Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Primary and secondary teachers are supporting pupils with their own money, buying food and warm clothing. Eight in 10 primary teachers in England spending own money to help pupils | Education | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Increasing numbers of children hungry and lack adequate clothing, with two-thirds of secondary teachers also supporting pupils  
    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.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

Bornrich v MBNA (Optima Legal)


bornrich
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4987 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

I am informed by MBNA - after problems of my own - that MBNA no longer use Optima. (Last Friday)

It appears that, maybe, Optima have not been very professional about this as they now appear to send convoluted, unintelligible replies to letters sent to them about MBNA debt! They also do not seem to acknowledge complaints about these letters.

MBNA are responsible for the actions of their collection agents in UK law. Maybe MBNA have taken action after all the complaints.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am informed by MBNA - after problems of my own - that MBNA no longer use Optima. (Last Friday)

It appears that, maybe, Optima have not been very professional about this as they now appear to send convoluted, unintelligible replies to letters sent to them about MBNA debt! They also do not seem to acknowledge complaints about these letters.

MBNA are responsible for the actions of their collection agents in UK law. Maybe MBNA have taken action after all the complaints.

 

This does not surprise me one iota I could see this happening for quite some time.

 

Have had my own experiences with optima legal if you would like to know how far have a read here.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/151709-help-65.html

 

From post 1286.

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes please langster email the web address to me when it is up and running and please feel free to use anything from my thread if you need it PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep us informed Langster - and thanks to all contributors for helpful advice/comments. A great site and, uncommonly, mostly helpful and supportive across the board.

Are they transferring you to another solicitor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they transferring you to another solicitor.

 

They have taken the debt back themselves and phoned me to say so - a good step forward! At the same time, I raised the issue of Optima tactics. That was when I understood I was informed I would not be hearing from Optima again as they were no longer being used.

 

Sadly there appears to be no competent body to deal with complaints about these issues. BUT that may now all change.

 

OFT lose cases, complaints departments treat complaints with distain (Mail article on LTSB complaint department facing large fine) - what does large mean when LTSB continue charging customers in default for 210 days before passing debt on? What do LTSB make in interest and charges for 210 days. (Answers on large sheets of paper please)

 

In defense of MBNA - when everything works well, they do put customers on their 'hardship scheme' if they recognise genuine difficulty. Optima just spoiled the pitch in a big way! It started to spoil MBNA reputation

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have taken the debt back themselves and phoned me to say so - a good step forward! At the same time, I raised the issue of Optima tactics. That was when I understood I was informed I would not be hearing from Optima again as they were no longer being used.

 

Sadly there appears to be no competent body to deal with complaints about these issues. BUT that may now all change.

 

OFT lose cases, complaints departments treat complaints with distain (Mail article on LTSB complaint department facing large fine) - what does large mean when LTSB continue charging customers in default for 210 days before passing debt on? What do LTSB make in interest and charges for 210 days. (Answers on large sheets of paper please)

 

In defense of MBNA - when everything works well, they do put customers on their 'hardship scheme' if they recognise genuine difficulty. Optima just spoiled the pitch in a big way! It started to spoil MBNA reputation

So they have discontinued your court case?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Hi Bornrich

 

came across your thread while searching the web

 

i have a very long story to tell in my fight against MBNA/OPTIMA...too long to post on here but if you take the time to look on

 

penaltychargesforum and search Slevin v mbna you can read it.

 

was very suprised to see my name mentioned in post #66 by langster

 

we can swap notes to help each other along the way

Link to post
Share on other sites

CC I notice you have no thread maybe a good idea if you start one, but in the mean time I've answered you question on my thread.

 

Regards

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok all you need to do is copy and paste the important bits over then add a link to that thread on here for the rest i will look in on your thread this evening

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

September? Are they winding up lol wishful thinking I know PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Langster

 

Glad you have seen my post

 

I have been checking you info and you definitely have a good source on the inside

 

I have some good stuff to send you relating to how low and deceitful Optima can go. it will be useful for your future website.

 

I dont want to discuss in an open forum as they will be watching. i want to "keep my powder Dry" so to speak

 

if i am able to attach some documents to a email to you i will

 

I would be interested to hear what your "friends" know about my case....

 

p.s. i dont mind my real name being used...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say anything definitive at the moment but a little bird tells me that there could be some big news coming soon which might be of interestlink3.gif to Optima watchers... I'm told that it looks like somebody might have been a bit naughty. I'm just waiting for a hard copy of the evidence but IF what I've been told is correct (and I stress that I'm waiting for a copy of the evidence and just going by word of mouth at present but I have no reason to suspect that this person is not telling the truth), a very senior person could potentially find himself in serious trouble.

