Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Stat demand - a complicated story


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5158 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

Its a bit of a long story here, so sorry in advance

 

I purchased some specialist equipment (I would prefer not to say what the equipment was on an open forum as I and the co. concerned could be identified)) from a manufacturer a couple of years ago.

 

The requested delivery date was some 3 months late, meaning I had to hire some replacement equipment to tide me over.

 

When the equipment arrived it had 4 faulty parts. The company asked me to send them back for rectification to the manufacturer of those parts which i did.

 

When I got them back, they were still faulty, so with eerybodies agreement took them to a local 3rd party repairer who identified the problem and was able to effect a partial repair, but needed the tech spec of these very specialised and technical items to allow thenm to work as intended. The manufacturer of those parts paid for this work, but was unable to supply any of the exact spec as they had lost it!

 

Time was of the essence, and no more help was forthcoming as the specs were lost. A couple mopre months dragged on with no progress, so in the end I suggested I obtain some used, but identical items, have them stripped to ascertain the spec, and have mine rebuilt to that spec.

 

I asked the supplier of the main equipment (not the component manufacturer) if he thought that was ok as time once again was a serious issue. As usual, i recieved no response, so bearing in mind the sale of goods act, paid to have the items repaired.

 

Once sorted, Iwasable to contact the manufacturer who agreed verbally to recompense me.

 

In the meantime, I had recieved some spares from them, the cost which was roughly the same as the rectification costs I had incurred.

 

The supplier asked me for payment, but my point was that they owed me more money, so call it quits.

 

They have refused to accept liability for my rectification work and so after various emails to the planet thick, I recieved form them a Statutory demand under section 123 (1) OR 222 (1) OF THE INSOLVENCY ACT 1986.

 

It doesn't appear to have been issued by solicitors, but has been produced by 'infolaw' which looking at the net appears to be an online resource centre. The name and address for response is the company concerned.

 

On it it states that I must deal with it within 21 days of service upon the company or a winding up order could be made in respect of the company.

 

I am not a company though, but a private individual using the goods for a highly specialised competitive sport.

 

It also contends that I am not contending the outstanding amounts, but clearly they are ignoring the monies I am owed by them.

 

The total amount, including interest is about £2500.

 

Rather than just call them up at this stage where do I stand with this?

 

I gave up talking to them on the phone as they are, and i mean this seriously, world class thick people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, not strictly a debt collection agency issue, but....

 

Recieved a stautory demand today from a company for £2600, of which £600 is interest, the rest for some parts I hold on sale or return, and about £700 for parts I ordered and recieved.

 

There has been an ongoing dispute for about 2 years now as they owe me about £700 for rectification work I had to have carried out to some faulty components that they already had 2 goes at repairing.

 

So basically, I can return the sale or return goods no prob, I owe them £700, they owe me £700, but could easily ramp that up to about £2500 given the costs involved in late supply of the goods initially which involved me having to hire equipment and other costs.

 

I have several emails to the company regarding this and trying to mitigate the stituation from day one, but they completely ignore any points I raise.

 

They referred me to their terms and conditions which were only added to their website in July, 2 days before they referred me to them. There is no way to access the t&c's from the site, but only from the link they emailed me. I have never had any T&C's on any invoices in the 2 1/2 years I have been dealing with them. Can I be liable for interest as they have dumped a lot onto the stat demand?

 

Can I issue a stat demand to them?

 

Also, they have issued the stat demand as though I am a business, which I am not.

 

Sorry its all a bit long, but its pretty complicated......

 

So I go to court and apply to have it set aside, and ask for a cost order to be included.

 

How much is this likely to be if it is set aside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a bit of a long story here, so sorry in advance

 

I purchased some specialist equipment (I would prefer not to say what the equipment was on an open forum as I and the co. concerned could be identified)) from a manufacturer a couple of years ago.

 

The requested delivery date was some 3 months late, meaning I had to hire some replacement equipment to tide me over.

 

When the equipment arrived it had 4 faulty parts. The company asked me to send them back for rectification to the manufacturer of those parts which i did.

 

When I got them back, they were still faulty, so with eerybodies agreement took them to a local 3rd party repairer who identified the problem and was able to effect a partial repair, but needed the tech spec of these very specialised and technical items to allow thenm to work as intended. The manufacturer of those parts paid for this work, but was unable to supply any of the exact spec as they had lost it!

 

Time was of the essence, and no more help was forthcoming as the specs were lost. A couple mopre months dragged on with no progress, so in the end I suggested I obtain some used, but identical items, have them stripped to ascertain the spec, and have mine rebuilt to that spec.

 

I asked the supplier of the main equipment (not the component manufacturer) if he thought that was ok as time once again was a serious issue. As usual, i recieved no response, so bearing in mind the sale of goods act, paid to have the items repaired.

