Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • lookinforinfo
      MET CCTV PCN Starbucks closed - Southgate Park CM24 1PY

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      You will probably get a couple more reminders followed by further demands fro unregulated debt collectors with even increasing amounts to pay. They are all designed to scare you into paying.  Don't. It's a scam site and they do not know who was driving and they know the keeper is not liable to pay the PCN. Also the shop was closed so they have no legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear. So to charge £100 is a penalty as there is no legitimate interest which means that the case would be thrown out if it went to Court.  Keep your money in your wallet and be prepared to ignore all their letters and threats. Doubtful they would go to Court since a lot more people would not pay when they heard  MET lost in Court. However they may just send you a Letter of Claim to test your resolve.  If yoy get one of those, come back to us and we will advise a snotty letter to send them.  You probably already have, but take a look through some of our past Met PCNs to see how they are doing.
    • Jaksmyboy
      IVA failure-DCA chasing-advice please

      By Jaksmyboy · Posted

      Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
    • Malocclusion
      MET CCTV PCN Starbucks closed - Southgate Park CM24 1PY

      By Malocclusion · Posted

      hi all just got the reminder letter, I have attached it and also the 2nd side of the original 1st pcn (i just saw the edit above) Look forward to your advice Thanks   PCN final reminder.pdf pcn original side 2.pdf
    • NewsBot
      Singapore air offers to pay turbulence victims

      By NewsBot · Posted

      The airline said it was offering to pay $10,000 to those who sustained minor injuries.View the full article
    • NewsBot
      BMW China parts probe expanded by US Senate panel

      By NewsBot · Posted

      The Senate Finance Committee wants answers from BMW over its use of banned Chinese components by 21 June.View the full article

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

SB100 v HFC - is this default compliant? Court/Restons ***WON***

SB100

By SB100
in Financial Legal Issues

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5115 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 611
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

diddydicky

diddydicky

Posted
Posted

 

With respect sir, the purpose of my defence is to establish that the claimant has no grounds to legally enforce the agreement in question.

 

If the court were minded to make a decision based on a moral basis rather than a legal one then I would be obliged if the court would outline in full its reasons for coming to such a conclusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SB100

SB100

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well that didn't go quite as I hoped, or expected.

 

Restons sent a Barrister to represent- for their SJ I'm guessing. She turned up with a skeleton argument, and a long printout of Rankine.

 

The Judge was a very nice chap, and dealt first with Restons application for SJ that they tried to file last week in the hope that it could be heard today. He refused to hear their application and said they should have known better.

 

He told them if they wanted to re-apply for it to be heard, they needed to do so before the end of October, but warned that their are issues with the default.

 

They also had a witness statement from HFC stating that the default was sent out by 1st class, as was ordinary practice. I have proof it was sent by UK Mail.

 

He then turned to my application. He said he couldn't strike out on the grounds I'd asked for. The bulk system didn't allow for attachments, and although they should have sent them straight to me, they did so as a result of my CPR so I had them reasonably quickly anyway. They made a massive application for costs. The judge asked me what my costs had been- I replied 'minimal', he thanked me for my honesty, then told them he considered the majority of their cost was as a result of their application so I shouldn't have to pay. He told me I'd have to pay a sum of roughly 1/3 of what they'd asked for, but not until after trial.

 

He then went on to set dates for disclosure, exchange etc. Its been allocated to fast track, which concerns me, with the cost implications.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SB100

SB100

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Sorry, hit return by accident.

 

When we left the court the barrister asked if I'd consider settling. I said I didn't have much, and did she know the witness statement made about the first class post was rubbish, and I could prove it. She said she didn't and I should let Restons have the evidence. I think she was then trying to get me to admit liability but I changed the subject each time.

 

To say I'm feeling deflated is an understatement. I suspect if I'd made the SO application on the back of the default rather than the POC I'd have had a different outcome.

 

:(

Link to post
Share on other sites
supasnooper

supasnooper

Posted
Posted

Well....you live to fight another day.

 

Restons didn't get their SJ which is good news.

 

I would also take heart from the fact that the Judge has let Restons know that the Default Notice is defective.