 

Just waiting for the green light on this.

_____

Well that cant come soon enough I have my pint glass at the ready lol

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Refearlier post LETTER BEFORE ACTION

 

found this on OPTIMAS WEBSITE...such hypocrits

Optima Legal - CCA Debts – Should minimum thresholds be imposed?

paul-lovegrove.jpg

Publications

 

 

CCA Debts – Should minimum thresholds be imposed?

 

11 May 2010 | in Credit, Featured Articles

by Paul Loveridge, Associate Solicitor

 

CCA Debts – Should minimum thresholds be imposed on Orders for Sale?

In February the Ministry of Justice published a consultation paper considering whether a minimum threshold should be imposed on Order for Sale applications arising out of final Charging Orders on debts regulated by the Consumer Credit Act.

The consultation arose due to the Ministry of Justice’s concerns at (1) the large volume of final Charging Orders which had been granted over the past decade combined with (2) the fact that given the current economic climate, creditors are more likely to want to quickly exercise an Order for Sale to release the monies tied up in the charge.

The consultation paper considers four separate options:

 

  1. Introducing a threshold on all Charging Order and Order for Sale applications.
  2. Introducing a minimum threshold on just Orders for Sale in CCA applications.
  3. Introducing a two-limb test before an Order for Sale could be granted ie a debt must be a high amount and account for more than a certain percentage of all debts owed to the applicant.
  4. Restricting the scope of Orders for Sale by removing their applicability to consumer credit debts or residential property altogether.

Whilst the consultation paper does not openly criticise creditors for their actions in a difficult economic climate it does question whether debtors should be offered more protection, perhaps even enshrined by statute, from applications that may be considered oppressive. Concerns such as this become apparent when the MOJ cites, by way of example, an order for sale on a property worth £300,000 arising out of a judgment debt of £500 secured by a Charging Order.

In order to ascertain whether existing debtor protection is sufficient, the MOJ considered the current statutory framework surrounding Charging Orders and Order for Sale applications as well as established case law and made the following observations:

 

  • There is sufficient protection afforded to debtors within the current statutory framework to safeguard against oppression. Furthermore, the framework does not pigeon-hole debtors in a way which may cause detriment.
  • Although judicial decisions do differ between courts, there remains a uniform trend when considering Order for Sale applications. The general attitude of the judiciary is, correctly, that such applications are a last resort and the court will take into account all matters including any arguments under the European Convention of Human Rights in circumstances regarding children or family life.
  • In the event that a creditor is denied the opportunity to enforce CCA debts through final Charging Orders and Orders for Sale, there is a risk that unsecured lending will be reduced or withdrawn to the detriment of society and the economy ie a significant proportion of society would either have credit lines reduced or closed eg young professionals in an inflated property market. This further suggests a reason for creditors acting with restraint in making an application for an Order for Sale.

In concluding that none of the four options set out above should be implemented, the MOJ took comfort from the OFT’s interim findings on applications for Orders for Sale, which revealed that a relatively small number of Orders for Sale are granted and the OFT, in its regulatory role, already acts as a safeguard to debtors as well as a passive deterrent to creditors engaging in unfair practice.

Notwithstanding the MOJ’s preliminary conclusions the consultation period remains open until 30 April 2010 and provides an opportunity to make representations against the backdrop of social and economic pressures on debtors. We will await with interest the outcome of the consultations but, in the meantime, would agree with the MOJ that the existing safeguards are already fairly comprehensive. The more it is made clear by the judiciary that such applications will only be considered as a last resort, the less any speculative applications will be made.

If you would like to record your agreement to the conclusion or any disagreement and recommendations you can do so at www.justice.gov.uk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

My Posts exist exclusively to assist me in preparing litigation against another party.

As such, it is almost certainly protected by litigation privilege.

 

The legal requirements for claiming litigation privilege are well established and are not in dispute.

Communication between a solicitor, or the client, or a third party will be protected by litigation privilege where the communications are for the dominent purpose of obtaining legal advice in connection with, or conducting litigation in prospect: Re: "Highgate Traders Limited (1984)"BCLC 151.

 

Copyright Information: All information contained in this website , Associated websites, and Forum posts are Copyright "Reclaim The Right Ltd". If you wish to use the information on this site for publication elsewhere then please email the administrator for permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...