Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • An update:  Letter dated 17th May 2022   Reference:  Parking Charge Notice - xxxx   Dear Sir/Madam   We are writing in relation to the Parking Charge incurred on 4 August 2020 at 15.08 at Asda Clapham car park.     We would like to confirm that this charge has now been cancelled and there is no outstanding payment due.   Yours faithfully   Parkingeye Team   So it worked your letter from Zimbabwe - see below:   TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN   DCBL REFERENCE NO.  INCIDENT DATE:  4th August 2020 PARKING CHARGE NOTICE NO:  VEHICLE REGISTRATION xxxxxxxx   Please note the car with Registration xxxxxxx was scrapped  and taken off the road in August 2020 when I left the country.   My brother rented the flat:  xxxxx, Battersea, London xxxxx for 2020 but has since moved to a new address.  The address you have used in Battersea, is not my address and no family member lives at that address.  It has been tenanted to someone I do not know.  Please only contact me at my Zimbabwe address, where I have been living for the last two years.   It has taken 3 months for me to receive a Final Reminder from DCLB due to the fact they sent the Final Reminder to the wrong address.   I have written to the CEO of ASDA explaining that I forgot to collect my free parking ticket whilst shopping at ASDA and that I am a loyal customer.     I do not intend to pay your charge as you are already charging over the new code of practice issued by parliament, which states you can charge £100 only otherwise any amount over that is considered a “rip off”. You are supposed to observe the law according to your agreement with BPA, furthermore it is likely you have not applied for planning permission with is also defined in the new CoP.   I suggest you drop this unnecessary case.   Please note that I live in Zimbabwe and any letters addressed to Battersea will no doubt be binned.  If you want to continue to pursue this case, then you will have to contact me at my address in Zimbabwe, but I warn you letters do take a rather lengthy time on occasion.   I look forward to hearing from you regarding the above appeal.   Yours sincerely      
    • I have done but it mentions computer typing and I don’t have one or access to one so if Its handwritten do I have to sign it or still just print my name the same 
    • My second son (not the 3rd one we have helped in the past!) was having a stag do and parked at the Saunton Sands hotel for roughly 2 hours to get to the beach.  They went through the hotel but have no proof of any purchase, even though they argued this in their appeal.  The appeal was rejected and then he went to Zimbabwe for a period of time as he has been suffering from severe anxiety.  He needed to come home and be treated.  He arrived back in the UK 10 days ago and received a "Letter Before Claim" from CST Law on 11th May 2022.   The total outstanding is £170.  Can you make any recommendations?   Smart Parking Charge Notice was dated 3 July 2021 Location:  Saunton Sands Hotel, Braunton   The Parking Charge Notice:   "Smart Parking Ltd have the right to seek payment of the parking charge for unauthorised parking of the vehicle on the land on the relevant date as owner of the land, on the basis of a contractual right to occupy or to have possession of the land, or acting as agent of the landowner.   A Parking Charge Notice (PCN) is payable with respect to the vehicle registration mark ...... for the alleged breach of advertised terms and conditions within Saunton Sands Hotel, Braunton on 3/7/21.   The signage, which is clearly displayed at he entrance to and throughout the car park, states that this is private land and the car park is managed by Smart Parking Ltd.   A Parking charge Notice of £100 is now due for payment and must b e paid before the end of the 28 days from with the date of the notice.  If the parking charge notice is paid before 28 Jul 2021the amount of the parking charge notice will be reduced to £60.  If you were not the driver of the vehicle and you wish to provide the driver details, lodge a dispute appeal or query this must be made on line or in writing.  Please follow the instructions overleaf.   Following the landmark Supreme Court ruling of Parking Eye v Beavis, it has now been established that a Parking Charge Notice issued on Private Land is enforceable.  The Court rejected claims that such charges are extravagant, exorbitant or unconscionable and advised that such charges Acta necessary deterrent of breach of contract.  A full copy of the Supreme Court Judgement can be found on line at https://wwwlsupremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0280-judgement.pdf.  If you feel you have sufficient grounds to appeal this notice you will find full details of the appeals process overleaf.  If you pay the PCN you are therefore accepting full liability for the charge, and are no longer eligible to appeal this notice. Yours  Smart Parking Limited  
    • Purchased a corner unit sette a LazyBoy brand from Scs in horwich for 5 thousand pound.  Yet on Scs website much cheaper. Furthermore salesman told me made in usa.  I discovered sette are made in far east, with massive complaints from review websites nearly all claiming that qualitu doesnt match Scs showroom quality. Have not yet had sette delivered but told by Scs i will lose 25% if I cancelled now before delivery date. I just want Full refund and not to lose 1250 pounds from my 25% loss for cancelling. I hope any advive can help.
  • Our picks

