Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • 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

Help with CABOT!


Zooee
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5188 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

Please can somone help me - I've been having trouble with Cabot. For my credit agreement they sent me what looks like an application form (it looks like a copy of my online application I did to Virgin in 2002) and a very bad copy of the bottom of the form where I signed. (See Cabot Sig File) They also sent new T&Cs

 

Is this enforceable?

 

I received this letter from them (see Cabot Letter).

 

They also have added over £2000 to the account whilst it was ii dispute.

 

I'm really not sure where to go from here.

 

Thank you!

Cabot Letter.pdf

Cabot Sig File.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that everything they sent you in reply to your CCA request??

 

As far as I can see, and CCA's are not my thing, but it looks to me as though it is unenforceable, it doesn't show any of the interest rates, there isn't the T&C at the time of you taking out the agreement, but what goes in your favour also is their acknowledgement that they think they have complied with the CCA request and this is enforceable!:lol:

 

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

It is total rubbish, send them this;

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

This account is in Dispute .

 

On xx/xx/2009 I wrote to xxxxxxxxx requesting that xxxxxxx supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account.

In response to this request I was supplied a mere application form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain any of the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553 for the definition of what is required. Suffice to say none of the terms are present in the document

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974, which states;

 

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

 

This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I refer to page 5 of the guidance which states;

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment.

 

I require you to produce a compliant copy of my credit agreement to confirm I am liable to you or any organisation, which you represent for this alleged debt, if you cannot do so I require written clarification that this is the case. Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40

 

Since the agreement is unenforceable and the default notice is non compliant, it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for your client to write the debt off. I suggest you give serious consideration to this as any attempt of litigation will be vigorously defended and I will counter claim for all quantifiable damages

 

I respectfully request a response to this letter in 14 days

 

 

I trust this out lines the situation

Print name do not sign

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just send them the above as cerbs posted, and make sure it is sent via recorded delivery...

 

Boo;)

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

  • 3 weeks later...

I have had the same sorts of letters from them. They make all these points about (i) acknowledging debt (ii) used funds (iii) made payments etc (and in my case even said I had a moral obligation).

 

None of that matters.

 

What is key is whether they produce a proper agrement or not. If they do not then they hve nothing to enforce. I think with all of us there is eveidence of payments, use of credit cards etc. That is NOT the issue. The issue is WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE AN ENFORCEABLE AGREEMENT.

 

If they have not sent you one, then assume they do not have one. Account is in dispute and then over to them. If they want to take your to court to ENFORCE, then that is their call (althoguh OFT guidleines aobut not taking any enfocement action if no agrement provided??). If went to court, you would need to DEFEND and, assuming the judge follows the law, he could not make any order as no agreement. Bye Bye Cabot.

 

If they do not have an agreement, the rest is just smoke and mirrors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ms M McEvoy

Account In Dispute

Ref:

 

Dear

 

Thank you for your letter of xx/xx 2009, the contents of which have been noted.

It would seem that you are of the belief that you have discharged your obligations under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in particular section 78(1).

the documents you have provided do not conform and I feel it is my duty to draw your attention to some serious flaws in your comments.

 

Firstly, to comply with section 61 of the consumer credit act 1974 which by the way refers to the signing of an agreement, a document must conform to regulations made under the provisions of section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 otherwise it cannot be properly executed

 

Now then, these regulations I refer to are the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553). These regulations set out the form and content of agreements. For an agreement to be compliant with the regulations it MUST embody within the agreement, the prescribed terms laid out in the SI1983/1553 without the prescribed terms the agreement does not conform to section 60(1) 1974 and therefore cannot be properly executed as described in section 61(1) CCA 1974.

 

For your information in case you are unsure. The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following--

(a)Number of repayments;

(b)Amount of repayments;

©Frequency and timing of repayments;

(d)Dates of repayments;

(e)The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

 

Now nowhere on the form that you supplied is there any reference to these terms. I wish to remind you that the absence of these terms will render a document unenforceable in court and I also wish to point out that these terms MUST be contained within the agreement and NOT in a separate document headed terms and conditions or words to that effect

 

Since the document you have supplied is an application form, I cannot believe for one moment that these very important terms would be contained on the opposite side of the form, therefore they must have been contained in a separate document, which is prohibited by the SI1983/1553, as there is no clear link to them within the signature document.

 

Therefore, you have failed to supply an enforceable document, which is correctly executed as to be so; it must conform to the Regulations under s60 CCA1974

 

I am of the opinion that a court is precluded from enforcing this agreement by s127 (3) CCA1974 as it is improperly executed under s61 CCA 74, the consequences of improper execution are set out in section 65 CCA 1974 and s65 sets out that only a court can enforce an improperly executed agreement subject to certain qualifications, one of those is that the document is signed and contains all the prescribed terms. Now since this document does not contain all the prescribed terms s127 (3) CCA 1974 strictly prevents the court from enforcing this agreement.

Could you also please confirm in writing that in the event of any court action by yourselves this will be the document you intend to present to the court in order to enforce alleged debt.

If you cannot supply me with a document, which complies with the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and ALL of the Regulations made under the Act, I shall be forced to make a complaint to Trading Standards and I will also draw this to the attention of the Office of Fair Trading.

 

I respectfully request you review this matter in light of my comments above and I request that you supply me the required information or alternatively confirm the account is closed and the debt written off with a zero balance.

 

I respectfully request a reply within 14 days of the date of this letter.

Yours faithfully

 

 

you can alter and try this one if you like

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Give them the template letter linked below through the letterbox or chained door.

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resour...ep-visit-.html

 

Tell them to leave as you have nothing to discuss and all communication must be in writing.

 

Tell them you will call the police if they don't leave immediately.

 

Remain calm and polite at all times.

 

Walk away from the door so the visitor cannot try and talk to you.

 

If they don't leave, call the police to report that you are being harassed and the visitor refuses to leave.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/571-failiure-to-provide-a-copy-of-the-agreement-within-the-prescribed-timescale

 

 

Do not be intimidated by these school bullies, I'll post a couple of other links for you to read about your legal rights;

 

Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (c. 40)

 

Malicious Communications Act 1988 (c. 27)

 

Telecommunications Act 1984 (c. 12) - Statute Law Database

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

Hi Zooee,

 

Just subbing in and offering support, I am alot further down the road with my case

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/144167-bb-cabot.html

 

But I have tried every line with them and they keep giving me the same old rubbish so they are going to court to try to get a judge that does not understand the CCA ----IMO a very big gamble. We shall see.

 

Good Luck

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Zooee,

 

I have referred to your Crapbot letters on one of my threads, and given them a bit of analysis. You might like to have a look and see if you find it useful.

 

Letters denying the truth that the prescribed terms MUST be in the signature document -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/223570-cabot-financial-dealing-cabot-2.html#post2488448

 

Letter threatening doorstep harassment -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/223570-cabot-financial-dealing-cabot-2.html#post2488756

 

Hope this helps.

 

SH

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure - the number is 0845 070 2622 - they phoned a couple of times last night and they let it ring for AGES!

 

I got the info about who it was who was phoning from the website "whocallsme" and someone on there said it was FIRE and that FIRE are actually Cabot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, it is these guys, very abrupt on the phone!!:eek:

Very quick to ask for a reference number aswell, a sure sign of a DCA, reading from a script, I asked if they were going to fit me some smoke alarms:D

No sir! Click.................:-?

FIRE - About FIRE

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...