Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • A local builder has wrecked my garden, charged me for materials he never delivered, consistently lied and failed to turn up when he said he was going to and built a wall which is unfit for purpose.  He has just walked away from the job and will not take my calls
    • I should add that the CCJ amount has reached £334, So if I minus the £50 in claimed solicitors fees and £25 filling fee that means that they upped the fee to £259 by the time they entered the CCJ.
    • I’m sure Nature is grateful for you flagging it as needing more examination !   Until then, what is your point about older people and anti-inflammatory medicines? or are you just quoting learned articles at random in the hope that occasionally you’ll either “get lucky” with a comment, or that you’ll gull someone into thinking you actually understand the cytokine / interleukin / inflammasome pathways….. The utility of steroids (dexamethasone) for in-patients needing oxygen has been demonstrated by the RECOVERY trial. I can’t see where this has been analysed on a sub-group basis for older people on anti-inflammatory meds : are you suggesting the trial has “missed a trick”?   What is your feeling on which interleukin needs to be targeted? And should it be upregulated or downregulated?   More to the point (since I don’t expect an answer that shows any degree of understanding, if you answer at all) :   What is your point, rather than just posting journal articles at random!
    • I know what you are saying but the court route so far has almost doubled the claim 
    • Here's my first draft! Let me know what you think so far...cheers!   On behalf of the defendant Statement no.1 20/05/2022   In The County Court At Manchester   Claim Number   HIGHVIEW PARKING LIMITED VS    Witness Statement   I am the defendant in this case. The facts and matters set out in this statement come from my personal knowledge and I believe them to be true.   I was not able to reply to the court documents as I was no longer at the service address at the time the court papers were served. I moved out of the address on the 30th of September 2021   September 31st 2021 - I moved out of my address November 15th 2021 - I left the UK November 25th 2021 - I was served court papers at an address I was no longer living at December 17th 2021 - Judgement by default was issued against me April 1st 2022 - I realised I had a CCJ against me on my credit file and contacted the court for more information April 1st 2022 - I immediately sent the court a N244 request to have the judgement set aside   I received no pre court action dated prior to this date    The Claimant's Witness Statement point 20g about prompt action is incorrect. As soon as I realised I had a CCJ on the 1st of April I applied to have the judgement set aside.   ######### Draft order ######   Between   Claimant xxxxxxxx -and-Defendant xxxxxxx       Draft Order   It is respectfully requested that the Judgement dated xxxxxx claim number xxxxxxxx issued under Part 12 CPR be set aside pursuant to CPR 13.3. a/b.   It is Ordered   The Claim be set aside and the defendant be allowed to defend the claim   Signed    Dated.     DRAFT DEFENCE      (1) the Claimant is suing the wrong person, the Claimant should be suing the driver of the vehicle and has not established keeper liability under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012;  a Notice to Driver should have been delivered within 14 days if the claimant wishes to rely on Keeper liability. Claimant's Witness Statement exhibit 3 clearly shows that their Charge Notice was issued on the 01/09/2017, 27 days after the alleged contravention. DCBL still have no idea whether they are pursuing the keeper or the driver and are disregarding Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in order to try their luck in the hopes of dishonest financial gain.    The claimant is put to strict proof that it was indeed the defendant who was driving the car at the time.      (2) Locus Standi - the Claimant is not the landowner and I do not believe they have the authority to bring this claim.  A letter - not even from the landowner - saying there is an agreement is not the same as producing an agreement (Claimant's Witness Statement exhibit 1);   The claimant is put to strict proof that they have the consent of the land owner and is asked to produce the actual agreement between themselves and the landowner.      (3) the convoluted "free parking voucher" scheme is an unfair term under the Consumer Rights Act 2019;      (4) I do not believe the Claimant has obtained planning permission for their signs which is a criminal offence and makes it impossible to have formed a contract with the driver;   The claimant is put to strict proof that they have the correct permissions from Manchester Council in order to operate the site as a parking business.      (5) The Claimant is claiming the debt, legal costs and an extra invented sum as an attempt at double recovery which invalidates the whole claim. Their action is expressly forbidden under the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 and ensuing government Code of Practice, as well as previous legislation.    (6) Both the BPA and the IPC do not not have compliant Codes of Conduct. They are in breach of the Law in two ways at least which has been confirmed by the new Private Parking Code of Practice introduced by the Government earlier this year which clarifies the position that has always existed on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 but ignored by most parking companies as well as the BPA and IPC.    (7) Escalation of costs Private Parking Code of Practice s9 states in the most recent publication ‘Private parking charges, discount rates, debt collection fees and appeals charter: further technical consultation’. 36. To reduce harm to motorists, we propose to cap the level of debt recovery fees at the existing industry level £70. In setting this cap, we have taken into consideration the deterrent effect, the amount of court fees and the costs to operators of enforcing parking charges. We will keep the cap under review and will take these factors into consideration when setting it in future.   The parking operator must not levy additional costs over and above the level of a parking charge or parking tariff as originally issued. The claimants WS Exhibit 3 demonstrates the unlawful progression of a £55 charge becoming £135, and escalating to £165 in Exhibit 5, way in excess of what code of practice dictates.   Even back in 2017 the charges were unlawful and on that basis the PCN should have been cancelled as an abuse of process.   Charging of extra debt collection/ administrative costs etc over and above £100. This has always been the case . Schedule 4 s4[5] states "(5)The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(c) or (d) or, as the case may be, 9(2)(d) (less any payments towards the unpaid parking charges which are received after the time so specified).   (8) Most parking companies are breaking the Law by using ANPR cameras that records the entrance and leaving of the car as the "period of Parking" on their Notice to Keeper which is necessary to comply with PoFA 2012. It is obvious that a car is not parked as it is driving within the car looking for a space, then parking in it and then leaving the car park should be not included in the ANPR times. In addition if there are disabled people in the car or children in car seats this can all add to the time. So given that there is a minimum of 10 minutes "consideration time" it is more than probable that the parking period was complied with and that the case should never have been taken to Court. It also means that the keeper's GDPR was breached.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Cabot/Mortimer claimform - old EGG card debt