 

Once sorted, Iwasable to contact the manufacturer who agreed verbally to recompense me.

 

In the meantime, I had recieved some spares from them, the cost which was roughly the same as the rectification costs I had incurred.

 

The supplier asked me for payment, but my point was that they owed me more money, so call it quits.

 

They have refused to accept liability for my rectification work and so after various emails to the planet thick, I recieved form them a Statutory demand under section 123 (1) OR 222 (1) OF THE INSOLVENCY ACT 1986.

 

It doesn't appear to have been issued by solicitors, but has been produced by 'infolaw' which looking at the net appears to be an online resource centre. The name and address for response is the company concerned.

 

On it it states that I must deal with it within 21 days of service upon the company or a winding up order could be made in respect of the company.

 

I am not a company though, but a private individual using the goods for a highly specialised competitive sport.

 

It also contends that I am not contending the outstanding amounts, but clearly they are ignoring the monies I am owed by them.

 

The total amount, including interest is about £2500.

 

Rather than just call them up at this stage where do I stand with this?

 

I gave up talking to them on the phone as they are, and i mean this seriously, world class thick people.

 

can you post up the sd without your personal particulars

 

i strongly advise doing NOTHING until you have done so

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Nomore,

 

As old_andrew has stated there is a set period to this SD, its 21 days... EDIT: INCORRECT, it should be 18 days

 

I feel you are leaving yourself open here to having a bankruptcy petition issued against you if you just accept their "word". After 21 days if you havent set this aside with a court hearing they can apply to the insolvency court AT ANY TIME to make you bankrupt, so if they dont like what you say at the end of the month then they can next day issue the petition.

 

There is a threshold of £750 for bankruptcy, under that and they and you cant issue.

 

Personally I would want to have a signed document on company paper stating they were withdrawing the stat demand as discussions are ongoing... if they are not prepared to withdraw (and lets face it they can issue again anyway if they want to) then I would seek to get the SD set aside.

 

S.

Edited by the_shadow
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a number of reasons a SD can be set aside,

 

To successfully get a statutory demand set aside one or more of the following must be satisfied:-

 

  • The amount stated on the statutory demand is disputed.
  • The person issuing the statutory demand also owes money. This is called a counterclaim.
  • The person issuing the statutory demand is holding security that equals or exceeds the amount owing.
  • The demand was issued in error.
  • The amount owing is less than £750
  • Execution has been stayed on a judgement debt.
  • The debtor is complying with an instalment order. This would mean the debt is not actually owed as it is being paid back.
  • The creditor failed to comply with the rules and prejudiced the debtor in the process

 

If you can meet one of the above criteria then in theory you can get this set aside.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Nomore,

 

As old_andrew has stated there is a set period to this SD, its actually 21 days...

 

I feel you are leaving yourself open here to having a bankruptcy petition issued against you if you just accept their "word". After 21 days if you havent set this aside with a court hearing they can apply to the insolvency court AT ANY TIME to make you bankrupt, so if they dont like what you say at the end of the month then they can next day issue the petition.

 

There is a threshold of £750 for bankruptcy, under that and they and you cant issue.

 

Personally I would want to have a signed document on company paper stating they were withdrawing the stat demand as discussions are ongoing... if they are not prepared to withdraw (and lets face it they can issue again anyway if they want to) then I would seek to get the SD set aside.

 

S.

I think you will find it is 18 days to make an application to set aside the statutory demand and 21 days to pay it.

 

Either way you do not want to leave yourself in a position where they can present a petition against you.

 

From what you say above, the demand sounds like an abuse of process and should be set aside without too much difficulty. The company that served this sound a bit underhand too - the terms they rely on can't be binding from the way they introduced these.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have spoken to the brain donors that sent it and am meeting them at the end of the month to discuss.

 

Speaking to trading standards etc, they are soo out of order its almost funny.

 

Do not be fobbed of by this. You need to act now. They are simple saying end of the month so the SD cant be set aside.

Not a nice trick on thier part.

 

Ps.

 

Its also free to get it set aside.

Edited by phil_nottingham
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not be fobbed of by this. You need to act now. They are simple saying end of the month so the SD cant be set aside.

Not a nice trick on thier part.

I agree.

 

Everything you have said about this company sounds underhand.

 

If someone served a statutory demand on me in these circumstances I would apply to have it set aside without even contacting them and let them learn the errors of their ways by means of an order for costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you will find it is 18 days to make an application to set aside the statutory demand and 21 days to pay it.

 

Either way you do not want to leave yourself in a position where they can present a petition against you.

 

From what you say above, the demand sounds like an abuse of process and should be set aside without too much difficulty. The company that served this sound a bit underhand too - the terms they rely on can't be binding from the way they introduced these.

