Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
  • 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
      • 160 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

UK Debt Sold & Transferred to Australia - Help Please !!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5273 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

OK Guys - A Tough One, and really Woried about this.

I had a debt ( Appx 15k)with MBNA in UK, and carried on making payments as per agreement, however when I fell on Harder times I had to reduce the payments, I advised MBNA, and they would not accept, but told me to keep paying what I could each Month.

A few months later, they write (Email & to my PO Box in Australia) advising that they would be selling the debt.

I CCA'd MBNA, and never got a response - I then sent them the usual Letter saying that they had timed out etc !! Still no response....until today !!

I got a letter from Charter Mercantile Agency in Queensland telling me I had to pay their Client - Link Financial AUD 30,000 within 7 days or a Solicitor will be contacted for further action.

I must stress that they only have my PO Box Number (which I gave to MBNA).

As you can imagine I am really concerened about this, and worry what may Happen.

I have heard all the stories about a UK debt not being Forceable over here, but if they have sold it to an overseas collection ageny what next !!

 

Any advice Guys - Please

Thanks

Nic

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would think any debt collection agency in the world is the same.

 

they have NO LEGAL POWERS!

 

ignore them.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Guys - A Tough One, and really Woried about this.

I had a debt ( Appx 15k)with MBNA in UK, and carried on making payments as per agreement, however when I fell on Harder times I had to reduce the payments, I advised MBNA, and they would not accept, but told me to keep paying what I could each Month.

A few months later, they write (Email & to my PO Box in Australia) advising that they would be selling the debt.

I CCA'd MBNA, and never got a response - I then sent them the usual Letter saying that they had timed out etc !! Still no response....until today !!

I got a letter from Charter Mercantile Agency in Queensland telling me I had to pay their Client - Link Financial AUD 30,000 within 7 days or a Solicitor will be contacted for further action.

I must stress that they only have my PO Box Number (which I gave to MBNA).

As you can imagine I am really concerened about this, and worry what may Happen.

I have heard all the stories about a UK debt not being Forceable over here, but if they have sold it to an overseas collection ageny what next !!

 

Any advice Guys - Please

Thanks

Nic

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't change anything.

 

A debt can be assigned to anybody - it can be assigned to an Australian Company.

 

If, however, they want to pursue it they have to issue proceedings in England and Wales and are no different to any other creditor

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

considering it concerns an Oz resident and an Oz DCA would that not mean that the jurisdicition would now be Oz but under English law?

 

Now that would be entertaining.

 

I'm not an expert in International Law but I'm pretty sure that as the contract was made in England and Wales and is governed by English Law that it would have to be litigated in England and Wales...

 

In fact I think that you'll find that English Law does not allow the case to be heard in Australia - see for example Regulation 9 of Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regs 1999

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

The agreement was taken out under UK law, irrespective of the nationality of the OP only a UK court can enforce the debt.

 

There are reciprical agreements which include debt collection within commonwealth countries, HOWEVER, there must be a CCJ applied to0 the debt at the time the debtor left the country.

 

Assuming that there was no such CCJ, then they haven't got a chance with this.

 

Since they also don't have any identifying information on you, other than a PO Box, it's not like they can follow up on their threats I wouldn't worry too much

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would have thought that there would need to be a clause in the contract stating that it was subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of E&W.

 

As far as I am aware you can be sued under English law anywhere in the world. International law is not my thing though so stand to be corrected.

 

UTCCR and UCTA - don't you need to show unfairness or detriment? If all the parties are in australia litigating in the UK would be unfair...

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would have thought that there would need to be a clause in the contract stating that it was subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of E&W.

 

As far as I am aware you can be sued under English law anywhere in the world. International law is not my thing though so stand to be corrected.

 

UTCCR and UCTA - don't you need to show unfairness or detriment? If all the parties are in australia litigating in the UK would be unfair...

 

I think you'd find that an Australian court would decline jurisdiction - Reg 9 of the Unfair Terms etc regs provides that "these regulations shall apply notwithstanding any contract term which applies or purports to apply the law of a non member state..."

 

It is a contract that was formed and performed under English Law - the correct forum has to England and Wales - in terms of UTCCR and UCTA - the issue of fairness relates to the contract term not the location of the court

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you would need to find out what legal arrangements there are between Commonwealth countries. I think this is one for a half hour consultation with a solicitor in Australia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but of course the utccr don't actually apply in Oz... the normal laws on jurisdiction would though.

 

See reg 4(2)b:

 

'These Regulations do not apply to contractual terms which reflect... the provisions or principles of international conventions to which the Member States or the Community are party'

 

I would also question how an oz company suing an oz resident in oz is 'contrary to the requirement of good faith [or] causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.'

