Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.View the full article
    • Well done.   Please let us know how it goes or come back with any questions. HB
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Hillesden/DLC


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5300 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 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

send This By Recorded Delivery

 

 

your Name

Address

Direct Legal And Collections

Trading As Hillesden Securities

Chicken Farm

Facenda Avenue

Care Of

Kentucky Fried Chicken Private Joke That, Look Up Who Dlc Own

Date

Your Ref

i Do Not Acknowledge This Account To You Or Any Other Company

 

 

Account In Dispute

 

 

 

Dear Cretin

On Xyz Your Company Contacted My With Reference To An Alleged Debt.

On Xyz I Contacted Direct Legal And Collections With A Request For A Copy Of The Alleged Agreement With The One Pound Fee Sent Recorded Delivery.

On Xyz You Sent Me What You Reported To Be The Consumer Credit Agreement (copy Enclosed)

As You Can No Doubt See That This Alleged Agreement Falls Short Of What Is Required.

The Agreement Must Be Legible. Until You Provide A Legible Agreement, This Account Remains In Dispute.

If You Are Of The Opinion That This Is Not The Case, Then I Will Have No Alternative To Escalate The Matter To The Office Of Fair Trading, Trading Standards, And The Financial Ombudsman Service.

I Also Require From Direct Legal And Collections A Copy Of The Notice Of Assignment, A Copy Of The Default Notice, And A Full Statement Of Account.

If You Are Of The Opinion That You Are Not The Creditor, Then I Will Have No Option But To Cease All Contact With Your Company.

Being That You Have No Legal Authority To Request Payment.

If You Maintain That You Are In fact The Creditor With Full Rights And Duties, I Expect You To Supply All The Documentation Requested And Not For Myself To Contact The Alleged Original Creditor.

This Account As Stated Is Now In Official Dispute And As Such Unenforceable In Law Until Compliance. I Expect All Collection Activity, Including Demands For Payment By Letter Or Telephone To Cease Forthwith.

Failing This Will Be An Offence Under The Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations And Will Be Reported To The Authorities.

I Require A Response To This Letter With In Fourteen Days Of Receipt With Your Intentions To Resolve This Dispute.

I Would Appreciate Your Diligence In This Matter,

I Look Forward To Hearing From You In Writing

Yours Faithfully

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add here, I have the same issue with DLC, and they started by sending me the 'we've requested said information from the creditor and will get back to you as and when...and suspended the account. That was 5 months ago, they sent me a similar letter every 3 weeks for a while and now that has stopped.

 

In regards to the entry on my credit file, it was duplicated by both the lender and Hillsden, I wrote to the CRA with a view to having the entries removed, the original creditor was contacted by the CRA and they stated that their entry could remain on file. Hillsden stated that they updated their files monthly and that the entry was to stay. Now that the account is suspended I have a mind to write to both the cra and Hillsden with a view to the file being removed.

 

If it's suspended they should not be 'processing' my data ?

I reside in Dawlish Warren but am not a rabbit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well the debt exists but the dca cant enforce

 

tell dlc/hillesden to foxtrot Oscar

 

the arrangement fee has been included in the amount of credit, not the total amount of credit so you are paying interest on it

 

it needs to be kept separate as its a charge for credit

 

this is a no no

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there reference to that online somewhere? I ask because in the case of a mortgage they can add the arragnement fee to the mortgage, why would an arrangement fee for loan under a different name (other than mortgage )be any different?

 

 

 

well the debt exists but the dca cant enforce

 

tell dlc/hillesden to foxtrot Oscar

 

the arrangement fee has been included in the amount of credit, not the total amount of credit so you are paying interest on it

 

it needs to be kept separate as its a charge for credit

 

this is a no no

I reside in Dawlish Warren but am not a rabbit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've gone all dizzy now, an interesting read if you can work through the babble but that was 2003, and given that mortgage deals are currently offering the 'arrangement fee' inclusive of the sum lent then it may be that the law has since been updated or a case precedent set?

 

Either that or all the mortgages with these arrangement fees contained with in them are unenforceable?

 

Thanks for that though, I've saved that link.

 

 

this gives the judgement in english

 

One Crown Office Row - Case

I reside in Dawlish Warren but am not a rabbit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

remember

 

this is for agreements covered by the cca

 

mortages are not as they are for agreements above 25000

 

in this case i would wait a few days for more comments but ejstowell

 

ITS YOUR LUCKY DAY

 

DLC CAN BOG OFF

Link to post
Share on other sites

your name

address

etc

etc

direct legal and collections

etc

etc

etc

 

date

 

your ref

 

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THIS DEBT TO YOU OR ANY OTHER COMPANY,

 

 

 

DEAR SIR/MADAM

 

FURTHER TO MY LETTER SENT TO YOU ON XYZ (COPY ENCLOSED) BY RECORDED DELIVERY

 

I MUST INFORM YOU THAT AFTER HAVING AN AUDIT DONE ON THE CREDIT AGREEMENT SENT TO MYSELF BY DLC, I MUST INFORM YOU THAT THE ALLEGED AGREEMENT IS IN FACT UNENFORCEABLE IN LAW FOR THE REASONS STATED.

 

THE RELEVANT CASE JUDGEMENT IS WILSON V FIRST COUNTY TRUST.

 

I CAN SUPPLY THE JUDGEMENT IF REQUIRED BUT A QUICK GOGGLE WILL GIVE YOU INSTANT RESULTS.

 

THAT CASE, AS WELL AS THIS AGREEMENT DEALS WITH APPLICATION/ARRANGEMENT FEES, BE IT THE AMOUNT OF CREDIT WAS MISSTATED.

 

THE AGREEMENT YOU SENT MYSELF CLEARLY STATES ARRANGEMENT FEE OF £100 ADDED TO THE AMOUNT OF CREDIT, THUS PAYING INTEREST ON THE ACCEPTANCE FEE.

 

THIS FEE IN FACT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF CREDIT WHICH THIS AGREEMENT SEEMS TO BE LACKING, IN FACT IT IS LACKING A HEADING AMOUNT OF CREDIT WHICH IN ITS SELF IS A PRESCRIBED TERM.

THAT ON ITS OWN, A COURT IS PROHIBITED FROM DOING AN ENFORCEMENT ORDER LET ALONE THE WILSON JUDGEMENT.

 

I REQUIRE A FINAL RESPONSE TO THIS MATTER FROM YOU AND THAT THIS ACCOUNT WILL NOW BE CLOSED AND RETURNED BACK TO YOUR CLIENT.

NOW THAT I HAVE INFORMED YOU ON THIS MATTER, ANY FUTURE THREATS OF COLLECTION AND COURT ACTION WILL BE REPORTED TO THE RELEVANT AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS A COURT IF REQUIRED.

 

I AWAIT YOUR RESPONSE

 

YOURS FAITHFULLY .

 

SEND RECORDED DELIVERY

Edited by postggj
Link to post
Share on other sites

And Ejetowell

 

You Were Going To Pay A Company 1200 Quid For That Info

 

Glad You Have Been Educated And Pass The Cag Word

 

When You Get The Surender Letter, Make A Small Donation To Cag To HelP Others

 

Does Not Matter If Its A Quid Or A Million,

It All Helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Argh! I had a letter today from Hillesden. Enclosed was an enlarged copy of the agreement I posted and a letter stating:

 

Thankyou for your letters dated November 2 and 4. (Referring to the request for info and the second letter regarding the charges)

Hillesden Securities Ltd are happy to rely on the enclosed documents in any future proceedings in relation to the construction of the agreement and legibility of the documents.

 

Please take this as our final reponse on this matter.

 

What do I do now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...