 

Restons now have an insight that the Judge is on the button regarding Consumer Law.

You've also fired a warning shot to their barrister that you have proof of postage...............and it ain't what they've told the Judge :eek:

 

As to the case going to the Fast track, this ensures that you will get a District Judge to hear the case.

He\She will have a good knowledge of the Consumer Credit Act and the Statutes.............and not a part-time stand-in Deputy District Judge who has specialised in Family Law

 

Restons being Restons, will drag this out trying to spook you into submission.........don't let them wear you down, as you hold the aces !!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
the_shadow

the_shadow

Posted
Posted
Sorry, hit return by accident.

 

When we left the court the barrister asked if I'd consider settling. I said I didn't have much, and did she know the witness statement made about the first class post was rubbish, and I could prove it. She said she didn't and I should let Restons have the evidence. I think she was then trying to get me to admit liability but I changed the subject each time.

 

To say I'm feeling deflated is an understatement. I suspect if I'd made the SO application on the back of the default rather than the POC I'd have had a different outcome.

 

:(

 

Hi SB, sorry it didnt go to plan but remember it didnt go Restons way either :-) you live to fight another day and the helpful judge has confirmed there is an issue with the default and the judge is clued up.

 

As to which reason to request SO for, its all done blindly, some judges I've read details of on here wouldnt have accepted the default argument and some would, its a lottery at the end of the day I'm afraid :-D

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SB100

SB100

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I know you're right SS, but tbh it doesn't feel like that at the moment.

 

I was hoping I'd be able to bring my last witness statement in to play, but didn't seem to be able to as it was in response to their application and not in support of my application.

 

I also mentioned to the barrister, out of court, about the robcag letter... not sure if I should have, but its done now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SB100

SB100

Posted
  • Author
Posted

He blocked them as they'd tried to rush the application, but insinuated that they wouldn't have got it anyway because of the DN. He stressed that he wasn't making a judgement on the validity, but that they should think carefully before re-applying for SJ.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AndyOrch

AndyOrch

Posted
Posted

Absolutley they wont try for SJ again, and now have to go to full trial with the knowledge of why.Well done SB100!!!

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
robcag

robcag

Posted
Posted

Hi SB

 

It sounds to me like you got a reasonable result, from the few threads I've read where people have mentioned going for a SO it doesn't seem happen very often.

 

As others have pointed out, the Judge didn't look too favourably on Restons either, even if he did mention the costs element.

 

I think it's easier for people on the outside looking in to see the implications of such a hearing (at least it was in my case). I came away thinking the result could have been better, but although others agreed to some extent, they also pointed out angles that I hadn't seen.

 

I wouldn't worry about the case being allocated to fast track, as you have an excellent chance of winning, just make sure your costs are not 'minimal' next time! When (not if!) Restons finally do throw in the towel, make sure you claim for every last sheet of paper!

 

Did you ever see this post by fairbyblue, where Restons had to cough up after discontinuing due to yet another defective DN?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/214452-mbna-now-served-3rd-2.html#post2365891

 

 

cheque.jpg

 

That's what the sweet smell of success looks like (not sure if that sounds right!)

 

Cheers

Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites
underdog13

underdog13

Posted
Posted

Sorry you feel a bit deflated SB, but take heart, it could have been a lot worse! The judge was fair, seems clued up and perhaps was giving you a nudge in the right direction by mentioning the issues with the DN. Has the same judge reserved your case for the next hearing?

 

If Restons are soooo confident of their case, why are they so desperate to settle? Couldn't possibly be because you can prove that they (allegedly :rolleyes:) deliberately mislead the court over the postage of the DN could it?:D

 

Put your feet up for the evening, have a glass or three of your favourite tipple and wait for Restons to cave;)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
citizenB

citizenB

Posted
Posted

Well done SB. I agree with the others. You did well and came away with a good result.

 

:D

  • Haha 1

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
fairbyblue

fairbyblue

Posted
Posted

The fight goes on. Restons are trying their hand. Keep going I waivered but due to the people on here i carried on and won (See cheque above which i converted into lager) Ups and downs. They wanted to get SJ and didnt. So therfore you one up and the game is on. !!!!!!!!!!:D

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...