 

there is also the issue of the effect of the utccr's - they mean that a term has no effect - so a clause saying you must be sued in a certain court, if unfair, would have no effect. If it has no effect then the consumer has the right to be sued in their own domicile.

 

Also, don't confuse law with jurisdiction - I think english law would apply but that this might be enforced by an oz court - law and jurisdiction are different things. Even if the regs were taken to apply, Reg 9 refers only to law, not jurisdiction. You also missed the end of the reg - 'These Regulations shall apply notwithstanding any contract term which applies or purports to apply the law of a non-Member State, if the contract has a close connection with the territory of the Member States.' With all the parties in Oz I think that it could be argued that the contract, whatever its initial form, now does not have a close connection to a member state, it has a closer connection to Oz; this is where the debt, consumer and creditor all went.

 

I still want to add the caveat that I might be wrong, I do know consumer law, but the issue here is the international dimension that I am unfamiliar with. I also know bugger all about oz law. So, I may be entirely wrong, but if I am I don't think it is because the utccr's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but of course the utccr don't actually apply in Oz... the normal laws on jurisdiction would though.

 

See reg 4(2)b:

 

'These Regulations do not apply to contractual terms which reflect... the provisions or principles of international conventions to which the Member States or the Community are party'

 

I would also question how an oz company suing an oz resident in oz is 'contrary to the requirement of good faith [or] causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.'

 

there is also the issue of the effect of the utccr's - they mean that a term has no effect - so a clause saying you must be sued in a certain court, if unfair, would have no effect. If it has no effect then the consumer has the right to be sued in their own domicile.

 

Also, don't confuse law with jurisdiction - I think english law would apply but that this might be enforced by an oz court - law and jurisdiction are different things. Even if the regs were taken to apply, Reg 9 refers only to law, not jurisdiction. You also missed the end of the reg - 'These Regulations shall apply notwithstanding any contract term which applies or purports to apply the law of a non-Member State, if the contract has a close connection with the territory of the Member States.' With all the parties in Oz I think that it could be argued that the contract, whatever its initial form, now does not have a close connection to a member state, it has a closer connection to Oz; this is where the debt, consumer and creditor all went.

 

I still want to add the caveat that I might be wrong, I do know consumer law, but the issue here is the international dimension that I am unfamiliar with. I also know bugger all about oz law. So, I may be entirely wrong, but if I am I don't think it is because the utccr's.

 

I think with respect that you are entirely wrong - I deliberately didn't finish the quote from reg 9 because it talks of the "contract" not the parties - the contract was formed and performed in Britain - it is, with respect, absurd to suggest that an Austrailan Court would determine a matter of English Law - it is unfortunately over 20 years since I studied conflict of Laws which is why I wouldn't purport to be an expert however the more that this discussion continues the more certain I become that the correct forum would be England and Wales. The essence of regulation 9 is that you can't put a clause in the contract which makes the law of a non EU state relevant where the contract concerned was made in the member state. Don't forget that it is Law that determines jurisdiction.

 

I am pretty sure that if the position were reversed that it was an Australian contract and the parties relocated to England & Wales that the English Courts would certainly not adjudicate on Australian law

Edited by I've got no money

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to all replies, sorry for triple posting - Dont know what happened there !!

 

Just to let you know that Debt was never taken to UK Court nor was a ccj issued in UK ! - As I said earlier I was paying the agreed monthly amounts for nearly 2 years from Oz.

 

I really appreciate all your replies, as it certainly helps share the problem !!

 

So What shhould I actually do - Nothing at all or respond saying that I do not recognise having account with Link Financial etc !! ??

 

Thanks Again Guys

Link to post
Share on other sites

The contract was and is subject to UK law, the CCA is a UK instrument and as such they cannot enforce such in a none UK legal system.

 

It is only if there is a pre existent CCJ that the debt can be enforced on foreign shores and even then, it's not the CCA that's being enforced, it's the CCJ.

 

NicoBlue they can do nothing to you, they can threaten and attempt enforcement but Oz courts would have no jurisdiction over this debt. As such I would be inclined to do nothing, it looks like a threatogram, until they start the process of taking you to court I would ignore them.

 

I don't know what consumer protection you have over there but if there is an organisation similar to CAB, then I would suggest for your own peace of mind and to gain a second opinion you should either contact them (if they exist), or as previously advised seek the advice of a well versed Oz attorney on the matter of jurisdiction. I would imagine it would be a fairly brief meeting :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The contract was and is subject to UK law, the CCA is a UK instrument and as such they cannot enforce such in a none UK legal system.

 

It is only if there is a pre existent CCJ that the debt can be enforced on foreign shores and even then, it's not the CCA that's being enforced, it's the CCJ.