Marlin/Phoenix CCJ on HSBC OD debt now want SD - Charging Order objection - ***WON***


molly13
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4092 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

If MCS are stating that they are in breach of OFT guidelines;

2 UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES

Communication

2.1 It is unfair to communicate, in whatever form, with consumers in an unclear, inaccurate or misleading manner.

2.2 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. use of official looking documents intended or likely to mislead

debtors as to their status, for example, documents made to resemble court

claims.

b. leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it

creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors' lack of knowledge

c. those contacting debtors not making clear who they are, who

they work for, what their role is, what the purpose of the contact is

d. unnecessary and unhelpful use of legal and technical language, for

example, use of Latin phrases

e. failing to provide debtors or creditors with information on status

of debts, for example, not providing requested balance statements when

reasonably requested

f. contacting debtors at unreasonable times

g. ignoring or disregarding debtors' legitimate wishes in respect

of when and where to contact them, for example, shift workers who

ask not to be telephoned during certain times of the day

h. asking or instructing debtors to make contact on premium rate

telephone numbers

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 212
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks for that Cerberus. I'll get onto that:)

 

Well, I've eventually got the agreement and final demand scanned etc.

 

Sorry, but I've got them in the wrong order, should read from bottom to top. ( well it is late :p)

 

Thanks again for the advice.

 

hsbc007.jpg

hsbc006.jpg

hsbc005.jpg

hsbc004.jpg

hsbc003.jpg

hsbc002.jpg

hsbc001.jpg

 

Regards

Molly:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why so HSBC "agreements" always look so like flimsy cut and pastes?? I can see nothing to link these pages and especially to link the other pages to the signature document. Still, the issue is the DN and the sale. I would ask HSBC for a copy of the NOA if they say they have sold the account.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pinky,

 

Thanks for the advice.:)

 

Are you saying that the Agreement is unenforcable?

 

Looking at the Terms, section 2 Default it states:

 

" we will have a right to demand immediate payment" "we will first send you a default notice" etc.

 

They didn't and then just closed the account!

 

I'll get on to them regarding the NOA and also question whether they have terminated.

 

Thanks again.

 

Regards

Molly:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the prescribed terms are there so if a court accepted the document as genuine, it would be enforceable. I just think they look very flimsy for a mainstream bank. Yes - get a copy of the NOA and see what it says about the assignment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

Diddidicky, I have had the SAR response. No mention of DN or NOA. I queried the lack of DN and was referred to the letter dated xx'07, which is the Final Demand letter:confused: No evidence to say a/c was sold or terminated. Just a/c closed.

 

Rob, I know about MCS being HSBC from our mutual good old Marlin days:) (in fact we had a letter from some guy who signed letters for both HSBC and MCS, who got in a bit of a muddle when my husband questioned him about that.)

 

However with this account when OH phoned MCS they stated that they were not part of HSBC.

HSBC can't/ won't say who it was 'sold' to.

 

Anyway I've now sent them a letter requesting NOA if they have indeed sold it.

 

Thank you both for your input.

 

Regards

 

Molly:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

Diddidicky, I have had the SAR response. No mention of DN or NOA. I queried the lack of DN and was referred to the letter dated xx'07, which is the Final Demand letter:confused: No evidence to say a/c was sold or terminated. Just a/c closed.

 

Rob, I know about MCS being HSBC from our mutual good old Marlin days:) (in fact we had a letter from some guy who signed letters for both HSBC and MCS, who got in a bit of a muddle when my husband questioned him about that.)

 

However with this account when OH phoned MCS they stated that they were not part of HSBC.

HSBC can't/ won't say who it was 'sold' to.

 

Anyway I've now sent them a letter requesting NOA if they have indeed sold it.

 

Thank you both for your input.

 

Regards

 

Molly:)

 

 

not usually a good idea to ask for proof of assignment- usually better to play dumb and wait whilst they start proceedings

 

if they have demanded full payment and /or closed the account and so prevented you from enjoying the benefit of repaying monthly then they have unlawfully rescinded

 

however make sure that "closing the account" doesnt just mean that they have prevented further borrowing- which is not the same as preventing you from repaying what is already owing by monthly payments

 

not a good idea to ASK them if they have terminated- if they say no it could be awkward

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree about asking for proof of assignment. If you don't have it - and it should have been in the SAR - you don't know if the account has been sold or not and whether the claimant has any right to ask for payment. That knowledge won't affect any subsequent proceedings. It should have been sent as a matter of course anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree about asking for proof of assignment. If you don't have it - and it should have been in the SAR - you don't know if the account has been sold or not and whether the claimant has any right to ask for payment. That knowledge won't affect any subsequent proceedings. It should have been sent as a matter of course anyway.

