Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3541 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

Good news saint - ha! Who'd have thought a brush with your friendly neighbourhood bailiff would help you get a quicker appointment for surgery? Now that's what I call a result.

Good luck

Rae

 

You could always send him a thank you card with a tip in it!!

 

PT


Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-reading my post, PT, I notice it was worded in a cack-handed way. I now have an image of the bailiff wearing a t-shirt printed 'XYZ Bailiffs - we can get you into hospital quickly!' :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cannot believe it, thouht i had said goodbye to this thread in december. but this mornin a bailiff from this company turned up i spoke to him out of the window he said i need to contact the council as they still say i owe tax despite paying it in full, before christmas,when i pointed out i was ill and he shouldnt come to my house any way he said that was my fault for not making sure the council had marked my account unfortunately i cannot find my account number so i have emailed the council asking if they csn send it to me, i would fone but the last timr i did i was on hold for 45 mins


I won £5289 heres how

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/40703-saint-luco-natwest.html

 

 

ITS NOT WHETHER YOU WON OR LOST, BUT HOW YOU PLAY THE GAME THAT MATTERS. ( OBVIOUSLY A LOSER THEN):D :D :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also ask them why the bailiffs are still involved if you have paid in full, and to call their dogs.. err opps bailiffs off straight away or you will be making a formal complaint to the chief executive of the council.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have todsy recieved aletter from said bailiffs

warning of further legal action, it says amount if paid today£42.50; levy fee£42.00; total due£82.50. i phoned them and asked what theses fees are for especially as no levy has been taken she said pay by thursday or the bailiff will visit. i told her 4 weeks ago i had a stroke so surly the bailiff shouldnt visit my home, her reply was weve been dealing with you since december so your illness makes no difference she then said i have made a note that i have told you that you could get more fees if you havnt paid by thursday oh by the wat the£42.50 is becuse they have sent me a letter


I won £5289 heres how

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/40703-saint-luco-natwest.html

 

 

ITS NOT WHETHER YOU WON OR LOST, BUT HOW YOU PLAY THE GAME THAT MATTERS. ( OBVIOUSLY A LOSER THEN):D :D :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
have todsy recieved aletter from said bailiffs

warning of further legal action, it says amount if paid today£42.50; levy fee£42.00; total due£82.50. i phoned them and asked what theses fees are for especially as no levy has been taken she said pay by thursday or the bailiff will visit. i told her 4 weeks ago i had a stroke so surly the bailiff shouldnt visit my home, her reply was weve been dealing with you since december so your illness makes no difference she then said i have made a note that i have told you that you could get more fees if you havnt paid by thursday oh by the wat the£42.50 is becuse they have sent me a letter

If they have made no levy then a levy fee cannot be charged as for a letter fee, ha ha they cannot charge for this either, they can however charge £42.50 for the two visits.

Was this included in the amount you paid last year? if so they can whistle dixie for the amounts that they are trying to get from you, however if you didnt pay it with the amount you owed on your liability order then they can chase you for it. Dont ring these numpties again have a word with the council who dealt with this in the first place and see if they have passed on £42.50 for the bailiff charges. If they have not then the bailiff company may make a claim in the small claims court to get it from you. Highly doubtful but they cannot act as if this is still outstanding as with a liability order. By the way did they ever visit your home. If they did not then you dont have to pay it any way. some one correct me here if I am wrong on that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

saint -luco

1 luco mansions

chatham

kent

 

thank you for your letter dated18march 2010 warning of further legal action

could you please confirm the amounts owed and who they are oswed to also could you please detail why these amounts are owed.

 

i look forward to hearing from you

regards

saint-luco

have just sent this mail to whyte and co, i think it could have been worded better but it tells them what information i would like. normally i wouldsend a, recorded delivery,letter.is iyt ok to use email. any thoughts on this please. after my telecon with thrm on tuesday i am expecting a visit any time now from their man

Edited by saint-luco
taremove my address

I won £5289 heres how

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/40703-saint-luco-natwest.html

 

 

ITS NOT WHETHER YOU WON OR LOST, BUT HOW YOU PLAY THE GAME THAT MATTERS. ( OBVIOUSLY A LOSER THEN):D :D :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow that was quickjust got a reply to my mail.

Thank you for your email.

 

There is a balance outstanding of £24.50 for bailiff costs. This is for call made to you on 7/12/2009 prior to you making a payment direct to Medway council. As a good will gesture I have removed the costs for the 2nd call on the 11/3/2010.

 

Please make payment of £24.50 on our website

www.whyte.co.uk so that can return the case as fully paid. If this fee remains unpaid and further bailiff calls are necessary you will incur further costs for this action.

 

Kind Regards

Whyte & Company

Edited by saint-luco
to rempve a name

I won £5289 heres how

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/40703-saint-luco-natwest.html

 

 

ITS NOT WHETHER YOU WON OR LOST, BUT HOW YOU PLAY THE GAME THAT MATTERS. ( OBVIOUSLY A LOSER THEN):D :D :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can afford to pay the 24.50 I would pay it now.. at least it will get the bailiffs off your back, you can then dispute it when you feel that you are able to if you need to, its a good result after what they were trying to get out of you. :)

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...