Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • "as I have no tools available to merge documents, unless you can suggest any free ones that will perform offline merges without watermarking" (which you don't) ... but ok please upload the documents and we'll go from there
    • Please go back and read my message posted at 10:27 this morning @jk2054. I didn't say that I wasn't going to provide documents, only that I will upload them to an online repo that I am in control of, and that I would share links to these. You shall still be able to read and download them no different from if they were hosted here. And, the issue I have is not so much with hosting, but using an online pdf editor to create a multi-page pdf, again I have discussed this that same message.
    • Thanks ,DX, I'd forgpotton about that letter and can't remember sending a SB letter. I must have left it and they did not chase. Unclebulgia. Yes several periods of no contact. Think its time for the SB letter . 
    • well if your not going to upload documents because you are too scared of your data being stolen and someone rocking up to you we are going to struggle to help you peoples energy data breach has nothing to do with a hosting site...
    • Whilst trying to point score over Biden, Trump can't remember the name of his own doctor. Trump gets name of his doctor wrong as he challenges Biden to cognitive test | Donald Trump | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Gaffe came as 78-year-old Republican presidential candidate sought to bolster his support among Black and Latino voters in Michigan  
  • 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

Sole trader to Ltd Co debts - strange one this


mkb
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5253 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

You need a solicitor. A very good one.

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the absence of any further comments, I will find a solicitor tomorrow who can help but needs to be under legal aid.

 

What does seem ludicrous is that:

 

a) the debt is only £300

b) we're now on income support

c) I need much more care with my disabilities so our situation will never

improve and

d) can't pay it in any case unless judge orders £1 per month :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive Been Making Some Enquires On This

 

This Is The Crunch

 

Why Did The Cheque Bounce

 

Lack of funds. Bank charges debited prior to cheque being bounced.

 

When You Wrote The Cheque, Did You Know There Was Not The Funds In The Account To Cover The Cheque

 

No idea there was insufficient funds when cheque issued.

 

 

 

Thanks for your help & hopefully you can now advise further ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

An Offence Can Only Be Applicable If You Knew Prior To The Issue Of The Cheque, There Would Not Be The Funds To Cover The Cheque.

 

If You Can Prove Just Prior To The Cheque Being Issued The Account Was Debited With Bank Charges, Thats By Statements, I Believe You Will Be In The Clear

 

The Law They Are Quoting Relies On Intent And Prior Knowledge, Ask Your Bank For Statements Around That Time

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mkb

 

Think Post is rightly referring to S.63 cancellation rights but......... things must be desperate if the sols are relying on Bills of exchange.

 

I've seen this before somewhere on another forum but as usual my grey cells fail me.

 

Will get back to you as soon as I can find what I was looking for

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Hi Seminole

 

This is where it gets complicated!

 

LTSB decided to close our Ltd Co account so our accountant advised that there would be no problem in using the T/A account for payments & receipts so the cheque that bounced was a T/A cheque but the invoice is to the Ltd Co.

did the T/A have funds to clear the cheque if so it is libel

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes it is a fact i was sending cheques written on the inside of fag packets and also firing them onto ceramic tiles 18" x 12" tiles they could nt enen pass them through the tellers glass ive posted a snippet of the bank libel on the forum the bank admitted it to the newspapers...here is a freind who took action some years ago.Decorated images :: 20-01-2010161933.jpg picture by patrickq1 - Photobucket

Link to post
Share on other sites

Email sent & this received in reply:

 

Thank you for your email.

 

I appreciate your comments; however, we are not pursuing the limited company for non-payment of its account but are rather suing in respect of the dishonoured cheque which was in your personal name (Mrs xxxx t/a xxxxxx) and not in the name of the limited company; accordingly, the liability for this payment remains with you personally. This is because, under the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, the law says that when you write a cheque to someone, you effectively promise that the cheque will definitely be honoured by your bank and if, for whatever reason, the bank does not honour the cheque, you imply that you will compensate that person in full.

 

I would strongly recommend that you seek legal advice to verify this if you are unsure; however, I can confirm that we will strongly contest any claim you make for our action to be struck out since this would be an abuse of procedure (especially since there is almost no defence to a dishonoured cheque). If it is of assistance, I would refer you to the information given under the following link http://www.insolvencyhelpline.co .uk/ltd-companies/bad_cheques.php which confirms the details I have provided above.

 

In the circumstances, I trust that you will now arrange for the amount due to be paid without further delay.

 

Yours sincerely

 

The bank is right, this is a simple contract thing. A cheque is a contract in its own right so they have an action against you for breach of contract. the initial invoice etc is all irrelevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE!

 

Got judgment for claimant :rolleyes:

 

States that it is therfore ordered that you must pay the claimant £28.75 for debt (and interest to date of judgment) and £45.00 for costs.

You must pay the claimant the total of £73.75 forthwith. I have no idea what happened to the £300 they were actually claiming!

 

Result!! :lol:

 

I will pay this within 28 days then ask for the entry to be deleted from the register.

 

Thanks for all the help guys and gals :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The £28.75 was there admin fee as on your original court document (post 1) not the amount they were actually claiming for. I think you might receive a revised judgement soon

Link to post
Share on other sites

O pants!!

 

Well if I do, I will have to apply for re-determination because I cannot lay my hands on that kind of money so they will have to wait quite a while for their money :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...