 

 

i have to disagree (from my own point of view) any claimant who brings an action against me must prove that they are the the genuine owners of the debt- if they are not the OC and it has been bought or assigned- then the assignee must have proof that the creditor (or them on behalf of the OC- have previously notified me of the assignment to them (registered letter - not normal post)

 

the more so if i positively deny any knowledge of any assignment

 

if they cannot show that i have been notified that the debt has been sold to them then their action against me would have no cause

 

strike out time

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Good afternoon all,

 

[Could someone take a look at this please and tell me whether,in your opinion this is an application form or a properly executed enforceable agreement:

 

 

 

 

14v00a8.jpg

 

I personally believe that it is an application form, and told HSBC this when I put the account in dispute.

Thank you.

 

 

Regards

Molly:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The response from HSBC re. a/c in dispute:

"we have complied with the requirements of s 78 of CCA. In particular we have supplied copies compliant with regulation 3 (2) (b) of the consumer credit (cancellation notices and copies of documents) regulations 1983"

What is regulation 3 (2) (b) please?

Molly:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is all that they have sent there are no Terms and Conditions for a start.

 

First line second column states that 'this application' etc. so there is your answer.

 

Others will be along soon with their opinions and with an answer to your question.

Every journey begins with a single step :):)

 

Please note: I have no qualifications in this area - my advice is learned from the wonderful members of this Forum. Thanks to you all for your help.

 

If you have found my post helpful please leave a short message by clicking the star to the left of my profile - Thank You

 

The only person entitled to your Personal Finance details is a Judge not a DCA

 

Move all banking activity to another banking group if you have a dispute - your funds can be used to offset debts within the same group.

Be careful with Banking details (card/account numbers) as these can be used to take unauthorised payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this:

 

Form and content of regulated consumer credit agreements [not applicable to overdrafts falling within section 74(1)(b) CCA]

3.—(1) Documents embodying regulated consumer credit agreements (other than modifying agreements) shall contain the information set out in column 2 of Schedule 1 to these Regulations in so far as it relates to the type of agreement referred to in Column 1.

(2) Documents embodying regulated consumer credit agreements referred to in regulation 2(2) (b), © and (d) above may contain the information set out in column 2 of Schedule 1 to these Regulations in so far as it relates to the type of agreement referred to in column 1 in which case these Regulations apply instead of the 1983 Regulations.

(3) The information specified in Schedule 1 shall be presented in a clear and concise manner.

(4) For the purposes of this regulation, the requirement for the information to be "clear" includes a requirement that the wording, apart from any signature, is to be easily legible and of a colour which is readily distinguishable from the background medium upon which the information is displayed.

Every journey begins with a single step :):)

 

Please note: I have no qualifications in this area - my advice is learned from the wonderful members of this Forum. Thanks to you all for your help.

 

If you have found my post helpful please leave a short message by clicking the star to the left of my profile - Thank You

 

The only person entitled to your Personal Finance details is a Judge not a DCA

 

Move all banking activity to another banking group if you have a dispute - your funds can be used to offset debts within the same group.

Be careful with Banking details (card/account numbers) as these can be used to take unauthorised payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe they are referring to this:

3 General requirements as to form and content of copy documents

(1) Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument

or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act

shall be a true copy thereof.

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy--

(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instrument or other document relating to the debtor,

hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the

Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancellable executed

agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of the signature by the debtor of an

agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

© in the case of any copy of an unexecuted agreement delivered or sent to the debtor or hirer under section 62 of

the Act, the name and address of the debtor or hirer; and

[(d) in the case of any copy of an executed agreement given to the debtor under section 77(1) of the Act for fixedsum

credit, or under section 78(1) for running-account credit, under which a person takes any articles in pawn, any

description of the article taken in pawn.]

Page 3 of 31

Either way what they have sent you is unenforceable in a court.

Account in dispute, withhold all payments.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without any of the prescribed terms, it is unenforceable.

