Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Dear Man in The Middle   Actually I should be thanking you   I have been impressed by your kindness your professionalism and your prompt reply   I very much thankyou for your thorough reading through my case and pin pointing every point   I was thinking of appealing the fine aspect of the sentence but you have made everything much clearer and it makes me feel better     Cant thank you enough for being so helpful and may you be blessed
    • HB.    What's wrong with" Girl done good"?  Not tripped over one of those politically correctness bumps have I.    We say, " boy done well or good", dont we? perhaps, well I do. Oh dear.   Apologies wherever necessary.
    • Hi    yes i already have -    the agreement  Notice of assignment  statement - but not fo complete period  2006-2016, and this is just printed on plain paper      So i will just request the Default notice and full statement on the CPR Form 
    • Thanks for the feedback. A couple of comments:   1. Before Magistrates arrive at court they have no idea what sort of offences they will be dealing with or who they will be dealing with.  They are given a list of defendants and the charges against them on arrival and that's it. Their Legal Advisor (the person sitting in front of them and facing the court) runs through that list before the court begins, but only to point out anything unusual or anything in particular they need to know. In a traffic court there is not usually anything to tell them. They have no papers given to them about any of their cases (except occasionally when dealing with trials or probation reports) until the case is called on. They rely on being provided with any papers they need by either the prosecutor or their Legal Advisor..   2. Your fine is based on your weekly net income and no account of expenditure is normally taken. It is asked for so that, should the defendant ask to pay in instalments, some idea of how much per week or month he can realistically afford can be gained. Actually, your fine was not harsh. On the contrary you were treated rather leniently. The guideline fine for 76 in a 50 is one and a half week's net income. £6,200 pcm is £1,430 pw. So your fine should have been £2,145. Your guilty plea would knock it back to £1,430 - one week's net income, as I mentioned in an earlier post. In addition to that you would pay £143 in the form of a "Victim Surcharge" and £85 towards prosecution costs - so £1,658 in total. Had you pleaded Not Guilty and been found guilty at trial (a near certainty from what I remember you told us) not only would you have lost the discount on your fine but you would also have paid £620 prosecution costs. A conviction following a trial should have cost you £2,145 (Fine) + £170 (VS) + £620 (Costs) which equals £2,935 (the maximum Victim Surcharge for offences committed before 28/6/19 is £170).   Other than that I'm not surprised they asked why you would prefer a ban instead of points and even less surprised that they chose points over a ban. I doubt your presence made any difference at all (which, again, I suggested earlier that it probably would not). Sentencing for speeding is very prescriptive and there is rarely any mitigation or other factors surrounding the offence or the offender which would significantly influence the outcome. Speeding becomes a very expensive business when cases come to court, especially for those on high incomes and very often a "view" is taken by the Magistrates that the calculated fine is a "bit steep". That's probably why you were cut some slack.   One other point which will probably upset you more than help (but which I think it is important you are aware of). Had your recorded speed been just one mph lower you would almost certainly have been offered a fixed penalty (FP) of £100 and three points. FPs are normally offered up to 49mph in a 30 limit, 65 in a 40, 75 in a 50, 85 in a 60 and 95 in a 70.   Thanks again for the feedback.
  • Our picks

sillygirl1

Welcome make huge losses.

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3053 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

The directors of Cattles have concluded that the value of the company’s net assets is now less than half of its called-up share capital.

 

In these circumstances the directors are required by law to convene a general meeting of shareholders to consider what action should be taken to deal with the situation.

 

That will be fun.

 

David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hot off the pages of Credit Today

 

Credit Today online

 

Wonder who it is - sadly Provident comes to mind here, just their sort of 'thing' at the moment, more poor uneducated suckers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think theres an offer - its smoke and mirrors!!

 

The last paragraph to me says it all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the pages of Credit Today

 

Credit Today online

 

Seems the bondholders gripe is that Cattles didn't tell them about the banks guarantees when they bought the bonds and now they will only get 1p in the £ (if that!)

 

Anyone with a Welcome loan should make a silly offer to get them off their backs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debt collection firm The Lewis Group, one of the group’s subsidiaries, is currently collecting the loan book of Cattle’s troubled Welcome Finance division. Debts collected will then be claimed by the banks as assets.

It is expected that it will take two to three years to collect the debts.

Dream on. ;)

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this bit of news too;

News

 

Fines for silent calls raised to £2m - 17/09/2010

 

 

Companies that make silent calls could be fined up to £2m after the government hiked the maximum penalty for offended.

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/news/news-item.cfm?news=1942

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

since when do we believe what credt today has to say

 

the bond holders are living on hot air

 

its rbs who are pulling the strings after cattles lost the court claim with rbs

 

the most the bondholders can expect back is £1 per share if any agreement is reached

 

also since the fiasco with price waterhouse /deloute and touche

 

now anaother (unknown ) addministrator

 

says it all realy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the pages of Credit Today

 

"Commission earned on the collection of other lenders’ debt and the provision of investigative services also fell to £11.9m in 2010 from £13.8m the previous year.

 

Meanwhile Cattles recorded a pre-tax loss of £246.9m for 2010, down from a £684.2m loss the previous year. Earlier this year the High Court sanctioned a scheme of arrangement which allowed Cattles to undergo a major restructuring of its finances."

 

Almost £2 million down in commission earned - I wonder why :lol::lol::lol:

 

"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what was it that insider said on the money program ch.4

 

less the 5% of money collect by the 5 major debt co's actually goes off the original debt balance?

 

dx


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what was it that insider said on the money program ch.4

 

less the 5% of money collect by the 5 major debt co's actually goes off the original debt balance?

 

dx

 

sounds about right. scandalous!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...