Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • 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.
  • 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

Statutory Demand - Capquest


tigs68
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5154 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 All i have just received a letter from Scotcall debt collecting Services telling me the capquest debt has now been placed with them and that i should pay with in 7 days, its a very christmassy letter as in big red letters DOORSTEP COLLECTION NOTICE- PLEASE READ CAREFULLY.

 

my question is are capquest allowed to do this when i have a set aside hearing on 25th Jan?

they provided me with a joke of a CCA

an no proof its not SB.

 

thanks tigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Ok thanks hungrybear can i use this at my hearing another nail in the capquest coffin.

 

tigs

 

 

Well I suppose you could use it as evidence of there evasiveness to your statute barred ascertions. Remember that it is against OFT guidelines to chase an SB debt once you have been told it is SB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a wunch of bankers and Cupid Stunts. They issue a Stat Demand and then pass it to the pond life that is Snotcall. The judge is just going to love their abuse of the Insolvency system.

 

The problem with capquest as with all DCAs is that they tell so many lies that they end up confusing their own TINY minds

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

OK....nothing to worry about, just relax...have you sent your costs into court ? These need to be in the court file at least 24 hours before the hearing a link here - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/207135-stat-demand-arrow-global-3.html

 

They are still in default of your request for a copy of your agreement and the relevant terms.....they only sent a one page application form.

 

The debt is also barred by the statute of limitations act 1980, you queried this before the statutory demand came through I believe, they quoted that you made a payment in April 2004....you have evidence/statements that prove that yo umade no such payment, you feel they may be less than economical with the truth... that you never paid them. They have not provided any evidence to support this....you feel that the demand is frivolous in that it is obviously designed to scare you into paying...

 

Moreover...they haven't provided any valid default notice that contains the prescribed terms.

 

PPI ? Penalty Charges ?...

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks 42man,

this is a supposed catalogue debt, do i have to apply for costs? can i also use the fact i havent had a notice of assignment, and what should i take to the hearing with me appart from something to steady my nerves.

 

Tigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

No you stand up in front of the judge and you show him how angry and distressed you obviously are at this company who are well known for issuing stat demands as a tool for debt collection...and yes no notice of assignment....

 

This was clearly disputed - and it is an obvious abuse that they are issuing a demand...show the judge this too - http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/press_release_attachments/1stcreditrequirements.pdf

 

And as you have evidence that you never made a payment when they said then you can tell the judge you feel they are being less than economical with the truth.....!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes, get your costs in....!! what is the worst a judge can do ? say no... - and don't forget this -

 

Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch)

 

In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made:-

 

27 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).

 

All they have done is said you made a payment...they never provided any proof whatsoever -

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok a bit more help needed here:

This is my defence i am writing up at the mo:

The statute demand i received was my first knowledge of this debt being sort after.

I also have here a copy of the requirements imposed by OFT in a simliar case.

Capquest are still in default of my request for a copy of my agreement, they sent me a copy of the application with no relevent terms attached, included with the screen print of the signed slip i received a covering letter stating i would receive a notice of assignement as of yet i have received nothing.

The debt is barred by the Statute of Limitations act 1980, in their reply was that a payment was made of ....... on ........, i have here copy of my bankstatement for that month with no amount that matches theirs being paid out. (do i have the right to blank out the payees off of my bank statement and just leave the amounts payable) they havent shown any evidence to support their claim.

I have since requesting the set aside hearing received from ............ a debt collection agency acting on behalf of capquest to collect the above mentioned debt, i have that here with me, ( i feel there is something i should put here but not quite sure, as i thought it might be an abuse of process)

I have also not received a valid default notice.

 

Feel free to suggest things to add or remove, any suggestions greatfully received.

 

Tigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Folks this morning i have received a letter from Capquest and i shall copy a paragraph here:

 

"we do not accept that the debet is not due however in view of the time considerations and use of the courts time we ask that the application be granted but with no order as for costs. If as we anticipate we subsequently obtain information which enables us to prove that the debt is due we will proceed by issuing a clain in county court which will allow the applicant the opportunity to defend the claim.

There are no additional matters upon which we will be able to assist the court at the hearing of the application to set aside the sd and in view of this and with a view to saving costs we therefore ask that our attendance at court on 25 jan2010 be excued and that this letter should be placed before the district judge as an explanation of our absence"

 

I have called the courts they have had a copy of the letter and are going to ask the judge if i need to attend.

 

Thank you all for your help

 

Tigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sod that letter - go for your costs!

 

They issued you with the SD, so they will have to pay. They are admitting they issued an SD without good reason, with no proof to hand, and that is a clear abuse of the judicial process.

 

Report this to the OFT, please!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Crapquest should have thought about what proof they had before they issued the SD. They have as good as admitted the SD was issued purely as a means to intimidate and force you to ring their telephone threat monkeys. You MUST report this to the OFT and send the OFT a copy of the letter. CRAPquest were warned about their misuse of SDs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok wish me luck folks, the Judge wants me in court even tho Capquest are not going to be there, costs sorted and evidence and arguement ready..................................plus plenty of deep breathing being done.

 

Tigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i'm not a happy bunny ...................got to court judge called me in told me she had a letter to say they werent turning up, that when they have their evidence together they will issue a court summons and i can either pay it off or wait for the summons,case is adjourned, thankyou for coming goodbye.

So what a waste of my time and my energy, i didnt even get to say a thing.

 

Tigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...