Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. 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 simply contracted by the landowner 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. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Lowell/Hamptons Statutory demand - old EGG debt *** WON + COSTS *** 2 years later - SD Issued again !!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4268 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

Vera,vera, vera....

 

Whooooppppeeeee...i bloomin' well knew you could do it!!!!:D See now dont you feel 100% over the moon...to think you were not going to go!:eek:

 

I am so happy for you...feet up with a large vino tonight..have one for me

 

love mj:)

 

Ha ha with a little help from my friends eh MJ?????

 

Hope your case is going okay

 

1 down......:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 200
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Very well done....and make sure you report them to the OFT too....1st Credit had restrictions placed on them by the OFT for not being serious about statutory demands - OFT imposes requirements on 1st Credit over debt collection practices - The Office of Fair Trading

 

Will do with pleasure 42 man..... Any help on drafting letters most welcome although ;)

 

But for today, Lowells can be put on a back burner!!!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm quite fond of this one -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1816916.html

 

However, have a look at the pdf's that Surfaceagentx20 has attached at the bottom of the post on a letter for wasted costs -

 

Surfaceagentx20 wasted costs

also

 

Liabilty for Costs CPR 38.6

Sharpman v Nationwide credit card services ***WON WITH WASTED COSTS***

 

Welcome/Cohens - case withdrawn ***WOO-HOO ***

 

have a look at this post by IGNM on costs as well -

 

IGNM post on costs

 

and a B_R_W post on what else you can claim - B_R_W additional costs you can claim

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Well done Vera and great work from all who helped you. :)

Can you please let us know if you get the costs paid.

I would love to see these **** get loads of ccjs against them :D

“I will not make any deals with you. I've resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 2 weeks later...

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Okay, this one has reared its ugly head again! another Statatory demand for the same account!!! Been so long just trying to jog my memory - Should I send them a letter saying they have already tried this or let them go ahead?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please, please report this to the OFT, and DO get it set aside.......take a look at some of the other Lowells threads, and if you aren't sure then let me know, did you keep the judges order from the last set aside ?.....(they probably have a copy at the court,) but don't rely on this as court documents do go missing....if you need some help then let me know, you now have forms 6.4 (set aside) and 6.5 (witness statement (which has replaced the affadavit)...you need to be mentioning words like vexatious, malicious.....It might even be worth quoting parts of CPUTR2008 too....

 

Is the demand in Lowells name again ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, in Lowells name again... I am not sure about how to report it to the OFT, (not great at writing letters always get too emotional) They are coming on 9th August to serve the SD, pretty sure I can dig out the old paperwork, but will probably be at work when they call. Should I write to them beforehand?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for a letter then send recorded delivery....

 

Dear curs

 

I am in receipt of your recent statutory demand. As you may remember I successfully set aside your last statutory demand over two years ago and in that case the judge awarded costs in my favour. I can only summise that with this latest demand it is your intention to present a malicious, unlawful and vexatious petition, as you didn't bother to defend on the last occasion, and although I will not enter into litigation via the postal service, I will be applying to set aside this demand MOST VIGOROUSLY.

 

When the issue of costs arises I will be producing the last order from the court. I am also forwarding all my correspondence to the Office Of Fair Trading.

 

I trust this makes my position completely clear.

 

Yours faithfully

 

(don't hand sign just type name)

Edited by 42man
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...