA claims, the stay as far as i understand it will stop the lenders as well as the debtors, so it is balanced unlike the bank charges issue.

 

the injunctive relief claims can still proceed as can claims such as the likes of Next Directory and any other lender who confirms they do not have an agreement or that you never signed an agreement. there is going to be further guidance given shortly so its not all doom and gloom

Link to post
Share on other sites

Far to many of the claims firms have been set up!

 

I note that Ms. Lipszyc also set up a company called;

the financial claims service.

 

PPI claims etc, have become a revenue stream for law firms.

 

AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just rang chester court spoke to listings and was told there was no stay. All cases are currently awaiting allocation and the judge dealing with it all is off for a week

yes i understand it is to be put in place not that its already in,

 

as far as the court manager said, they understand that cases are already being transfered to HHJ Halbert from other district registries but no stay is in place on those claims as yet

 

the info coming out of chester is sketchy at best

Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll stay the lot, so they can complete this:

 

The Consumer Credit Act 2009

 

The 1974 Act is now scrapped, as is our last largely unsuccessful 2006 attempt to neuter the awkward 1974 Act.

 

s1

 

(1) Banks are now above the law and cannot be held accountable for their actions.

 

(2) Anything a banker says is deemed to be accurate and must be believed.

 

(3) No Agreements necessary, a copy of absolutely anything will do and will be enforced by the Court.

 

(4) Default Notices are no longer required, all previous Default Notices are deemed to be valid.

 

s2

 

(1) Consumers have no rights and are in the wrong by default.

 

(2) Anything a Consumer says can be wholly disregarded.

 

s3

 

(1) Banks can end any Agreement at any time, without giving notice.

 

(2) Banks can vary any Agreement at any time, just by thinking about what they want the most.

 

s4

 

(1) Banks cannot be guilty of Harassment.

 

(2) Section (1) also applies to their Agents.

 

s5

 

(1) Pay up.

 

(2) Interest of 25% applies to (1) from any date a bank feels is most lucrative.

 

Notes:

 

Applies retrospectively to all debts from 1066 onwards.

The alarming thing is...some of this appears to be happening already, at least from the way some Judges now behave.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes i understand it is to be put in place not that its already in,

 

as far as the court manager said, they understand that cases are already being transfered to HHJ Halbert from other district registries but no stay is in place on those claims as yet

 

the info coming out of chester is sketchy at best

 

pt I have received this morning an order relating to a case MBNA are bringing against me asking for disclosure etc and it is dated 6th May,after the announcement of the alleged stay

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5298 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...