Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well done with the photo. Of course the signage is insufficient.  PPM are not interested in competent management of a car park, they are interested in catching drivers out so they can issue their PCNs. For a start, according to their trade associations' Codes of Practice, they are supposed to have signage at the entrance. Any e-mail reply from the company and whether they will/won't/can/can't get the invoice cancelled?    
    • I will annotate the message I sent for the forum.  Sorry, didn't see this straight away...
    • I went back to the area, this photo is taken on entry. My vehicle was parked in the first space on the left.    Would you say there is sufficient signage ? It’s different to the street view as one sign is missing. The sign nearest to where I parked is 2.23m above ground! So even if the car had been reversed parked in front of it, I don’t think it could be seen. PCN PPM.pdf
    • Thank you. I expect that @dx100uk will be along soon to give advice. Meanwhile, I really wonder whether the default date – as being the starting point of the six years – something which has been decided in law. It has always seemed to me to be extremely unfair. According to the limitation act, the six year period begins from the date on which the cause of action accrued. This normally means that the breach of contract occurred. Section 6 of the limitation act says that in terms of loans, the cause of action begins on the date that the debt was "demanded". Over the past two years this has come to mean the date that the default notice was issued – but I have to say I don't find that very satisfactory. If you received demands for payment before then then I don't see why section 6 shouldn't refer to that date. Did you not receive any correspondence at all in 2017/2018? What was the value of the original loan – and how much you pay off? I see that there was some kind of instalment agreement. Tell us about that. See what my colleague @dx100uk says but anyway, if I were you I would send off an SAR immediately both to the claimant and also to the original creditor. It costs you nothing. There is no downside. Get in the post straightaway with some kind of utility bill establishing your identity. You can even include a copy of the claim form as well as proof of your identity
    • £749.69 court fee £70 legal fee £70 total £889.68 MyJar TM.pdf
  • 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

Yes Car Credit & Go Debt


RiQ123
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4964 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 383
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

in The Xxxxxxx County Court

claim Number Xxxxxx

shifty applicant

and

godebt Ltd respondant

second Witness Statement Of

shifty

I, Shifty, Being The Applicant In This Case, Make This Witness Statement In Response To The Witness Statement By The Respondant Dated 20/07/10.

1/ The Facts In This Statement Are True To The Best Of My Knowledge.

2/ The Applicant Does Not Dispute That He Entered Into A Credit Agreement

With Yes Car Credit On The 24/03/2005 By Way Of A Conditional Sale

Agreement.

3/ The Applicant Agrees That He Defaulted On The Agreement And That The

Vehicle Was Repossessed.

4/ The Applicant Maintains That He Received No Notice Of Assignment To Comply

With The Law Of Property Act 1925, And The Applicant Requires Proof Of

Service By Way Of Recored Delivery.

5/ The Applicant Confirms That He Did Make A Repayment Plan With The

Respondant On The 6/10/2009. The Applicant Withdrew This Arangement

After Having An Audit Done On The Credit Agreement As To Its

Enforceability.

 

6/ The Respondant Goes To Great Lenghts To Points Made By The Applicant In A

Letter Dated 18/05/2005. The Respondant Keeps Quoting From This Letter In

His Witness Statement.

the Applicant Confirms That No Such Letter Was Sent To The Respondant

Dated 18/05/2005, And Asks The Respondant To Clarify This Matter.

7/ On The 18/05/2010, The Respondant Was Sent A Letter By Recorded Delivery

Stating The Reasons Why The Agreement Was Unenforceable And Putting

The Agreement Into Dispute.

8/ The Applicant Did Receive A Letter From A Sarah Burrows Which Was Dated

4/06/2010 In Response To The Letter Sent By The Applicant On The 18/05/2010.

This Letter Only Stated That They Considered The Agreement Enforceable

And Gave No Explanation As To The Reasoning For This Statement, Or Refute

My Reasonings As To The Agreements Unenforceability.

9/ this Statement Sent To The Respondant By The Applicant Explains Why He

Considers The Agreement To Be Unenforceable.

 

When The Agreement Was Taken Out With Yes Car Credit, I Was Informed I Had To Have A Shortfall Insurance Policy Added To The Agreement. This Insurance Is Known By G.a.p.

Now, As This Policy Is Included In The Charge For Credit As It Has Been Included In The Amount Of Credit.

As The Amount Of Credit Has Been Misstated, The Agreement Cannot Be Enforced As The Amount Of Credit Is A Prescribed Term; The Court Is Prohibited From Making An Enforcement Order. This Legislation Falls Under S.127 (3) Of The Consumer Credit Act 1974

This Gap Policy Needs To Be Included In The Total Charge For Credit, Not The Amount Of Credit.

The Agreement Is In Two Parts, A Conditional Sale And Credit Agreement, As They Have Been Linked; The True Cost Of The Vehicle Has Been Overstated. This Puts The Debtor At A Disadvantage Should He/she Wish To Do A Voluntry Termination Of The Vehicle.

i draw The Courts Atention To Amount Of Credit

a/ Any Deposit That Has Been Added To The Credit Agreement (insurance G.a.p.)

And Not What It Was Intended For. That Would Be The Conditional Sale Part

Of The Agreement.

b/ The Deposit Has Been Added To The Amount Of Credit On The Insurance (g.a.p.)

c/ By Doing This The Total Amount Repayable On The Conditional Sale Part Of

The Agreement Has Been Misstated, Putting The Debtor At A Disadvantage

If He/she Wishes To Do A Voluntry Termination Of The Agreement.

Section 90 Of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 Explains Voluntry Termination

And Payments Of A Third.

summary

the Total Amount And Charge For Credit Has Been Misstated.

it Will Be Prejudicial In The Annual Percentage Rate Which Will Be Misstated And Being A Prescribed Term, Makes The Agreement Unenforceable.

On More Than One Occasion, The Applicant Has Requested The Respondant Issue An N1 County Court Claim So This Matter Can Be Delt With At A Trial. The Respondant Refuses To Enter Into Any Dialogue On This Matter.

The Applicant Maintains That A Valid Dispute Is In Place On This Agreement.

The Applicant Repeats The Words Of A Mr Justice Warren.

He Confirmed The Insolvency Service Should Not Be Used As A Method For Debt Collection Where A Bona-fide Dispute Is In Place.

statement Of Truth

i Believe The Facts Stated In This Witness Statement Are True

signed

sshifty

dated This Day 22/07/2010

 

 

 

 

Dont Forget To Sign Shifty

 

 

Email Sent

 

 

comments People

good Or Bad

Link to post
Share on other sites

I Was Expecting This Stance From Godebt

 

My Template Letter Has Hurt Them Alot

 

Ive Not Been Beaten Yet By Godebt And It Will Stay That Way

 

All Your Details Are Included In The Email

 

Just Remember To Sign It

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting

 

Change The Case Number On The Email Ive Sent As Ive Taken It Off Of Hollis Briggs Letter

 

You Use The One The Court Sent You, Just Ammend To The Corect One

 

you Only Have One Case Number

 

The One The Court Gave You

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...