 

If HSBC are trying to fob you off, then you need to report it to the OFT. Their new guidance on requests under s77-79 of the CCA makes what they're doing misleading and unfair. It's also very stupid, as all they need to do is repopulate a template of the agreement you 'would have' signed, and send you that and it would comply. It still wouldn't be enforceable in court though.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Further to my post HSBC application or Agreement? Sorry I don't know how to link it.:oops:

 

I received a DN in 2008 dated 14 xxx arrears of xx to be paid by 28xxxx., received by me on 17xxxx followed by a Final Demand a month later.

It was only earlier this year that I became aware of the significance of the DN dates and I accepted ther unlawful termination. The response from HSBC was:

 

"From the information that you have provided, you advise that you received our Default Notice on 17xxx and that the Final Demand was issued xxx. The statutory period of time between a Default Notice and then the Final Demand is one month, which you can clearly see was adhered to.

As both letters have been issued correctly we lawfully repudiated the agreement, which was stated in the terms and conditions you signed upon opening the account.

A letter was sent to you which proves the account had been properly executed and is legally enforceable."

 

However they have now sent a new DN, giving me 21 days, no date,to pay arrears, and another Final Demand.

 

What I would like to know is:

How can they issue another DN and FD when they have already admitted that they have repudiated the agreement? lawfully or not?:???: To my mind there is then no longer any agreement to breach.

Am I completely wrong on this?

Thanks in advance

 

Molly:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you scan and post both of them up? Remove all ID, bar codes, ref numbers etc, I am inclined to think that as they have seen the error of their ways which you pointed out to them, they have simply issued you with an enforceable DN, ALTHOUGH!!!!!!! Not stating an exact date also makes it unenforceable, I will dig out the exact reference for this just so you can be confident that is correct, wait one!

  • Confused 1

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BB

 

I haven't got access to a scanner at the moment, but will try and do it tomorrow from work.

 

But what I don't understand is, that they got my acceptance of unlawful termination, then they say the repudiated lawfully, and presumably, that was the end of agreement.

 

Molly:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If a creditor just intends to pursue for the arrears, no default notice is needed. By Section 88(2),

any notice after 1 October 2006 must give the debtor at least 14 days after service (7 days

for notices served before 1 October 2006) to remedy his or her breach or before the creditor

proposes to takes further action. Section 176 of the CCA 1974 inserts a presumption that, if sent

by post, a default notice is deemed served on the date it would have been delivered in the normal

course of post. This is the case even if the default notice does not come to the debtor’s attention:

Lombard North Central plc v Power-Hines [1995] CCLR 24.

http://www.hammonds.com/FileServer.aspx?oID=23087

 

88. Contents and effect of default notice.

— (1) The default notice must be in the prescribed form and specify— (a)

the nature of the alleged breach;

 

(b)

if the breach is capable of remedy, what action is required to remedy it and the date before which that action is to be taken;

 

©

if the breach is not capable of remedy, the sum (if any) required to be paid as compensation for the breach, and the date before which it is to be paid.

 

 

(2) A date specified under subsection (1) must not be less than [F1 14] days after the date of service of the default notice, and the creditor or owner shall not take action such as is mentioned in section 87(1) before the date so specified or (if no requirement is made under subsection (1)) before those [F1 14] days have elapsed.

(3) The default notice must not treat as a breach failure to comply with a provision of the agreement which becomes operative only on breach of some other provision, but if the breach of that other provision is not duly remedied or compensation demanded under subsection (1) is not duly paid, or (where no requirement is made under subsection (1)) if the [F1 14] days mentioned in subsection (2) have elapsed, the creditor or owner may treat the failure as a breach and section 87(1) shall not apply to it.

(4) The default notice must contain information in the prescribed terms about the consequences of failure to comply with it [F2 and any other prescribed matters relating to the agreement].

[F3 (4A) The default notice must also include a copy of the current default information sheet under section 86A.]

(5) A default notice making a requirement under subsection (1) may include a provision for the taking of action such as is mentioned in section 87(1) at any time after the restriction imposed by subsection (2) will cease, together with a statement that the provision will be ineffective if the breach is duly remedied or the compensation duly paid.

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=Consumer+Credit+Act&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=436428&ActiveTextDocId=436537&filesize=8186

 

Not 100% sure on the failure to stipulate an exact date action to remedy account, however it MUST be 14 'clear' days OR 7 clear days for notices issued before the 1st Oct 2006.

 

Here is another thread which BRW clarifies it better than I can.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?179944

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops got it wrong:oops:

The "new" DN dated 31xxx to pay by 21xxx.

But I don't believe they have a right to issue a new DN when they admit that they repudiated the agreement and I accepted it before they issued it.

 

Molly

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...