Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Debtcontrol V BarclayCard / Connaught


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4809 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

Hello,

 

I have to say this forum is an excellent resource and I will be contributing to the cause when I get paid next!!

 

I made up my mind last week to stand up to these CRA's who have, after reading advice on here, been threatening me with hollow threats for months, if not years.

 

I have 9 CRA accounts, a mixture of credit cards & loans. The majority of these defaulted in 2003, a couple defaulted in 2004.

 

My original post is here -

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/205013-paying-back-various-amounts.html

 

It is worth noting that I have never had to sign for any recorded/special delivery post from the lender or CRA.

I have also never received a Default Notice, or Notice of Assignment.

 

I have CCA'd all CRA's and cancelled all DD. Payments will be made by SO for £5 per month until it’s legally enforced for me to pay more. (I am confident that my financial circumstances are dire enough for them to have no joy if they wish to pursue through the courts).

 

 

This thread will talk about my battle with Connaught Collections & the credit card they say they are pursuing.

 

Thanks for reading, more to follow!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a CCA acknowledgement from Connaught collections today. Looks like they are collecting on behalf of 1st Credit.

 

They advise that it may take longer than usual, due to them requesting the CCA from the original lender, however, I assume the 12 day rule applies regardless from their letter dated today?

 

Thanks for reading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hello,

 

Had an interesting letter from Connaught today.

 

Its in response to the standard 'Account In Dispute' letter I fired to them on the 10th of July 2009.

 

Their response in the in PDF attached.

 

 

My letter, is typed here -

Connaught Collections UK Ltd.

Airport House,

Purley Way,

Croydon,

Surrey,

CR0 0XZ

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Re:− Account/Reference Number xxxx

 

Date: 10th July 2009

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

You have failed to respond to my legal request to supply me a true copy of the original Consumer Credit Agreement for the above account.

 

On 20th June 2009 I made a formal request for a true signed agreement for the alleged account under consumer credit Act 1974 s77/8. This was signed for as delivered on the 22nd June 2009. I have electronic proof of delivery if you require a copy.

You have failed to comply with my request, and as such the account entered default on 9th July 2009

The document that you are obliged to send me is a true copy of the executed agreement that contained all of the prescribed terms, all other required terms and statutory notices and was signed by both your company and myself as defined in section 61(1) of CCA 74 and subsequent Statutory Instruments. If the executed agreement contained any reference to any other document, you are also obliged to send me a copy of that document. In addition a full statement of this account should have been sent to me detailing all debits and credits to the account.

 

Furthermore, you are aware that the Consumer Credit Act allows 12 working days for a request for a true copy of a credit agreement to be carried out before you/your client enters into a default situation.

 

This limit has expired.

As you are no doubt aware section 78(6) states:

 

If the creditor fails to comply with Subsection (1)

 

(a) He is not entitled , while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.

 

Therefore this account has become unenforceable at law.

 

As you have failed to comply with a lawful request for a true, signed copy of the said agreement and other relevant documents mentioned in it, failed to send a full statement of the account and Failed to provide any of the documentation requested. You will also be aware of the CPUTR 2008 and the OFT's guidelines on debt collection which state under the title Deceptive and/or unfair methods - Examples of unfair practices are as follows - 2.8

 

(i) - 'Failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued'

 

(k) - 'Not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonable queried or disputed debt'

 

Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS.

 

Furthermore I shall counterclaim that any such action constitutes unlawful harassment.

 

Please note you may also consider this letter as a statutory notice under section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any data in relation to this account with immediate effect.

 

This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies.

 

Should you refuse to comply, you must within 21 days provide me with a detailed breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data.

 

It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’; you must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends.

 

Should you not respond within 14 days I expect that this means you agree to remove all such data.

 

Furthermore you should be aware that a creditor, or agent acting on his behalf, is not permitted to take ANY action against an account whilst it remains in dispute.

The lack of a credit agreement is a very clear dispute and as such the following applies.

 

* You may not demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you.

* You may not add further interest or any charges to the account.

* You may not pass the account to a third party.

* You may not register any information in respect of the account with any credit reference agency.

* You may not issue a default notice related to the account.

 

I reserve the right to report your actions to any such regulatory authorities as I see fit.

You have 14 days from receiving this letter to contact me with your intentions to resolve this matter which is now a formal complaint.

Please note that no communication will be entered into by telephone. Only communication by letter is now acceptable. Failure to adhere to this will constitute harassment and will be reported to the police as a breach of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

It is also worth noting that any attempt to contact me or associates via telephone will also be reported to OFCOM, Office of Fair Trading and Trading Standards as a breach of the Communications Act (2003) s. 127. I trust this clarifies this matter.

All payments to you and/or the original creditor have now been ceased and will not commence until such time it is judged in a court of law that it is lawful to do so.

 

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

 

 

 

Any advice on whether I need to respond would be great.

Thanks.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, does anyone know if I need to respond to this letter from Connaught?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no response needed as they say they will contact when they have the cca :rolleyes:

 

ida x

  • Haha 1

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

no response needed as they say they will contact when they have the cca :rolleyes:

 

ida x

 

Hi Ida, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Not heard anything from this in a while until last week and this, 1st Credit now seem to have this account.

Got what looked like a fishing letter last week from them, ignored it.

Received today in the post, a 'Legal Proceedings' letter from 1st Credit.

 

Now, I know Connaught couldn't have sold on my account and let someone else proceed with it, as they told me they wouldn't in their last letter :-o, but it looks like 1st Credit aren't playing the game.

 

I'm inclined to ignore this also, or send them a letter explaining the dispute and their breach of regulations etc. etc.

ANY THOUGHTS / ADVICE?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent news, thank you.

So they have progressed further action. Does anyone have a template for a formal complaint at all?

This bunch of jokers are being reported.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

I have now received a couple of letters from Judge & Priestley warning me of legal action if I dont settle the debt.

Are these in-house guys for 1st Credit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dc

 

Not in house - goons for hire:

 

"Whilst a letter from a Debt Collection Agency may have some effect, the fact that we are able to carry out our threat of issuing proceedings immediately means that debtors usually take notice of our first approach." http://www.jpcreditsolutions.co.uk/

 

x

 

v

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is always four elements to the 1st credit collection process.

1st Credit/LCS Solicitors/Connoughts/Judge Preistley.

They constantly pass the account around between themselves to give the appearance they are some highly organised, professional outfit, when in fact they don't know their arse from their elbow.

 

I have over 200 letters from these four clowns, that was Barclaycard too, they huff and puff to try and impress but have done nothing apart from send letters which I now ignore and the odd phone call to which they are greeted with @@@@ @@@.

 

Until they supply what you asked for ignore them

 

Their website offers services such as this

 

LBAs only £2 inc vat.

A letter before action sent on Solicitor’s letterhead can nudge your debtors to pay their outstanding debts.

 

What you have received is such a letter.

 

Have a read of my thread on these muffins

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?115666-Alf-v-Barcalycard-RMA-1st-Credit-Connoughts-Now-Mack-Hall&highlight=ALF+v+rma

 

Is a long one but gives you an insight to the adventures that await

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alf, thank you very much.

This has put my mind at ease somewhat.

On the basis of what they have submitted to me thus far, they do not have much to go on.

Thanks again, will have a read of your link.

DC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...