Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. 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 simply contracted by the landowner 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. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Old CCJ (1998) still valid + adding interest


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4154 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

From what I've read CCJ are on record for 6 years.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

First National Bank - CCJ (dated 30.09.1998) = £1300.44 + Costs £163.50 = Total 1463.94

by installments of £6.78, Needless to say I'm still paying it (rounded up to £7.00)

-

I've cleared all other creditors over the years mostly by Full & Final settlements, but First National Bank were the only one to take out the dreaded CCJ.

- T

Cannot remember - but it has been with a few collection agencies in the past but now with Link Financial.

 

Recent communication with Link Financial to find out exactly what amount I owe - they commented that contractual interest has been added. :(

 

When I talk about the CCJ and it states in the 'TAKE NOTICE' that *"if judgment is for more than £5000. the plaintiff may be entitled to interest"

 

and that interest should not be added - they say that the CCJ only last for six years.

 

Question:

 

Are they right and the CCJ doesn't count anymore because it's over 6 years old?

 

I've still got a lot of payments to go - I still reckon I owe over £550 (without interest)

 

Dave

ps: I have a reasonable good relationship with Link Financial - they are going to send me a statement hopefully showing when and how much the interest is - they did say that the interest has only been added for the term of the original loan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

unless the ccj specifically states interest can be added, then whoever has added it, is doing this unlawfully.

 

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

Thanks - when I get the statement adn can see exactly what they've charged, i'll querie it.

 

But are they right and the CCJ's doesn't count anymore when they are over 6 years old?

Does this mean that the Judgement is not in force?

or

Does the judgement stay enforced until the whole debt is paid - no matter how long it takes?

I'm looking to make them a full & final offer of around 60% - but first I have to establish the amount I owe, and can I do this with a CCJ still in place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No the CCJ will still be valid for as long as you continue to pay (it will drop off your credit files after 6 years).....If you haven't made a payment towards a debt that has got a CCJ on it in 6 years then although it doesn't technically become statute barred, the creditor has to take it to court to get it enforced again...but I haven't seen this ever before...as the emphasis moves to the creditor to state why it hadn't been enforced....

 

As for a full and final, then they don't have to come to a deal (and probably won't) as they don't need to as it is a judgment debt.

 

Do you still have the judgment details ? if not then you can find them here - CCJs, court orders & fines - Search yourself and others - Trust Online

Link to post
Share on other sites

dave n

 

i may well be way of beam but it is still possible to establish if the creditor has an enforceable loan agreement against you.

i have been in a similiar situation to your good self and followed the road of challenging our agreements that had ccj registered against us from 1992/3 we are now in the position of challenging each of these agreements as the original creditors/dca's have been unable to produce the important agreements. one of which has a chargeing order and whilst they have wriggled and threatened the usual reprocussions but all without exception are slowly capitulating.

if however you are in a position to be able to clear this debt by ff payment it is possibly to your advantage to proceed on this course. if not the decision is yours.

 

good luck

 

djc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks All

I’ll wait for the statement (may take a few weeks) to see what interest their adding and determine whether or not they have the right to do so.

Dave:

Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd - Settled (£625) of (£1420) Full & Final

Unidept - Settled (£600 of (£1155) Full & Final

NCO - Settled (£3000 of (£7264) Full & Final

Icor - Settled (£70.00 of (£102.50) Full & Final

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received statement today: Sent me a copy of my signed agreement as well: to my amazement they show interest taking the debt up to £5157.44 saying the settlement figure May 2009 is £945.57 bearing in mind that the without interest I’ve worked it out I owe £576.00

Just recap CCJ was in Oct 1998 for £1457.16 been paying £7.00 pre CM

Payments from Oct 89 until Apr 01 show NO INTEREST?

Then in April 2001 they lumped £599.98 in interest and been charging interest on a monthly basis ever since?

In the agreement they refer to the following clause?

9) © part that says “Shall bear interest at the rate stated in paragraph D overleaf (subject to variation) until payment after as well as before any judgement (Such obligation to be independent of and not to merge with the judgement)”

Any idea’s where I stand?

Dave:

Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd - Settled (£625) of (£1420) Full & Final

Unidept - Settled (£600 of (£1155) Full & Final

NCO - Settled (£3000 of (£7264) Full & Final

Icor - Settled (£70.00 of (£102.50) Full & Final

Link to post
Share on other sites

First National Bank (FNB) – Link Financial

 

 

Just recap CCJ was in Oct 1998 for £1457.16 been paying £7.00 pre CM

 

 

 

Thought I would find out where I stand with them and requested a statement on the account.

 

Received statement today I requested on my FNB Sent me a copy of my signed agreement as well: to my amazement they show interest taking the debt up to £5157.44 saying the settlement figure May 2009 is £945.57 bearing in mind that the without interest I’ve worked it out I owe £576.00

 

Payments from Oct 1989 until Apr 2001 show NO INTEREST?

Then in April 2001 they lumped £599.98 in interest and been charging interest on a monthly basis ever since?

 

In the agreement they refer to the following clause?

9) © part that says “Shall bear interest at the rate stated in paragraph D overleaf (subject to variation) until payment after as well as before any judgement (Such obligation to be independent of and not to merge with the judgement)”

 

Any idea’s where I stand?

 

Do you reckon they will still accept a Full and Final any ideas what percentage I should try for from what figure?

 

Dave:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am almost sure that this is not allowed. The amount on the CCJ is the only amount you have to pay to satisfy the CCJ, and once this is done and you have receipts for that amount I would contact the Court and ask for a Note of Satisfaction. Once you have that they can go whistle for any illegal amounts they have added.

 

I would suggest that this also needs reporting to OFT and the Courts' own complaints procedure.