 

NicoBlue they can do nothing to you, they can threaten and attempt enforcement but Oz courts would have no jurisdiction over this debt. As such I would be inclined to do nothing, it looks like a threatogram, until they start the process of taking you to court I would ignore them.

 

I don't know what consumer protection you have over there but if there is an organisation similar to CAB, then I would suggest for your own peace of mind and to gain a second opinion you should either contact them (if they exist), or as previously advised seek the advice of a well versed Oz attorney on the matter of jurisdiction. I would imagine it would be a fairly brief meeting :)

 

I thought a CCJ obtained in the UK was unenforcable in another country. From what I understand a debt can be assigned for collection but not enforced etc also the CCA if requested would have to be provided - thats the way I understood it. I will stand corrected if am wrong..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought a CCJ obtained in the UK was unenforcable in another country. From what I understand a debt can be assigned for collection but not enforced etc also the CCA if requested would have to be provided - thats the way I understood it. I will stand corrected if am wrong..

 

For Clarity - There has been no CCJ issued in the UK, I did request CCA as mentioned earlier on the 9th February to MBNA - No Response - I then sent Account in Dispute Letter on 9th April. No resonse Again !!

 

I didnt even recieve notification that Link Financial had Bought or had the debt assigned to Them.

 

Do I re send CCA to Charter Mercantile in Oz and advise that Account in Dispute, or should I just do Nothing !!

 

As I said I only have a POBox Number here.

 

Thanks Again Guys

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send a CCA to Charter Mercantile, if they want to collect an English debt they'll have to conform to English law, although they'll probably run a mile. :rolleyes:

 

I'd agree with that totally

If I've helped feel free to add to my reputation.

 

I am not a Practising Lawyer. My comments are my opinion only. You should not rely upon those comments and should always take your own professional advice from a practising Solicitor or Barrister

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is, with respect, absurd to suggest that an Austrailan Court would determine a matter of English Law

I'm sorry, I have to disagree. Whilst it is probably unlikely in a consumer case, jurisdiction and law are different. One jurisdiction can apply yet another choice of law might. Look at the lockerbie trial for example, a swiss court heard the case under scots law. This happens all the time in tort where you are looking at the assessment of damages. It is quite prevalent in insurance, shipping and arbitration.

I'd also look to these cases which indicate that a court English court might refuse to here a claim when all the parties are based in Oz (note - jurisdiction cases generally, not specifically consumer related):

Ace v Zurich 2001

Du Pont v Agnew 1987

Piper Aircraft Co v Reyno 1981

Then you have Shashoua v Sharma where an english court had jurisdiction but the relvant law was indian (arbitration case).

Whilst not strictly relevant to this debate, there is also the rome convention which allows for 'a contract to which this Article applies shall... be governed by the law of the country in which the consumer has his habitual residence...'

So... my opinion remains:

English law applies

The consumer could be sued in Oz under English law

Due to the costs and complexities, this is extremely unlikely, although possible

Because all the parties are bases in Oz an English court might decline jurisdiction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You might like to take a look at this :

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/134645-being-chased-australia.html

 

 

and also consider Q168 of this Holy document

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldeucom/118/118.pdf

 

before deciding what line to take on this.

 

The document is for EU consumption - but in the case of an unsecured credit contract signed under CCA'74, an Aussie colleague reliably informs me that they "have more chance of being pé&sèd on by the Pope".......

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That thread has been chopped about a bit because if I remember rightly it was hijacked by a troll and had to be edited....but I think there's still plenty of info to be chewed over.

Edited by dannyboy660
spelling and grammar comparative to a 2 year old

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Guys - A little more info on above Message - I actually contacted Consumer Credit Bureau (In Australia)and asked them about Transfer of a disputed & Unsecurred UK debt to Australia - Their response quite Alarming ??

 

Basically they told me YES the purchasers of the debt can Globally Chase it, however in Australia - Action has to be taken in the State that you reside !

 

Alternatively the Purchasers of the debt (presumably UK based) can get a Judgement in the UK and have it Transferred for Action in Australia and YES this could be enforced in the state you reside in.

 

Furthermore, if you have a PO Box, the court can issue a "substitution oder ??" - I have no clue what they meant by this - and once issued you have you then declare your full address details to the court for hearing. !!

 

I asked - How can they do this if the account is in dispute - surely they have to provide any such credit agreement or assignment notce - which both I have never recieved (After sending CCA request to MBNA - with No response at all !!

 

Response - well they have bought the debt for approx 15 cents in the dollar - call them and negotiate a settlement or payment plan before it goes to court !!

 

Confused to say the least !!

 

It would appear Link Financial have purchased and just appointed a Collection agent in Queensland to Chase up !!

 

Any Thoughts

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...