fairbyblue
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1364 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

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi All,

Just received my letter from Apex regarding debt bought from Egg. Also contains same standard letter of assignment on Egg letter headed paper.

 

What do I do now? I have already CCA'd Egg a couple of years ago and the agreement is enforceable? Do I just pay to Apex what I was paying to Egg? Or do I go for a lower amount? Total debt is approx £3300.

Should I ring Apex or write? Or wait for them to call me?

Regards, Fernack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure CCA enforcable, what about Default notice? The bottom feeders will try and get as much out of you as they can. I'm not saying dont pay but if you feel morally obliged to pay make sure its an amount that you can afford EACH and EVERY month or you primary bills take precedent.

Be careful when dealing with them, everything in writing only !!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi .. Not sure about default notice? I think I got one originally a few years ago when I got into difficulty with repayments. I have made an offer to Apex via their online service - about half of what I was paying to Egg.

Will be watching the Apex threads with interest - seems Egg have sold off all the old debts they cant be bothered with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I may just be getting a little over excited here, but has anyone managed to find a copy of their consumer credit licence online??

 

I tapped in their company registration number of 03967099 but nothing came back??

 

EDIT...ok, the search engine doesn't like the zero at the beginning of the number!!

 

They are licensed for:

Credit brokerage

Debt Adjusting/Couselling

Deb Collecting

 

 

So, as Consumer Credit is not there, this means that either Egg has terminated the agreements and they are no longer live or Apex are acting on behalf of EGG as an equitable and not absolute assignment.

 

The latter would surprise me as I presumed that Egg was offloading these accounts due to financial difficulties and the known flaw in the agreements.

 

Also, my default was issued 3 years ago and no mention was made of terminating the agreement then.

Edited by WelshMam2009
Details added...

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

Just received my letter from Apex regarding debt bought from Egg. Also contains same standard letter of assignment on Egg letter headed paper.

 

What do I do now? I have already CCA'd Egg a couple of years ago and the agreement is enforceable? Do I just pay to Apex what I was paying to Egg? Or do I go for a lower amount? Total debt is approx £3300.

Should I ring Apex or write? Or wait for them to call me?

Regards, Fernack.

 

Are you sure its enforceable ?, most of them are at least questionable due to the use of the term Approved Limit instead of Credit limit or indeed any reference to the term credit at all, as far as we know approved limit maybe the limit you can spend each month, etc.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard, from a little birdie, that they have only sold on accounts where people have come to agreements with them.

 

They see no (short-term) value in accepting ongoing token payments, but as there are payments, these people are seen as malleable.

 

So, debt collectors sense a chance of bullying the money out of you. Egg raises a bit of desperately required cash.

 

With Egg, the best way is to ignore them.