 

Hope this is right, but others will have more help hopefully.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That clause is allowing them to charge interest after judgement.

I am not an expert but reading that, it tells me that the interest charged is legal and seperate from the judgement, ie, after the judgement is satisfied, the interest accrued is a seperate debt altogether which they may chase you for through the courts again if they wish.

I hope I am wrong but....

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

That clause is allowing them to charge interest after judgement.

I am not an expert but reading that, it tells me that the interest charged is legal and seperate from the judgement, ie, after the judgement is satisfied, the interest accrued is a seperate debt altogether which they may chase you for through the courts again if they wish.

I hope I am wrong but....

 

I think your right - they can charge the interest due to their clause

Bit that baffles me is on their statement looks like they weren’t charging any interest from the start of the judgement Oct 1998 –

Then in April 2001 they lumped £599.98 in interest the start of the interest ever since?

 

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be worthwhile 'phoning the court manager and getting their opinion. I was under the impression that once a CCJ had been obtained that in effect cancelled and re-wrote any previous agreement, and unless the judge expressly stated in the order that interest could be charged they are not able to add it or any other charges for that matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i was under that impression to

 

they can put whatever they like in an agreement

does not make it legal

 

a ccj means an account has been terminated

 

grey area this

 

In the agreement they refer to the following clause?

 

© part that says “Shall bear interest at the rate stated in paragraph D overleaf (subject to variation) until payment after as well as before any judgement (Such obligation to be independent of and not to merge with the judgement)”

 

I think putting the above clause in the agreement allows them to add the interest

 

Found this it relates to my situation: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/audio_video/programmes/inside_money/transcripts/credit1.txt

Seems they can unless things have changed since then –

 

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

1. CCJ– Sept 1998 (£16.00 PER MONTH)

 

Credit Agreement signed 23/01/1996

 

2. CCJ– Sept 1998 (£8.00 PER MONTH)

 

Credit Agreement signed 28/07/1996

 

Conditions:

 

9c: FNB shall give notice to the Customer of any costs charges orexpenses incurred or claimed under sub clauses (A) and (B) above which, unlesspaid by the customer by the date specified in the notice shall bear interest atthe rate stated in paragraph D overleaf (subject to variation) until paymentafter as well as before any judgement (such obligation to be independent of andnot to merge with the judgement).

 

It appears from what I can gather from Link Financial whonow own the debt have purchased the debts including the Contractual Interestfrom GE Money.

 

As far as I am concerned I’m paying back the CCJ’s at therate set by the courts, I am now found myself in position the pay the CCJ’s

 

· 1 = £666.00

 

· 2 = £457.00

 

· Total = £1123.00 (full and final offer)

 

The problem I am now finding is when I phone Link they just have the one settlement figure including the Interest.

 

9c conditions indicate that the Interest cannot merge with the Judgment.

 

I have a reasonable relationship with Link Financial and don’t really what to start anything official which is likely to rub them up the wrong way.

 

· Is it possible/Legal for Link Financial to have purchased my debt including the interest?

· Should I go back to GE Money to ask what is going on?

 

 

Link Financial doesn’t seem to recognise that the CCJ has to be paid first and once paid then they have to take me to Court Again for the Contractual Interest.

They just have the one figure including interest

 

This is what I am trying to avoid.

 

 

Anybody with any idea’s

Link to post
Share on other sites

Conditions:

 

9c: FNB shall give notice to the Customer of any costs charges orexpenses incurred or claimed under sub clauses (A) and (B) above which, unlesspaid by the customer by the date specified in the notice shall bear interest atthe rate stated in paragraph D overleaf (subject to variation) until payment after as well as before any judgement (such obligation to be independent of andnot to merge with the judgement).

 

 

This condition in the original Credit agreement I signed -is in which they are claiming interest on is Legal believe it or not, andwithout paying just the CCJ and calling their bluff and then they will still registerthe non-payment in my credit file for ever.

But has they only have the one figure (the one withinterest) it makes it hard to negotiate an settlement.

 

I have offered the CCJ’s amount in FULL & FINAL +another £100.00 admin fee as an extra sweetener

 

But they say they would only settle on:

 

£16.00 a month - £1713.80

 

£8.00 a month - £1028.80

 

Total = £2742.60 where the CCJ’s add up to £1123.00.

 

This is the stage I’m at now –

 

But need to know - How they have managed purchased my DEBT from GEMoney including the interest, which in theory doesn’t come into play until Ifinish the CCJ.

 

Edited by Dave_N
Link to post
Share on other sites

as stated unless the interest link claim is specifically stated in the judgement boxes, they cannot charge it.

 

link will try all kinds of trick to fleece people.

 

p'haps sar the OC work it out?

 

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

It doesn't matter what conditions there were in the original agreement, the CCJ supesedes it; the legal definition of supersedes = obliterate, replace, make void, or useless.

 

Unless your CCJ specifically states that interest can be added then non can be nor can they rely on the original credit agreement.

 

Did the CCJ stipulate what the repayment per month should be?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But need to know - How they have managed purchased my DEBT from GEMoney including the interest, which in theory doesn’t come into play until Ifinish the CCJ
They can legally purchase the CCJ but not the original CCA because it doesn't exist any more ergo they cannot add interest subject to its terms and conditions nor would they be successful in any future legal claim for interest as per its T&Cs.
Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the best way to paythe CCJ figure off - as the Link Financial don’t recognise this is beingseparate and separate figure - can I pay it back via the courts?

Ihave asked them to confirm the CCJ balance they have just to confirm we areboth singing from the same hymn sheet. also they are requesting copies of the credit agreements - so they can see that they cannot merge the interest with the judgment.

Iknow it’s all about negotiation – just wish they would take the money and callit quits.

I an always put the money aside in a savings account and set a standingorder from that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...