Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all!   Thank you in advance for any help you can give me!!    I parked up (at 18:08) in a rush, entered my Reg and paid for an hour of parking. At 18:20 I got a ticket for not paying for parking.    I've just looked at my receipt and noticed why ... I put "22" instead of "21"  when i put in my Reg. yes... what a stupid mistake.    I seem to remember there being a court case or a rule change about entering the wrong reg but the company wasn't at a loss because i had paid for the parking just technically for the wrong car. Am i making that up?    Any advice would be gratefully received, even some key points i have to hit when doing the appeal      
    • You haven't returned to the thread to give us your views, but a couple of other things strike me which you should consider: 1. You say that at no time was your father's licence revoked by the DVLA. It didn't have to be revoked. It expired in September and his "entitlement to drive" (of which the licence provides proof) expired along with it. He could only continue driving whilst his application was being processed by virtue of s88, and it seems clear to me (based on what you have said) that he was not able to take advantage of the benefits provided by that section. 2. The letter he received threatening to revoke his licence was probably a template letter sent when any medical issues are brought to the attention of the DVLA. But it is clear that beyond September until it was eventually renewed, your father had no valid licence to be revoked. I believe a "not guilty" plea in court will fail. The basic facts are that your father's licence expired in September, it was not renewed until February because the DVLA were looking into his medical declaration and he could not take advantage of s88. So in December he had no licence and no entitlement to drive under s88. The facts that he believed he was fit to drive and that his licence was eventually renewed may mitigate the offence but they do not provide a defence. I also asked whether he had received a summons (very unusual these days) or whether he had received a "Single Justice Procedure Notice". The way to proceed from here differs slightly depending on what he has received so if you let me know, I'll advise further.  
    • Well, what I've read from various sources suggest if a CCJ is 6 years old that if becomes pretty much ineffective for enforcement purposes in its original form.  And that if it's about to expire then the claimant needs to apply to the court to extend the original CCJ within the final year.  Even if they do apply for an extension within the 6 years they have to have a very strong argument for doing so such as the person being out of the country or could not be traced, basically show they were actively still perusing the debt I guess. Now if a claimant ever does apply within the 6 years to extend the CCJ, would the person named on if be notified by the court that such an application has been made?.  In my case I've heard nothing from the court so assume no such application has been made.  The original CCJ in my own case is now a year beyond the 6 years of issue so must now make things even less likely again. So whilst the CCJ exists that they have not enforced it in that time must surely make it unlikely they can now take it back to court because as said it would be very rare for a judge to agree to such action now. That said, I guess they now can't use the CCJ to continue with any action for an attachment order to our mortgage either?
    • Donald Trump now banned from countries including Canada and UK as convicted felon WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK There are 37 countries that bar felons from entering, even to visit.  
    • Well, they trashed their last election manifesto pledges, so nothing new really is it? They just find weasel words to try to claim they haven't actually failed if you just look at it just a little squinted and in this particular way  - and are stupid.
  • 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

Help With Verifying if Default Is Valid


CAG Dell
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5346 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

Hi

New to CAG and need some help on default notice.

Can anyone help with verifying if the default and termination notice below is valid, the default notice is dated 16/11/2008 and arrears must be paid by 20/11/2008, what i have read on the forum is the date would make the default invalid as its not taking into account postage.

 

Also if you notice the arrears value "Total Due" = 712.53 but add the amounts up and it comes to: 608.48.

 

Also outstanding balance is: 3879.74 but add it up and it is 2938.09

 

Images are posted below, will post further details about this later:

 

CITDefaultNoticeFW-1.jpg

CITDefaultPage2FW.jpg

CITTerminationNoticeFW.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi cagdell and welcome to Cag

 

DN

No service allowed

Incorrect figure

 

Invalid

 

Termination Notice

 

Does not allow 7 days final rectification allowance CCA 2006 Amendments Oct 2008

 

Invalid Termination

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct it is assumed that first class was used so DN dated the 6th recieved say 8th at latest that allows 12 days(not taking into account working days)

 

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

Thanks for that, here is a quick brief summary, i was self employed, about 2 year ago i ceased trading, i wrote to cit and informed them of this and asked to terminate the agreement under the t&c's

TERMINATION: Either party may terminate if the other: 2) becomes insolvent or is unable to pay debts as they fall due.

 

Well as i'm unable to pay the debt, and i informed them of this they agreed to collect the servers, i have the telephone conversation about this. But 2 years on and i still have them. It was also agreed that i would pay £50 per month to pay what i owed, and i still am paying.

 

They have had DCA onto me and eventually i got so fed up i sent them a SAR to cit, which 6 month down the line they have not replied to, with the DCA when i informed them that the account was in dispute and informed them to remove all information they have about me, 2 weeks later they replied saying that all information has been removed and the case has been referred back to cit. I have not heard anything until last week when another DCA has send me a letter stating i owe over £6000.

 

Well as the account is still in dispute as they have not replied to SAR, i believe they are in breach of the data proctection act and CCA, and as you have stated, the default and termination are invalid so am i correct in assuming that:

1) Passing my details to DCA they are in breach of DPA and CCA

2) Failing to supply information for SAR, they are acting unlawfully.

3) Any attemt at court action by DCA will fail due to invalid default and termination letters + failing to comply with SAR.

 

Have i forgot anything

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope in theory thats how it works but in reality these muppets create chaos.Have you actually requested a seperate sec77/78 request on the agreement from the OC apart from the S.A.R ? as this if not complied with would certainly nail it and also give you chance to view the agreement if not already.

 

 

Andy

Edited by Andyorch

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

Whats a "sec77/78 request on the the agreement from the OC", really what i was after with the sar was all logged phone calls between me and them and all letters sent received, i have the agreement they sent me the original back by mistake and it has no t&c' on it, the t&c's i quoted was from the back of the invoice.

 

Also correct me if i'm wrong, but if the default and termination is invalid, then all they are intitled to is the £976.24 arreas, plus since date of termination i have paid back about £500, so really i would only owe £476

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

Whats a "sec77/78 request on the the agreement from the OC", A legal request to your copy of the Credit agreement executed and conforms of the CCA 1974 really what i was after with the sar was all logged phone calls between me and them and all letters sent received, i have the agreement they sent me the original back by mistake and it has no t&c' on it, the t&c's i quoted was from the back of the invoice.Ok you have it then probally unenforcable anyway but you would have to post it for verification

 

Also correct me if i'm wrong, but if the default and termination is invalid, then all they are intitled to is the £976.24 arreas, plus since date of termination i have paid back about £500, so really i would only owe £476

Regards

Correct

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Says page 1 of 4 there Cagdell so the T&Cs may well be embodied within the agreement.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

Thanks, so all it boils down to is the invalid default, termination letter and failure to comply with sar.

So what is best cause of action, wait and let DCA take me to court and then produce default, termiantion letter and tell the judge that cit have failed to comply with sar, inform him/her that i'm also still paying the £50 per month as agreed and that cit has failed to collect servers, do you think i could charge them for storage :D

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...