 

Eeek, never nice to wake up and see you gave mistaken advice... you are of course correct and if I'd bothered to read fully from the notes I'd pasted I would have seen in big bold red letters 18 days highlighted :(, apologies old_andrew.

 

Please either get them to withdraw or get this set aside... you CANNOT rely on them not proceeding otherwise.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried to (unsuccessfully) get an appointment with the CAb as they only do 'drop ins' prior to having a full appt. The small place where I live is rammed with people and on the 2 occasions when I attended was a min 2hr wait!

 

Spoken to trading standards who have advised that of the monies they are claiming, because of faulty parts, I only owe them about £250, wheras they owe me £700 for repair work, plus possibly the hire fees for hiring equipment due to late delivery.

 

Are they allowed to charge interest on the amount they allege I owe them?

 

And as a private individual, am I allowed to charge them interest on the moneythey owe me?

 

Its all getting to be a right pain as I will have to attend court in Liverpool to get this set aside, plus a 2nd trip to appear in front of the judge if he wants to hear the set aside facts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried to (unsuccessfully) get an appointment with the CAb as they only do 'drop ins' prior to having a full appt. The small place where I live is rammed with people and on the 2 occasions when I attended was a min 2hr wait!

 

Spoken to trading standards who have advised that of the monies they are claiming, because of faulty parts, I only owe them about £250, wheras they owe me £700 for repair work, plus possibly the hire fees for hiring equipment due to late delivery.

 

Are they allowed to charge interest on the amount they allege I owe them?

 

And as a private individual, am I allowed to charge them interest on the moneythey owe me?

 

Its all getting to be a right pain as I will have to attend court in Liverpool to get this set aside, plus a 2nd trip to appear in front of the judge if he wants to hear the set aside facts.

 

did you sign any paperwork which had t&c on them? If you can prove the date the t&c were added to the website and the fact you have never been shown these t&c then you would think they'll be on shaky ground attempting to reclaim interest where no agreement of charging exists.

 

As to you claiming interest, for the same reasons prob not unless you want to attempt to charge them the same interest as they are charging you under s69 interest. Usually this would be at 8% but if they are charging you under a so called contractual amount then I think you can charge the same back :-D and if they are using compound interest then you to can do the same in theory.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never had a copy of their terms and conditions. As the company stated to me their t&c's are available at their factory or on their website.

 

Well their t&c's are NOT able to be navigated to from their website, and as the lady at Trading Std's told me today as I didn't buy the equipment off the internet its not relevant anyway.

 

Interestingly enough, when I asked them for a link to their terms and conds, it was amended (or posted) 2 days before they mentioned they even existed.....

 

Liverpool is my nearest court that deals with set asides - only 25 miles away. Great.

 

Think I will try getthe company to withdraw it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never had a copy of their terms and conditions. As the company stated to me their t&c's are available at their factory or on their website.

 

Well their t&c's are NOT able to be navigated to from their website, and as the lady at Trading Std's told me today as I didn't buy the equipment off the internet its not relevant anyway.

 

Interestingly enough, when I asked them for a link to their terms and conds, it was amended (or posted) 2 days before they mentioned they even existed.....

 

Liverpool is my nearest court that deals with set asides - only 25 miles away. Great.

 

Think I will try getthe company to withdraw it...

 

Give them a deadline to withdraw it as the clock/calender is definitely key here and ensure you tell them you will apply to set aside and ask for costs against them if they dont agree.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can they issue a section 123 stat demand to me as a private individual?

 

Really need to find out about this - tried 4 times to get an appointment at citizens advice and failed! people queing out of the door and they will only do 'drop in' assessments - not muchh good if you have to wait 3 hrs to be seen!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds like the 4.1 form which is used for limited companies.

 

A bankruptcy petition based on this would be defective as the demands for individual have to contain additional information, in particular details and the appropriate court for applying to have this set aside.

 

That said, I would still make the application to set aside the demand, which if they have used the wrong form is very likely to succeed, apart from the other grounds because they have abused the bankruptcy process and the set aside order will strengthen your hand in any settlement discussions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe me, if a bankruptcy petition is presented, the inconvenience of dealing with this will outweigh driving 60 miles.

 

You don't have to deliver the set aside application to the court personally - you can send this by post, but bear in mind your 18 days are nearly up. You will however have to attend the hearing of the application which will be in a few weeks time.

 

If you need any help preparing the application just ask.

 

Good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe me, if a bankruptcy petition is presented, the inconvenience of dealing with this will outweigh driving 60 miles.

 

You don't have to deliver the set aside application to the court personally - you can send this by post, but bear in mind your 18 days are nearly up. You will however have to attend the hearing of the application which will be in a few weeks time.

 

If you need any help preparing the application just ask.

 

Good luck!

 

PM sent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...