 

Interestingly, this is the "calibre" of person that Apex employs.

Hardly cream of the crop.

Whenever you feel done, click here, and realise it isn't so bad after all!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard, from a little birdie, that they have only sold on accounts where people have come to agreements with them.

 

They see no (short-term) value in accepting ongoing token payments, but as there are payments, these people are seen as malleable.

 

So, debt collectors sense a chance of bullying the money out of you. Egg raises a bit of desperately required cash.

 

With Egg, the best way is to ignore them.

 

Interestingly, this is the "calibre" of person that Apex employs.

Hardly cream of the crop.

Whenever you feel done, click here, and realise it isn't so bad after all!

 

I hope Gemma phones me, isn't it nice they all love their job so much, come on guys..be more honest :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hee hee! What a FABULOUS career!

Seriously though, I do feel sorry for them, paltry salary and what an awful, worthless job to do.

 

As someone mentioned on another thread, all the consumers need to do is stop paying anything, and let the banks take them to court.

 

The worst outcome?

You pay what you can afford, which is better than paying what you can't afford.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hee hee! What a FABULOUS career!

Seriously though, I do feel sorry for them, paltry salary and what an awful, worthless job to do.

 

As someone mentioned on another thread, all the consumers need to do is stop paying anything, and let the banks take them to court.

 

The worst outcome?

You pay what you can afford, which is better than paying what you can't afford.

 

I feel sorry for poor Roger !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Just got a call from Apex but refused to answer the Data protection details as I told them they called me and should have the info.

Basically I don't know what to do. I have been paying Egg a s much as I can afford with no job. In fact I still am. Now these guys are on my back and I don't know what to do.

I read all this thread and because I am panicking it didn't sink in. What should I do first?

 

Please help. I have been trying to pay my debts as best I can. I know I owe the money and was trying to do the decent thing but these companies confuse me. Like Nat west was the first they sold a debt to one company then another company jumped in and now I am being taken to court by Shakespeare Puttman. I don't know here I am, particularly as I am still paying Nat West too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I should have said I also have Moorcroft threatening legal action on same debt.

 

I sent a Cag to Moorcroft on 11.10.09 and had no reply. Who the heck do I owe this money to and how do I start?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I join the party :)

 

OH has just received the twp letters in the same envelope from Apex, cca appears to be unenforceable ('Approved Limit as opposed to the prescribed term 'Credit Limit'.

 

Advice given to me from Angry Cat ;-) is to cca Apex BUT clearly write on the PO 'To be used for CCA request ONLY'.

 

In OH's case PPI & unfair charges outweigh outstanding balance.

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
As far as I'm aware its 12+2 days end of.

 

Apex using their own rule book perhaps.

 

I can find no mention of a further 28 days in the CCA 1974.

 

I'm assuming the 'the documents' not received bit refers to them not getting the docs back from Egg ?. Lets hope that Apex are begining to regret buying this job lot from Egg :)

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy,

 

If Apex 'own' the account, as they're saying they do (OH account has been 'sold' to them also) then they - as the 'new owner' (Allegedly) have 12+2 days to supply the cca

 

Still waiting for them to produce the OH cca - which was in dispute with Egg anyway.

 

May they suck on the lemons they 'bought' :)

 

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I understand it a CCA is 12+2 working days. Then you can file the account under dispute which as long as the dispute is on then collection has to stop.

 

BUT it does not mean that if say after 28 days if they produce a copy of the agreement the account stays in disputed. Then it becomes if the agreement is enforceable or not.

 

Now I notice that a lot of members on this thread have said they have been making token payments and have kept to the agreement.

 

Hence, I would first shoot off a CCA request. IF in 14 working days nothing, then send a dispute letter. About a week later send an SAR application. (If it goes to Court you can show the Judge you were making regular payments so it will show in your favour. It is a big difference if it is "Can't pay but have paid" then "Can't pay won't pay"). Also the SAR you can use it to find possible mistakes, PPI, charges etc etc which can be used in an argument.

 

Next one is to ask for a copy of the Default Notice and a copy of the proof of delivery.

 

Between them you should keep Apex very happy, busy and with enough work to take them into the New Year.

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Hi all,

 

got letter from Mortimer clarke saying I owe 3k on credit card,

 

can't remember if I do as its a while,

 

only started receiving letters from cabot a few weeks ago,

 

they want income and expenditure history,

 

I have no recollection nor I do not recognise the creditors prime credit 1 sarl.

 

Any ideas what to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...