Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Letter from Morgan on behalf of Cabot


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4867 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

My other half received this letter from Morgan this morning, reference an entirely unenforcable Monument (Providian) agreement.

 

Its the first time I have seen one of these, has anyone received the same letter?

 

Alan

Morgan.pdf

Edited by alangee
Link to post
Share on other sites

i received the same letter from morgans (cabot in house solicitors) on 22/12/09 about an old pre 1989 debt with bank one intl. taken over by halifax, with a dodgy default notice, no date just days to reply and an original application form with no original terms and conditions just a copy of the halifaxs current t & c and no prescribed terms. Did PM PT2537 how to respond but no reply.

 

Unsure how to respond to morgans letter and preprotocol staement from morgans?

 

Merry Christmas to all on CAG

 

Can anyone advise a reply from the Cabot fan club, or anyone.???

 

VOLVO

Edited by volvo
spelling error
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Seminole

 

Barring the DJ lottery, it should not be enforcable.

 

Alan

 

Something I picked while searching through my case for inspiration is the cancellation box on the application form on this link.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=15142&d=1261657307

 

 

 

It says that the Cancellation of the "Agreement" is to be offered on a seperate document (it is in fact on T&C's page 10) but there is no link from that app form to the T&C's except where it states :

 

"Important - Your Information

 

"I have read condition 21 of the T&C's............etc

 

And in the main paragraph it tooks about the T&C's and how your information is dealt with in your "Application"

 

The T&C's give most of the prescribed terms that would make this enforceable but is the link STRONG enough to enforce, in my case the DJ in court clearly thought that this was the case.

 

I am now appealing this decision but I am looking for signs that definitelty make this document or combination of the documents unenforcable.

 

Any Thoughts Anyone

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife received a claim from Morgan (representing Cabot) today, via Northampton.

 

PoC states:

 

The Claimant is the Assignee of a Debt(s) from Monument

Credit Card reference xxxxxxx

Notice of Assignment having been given to the Defendant in writing. Despite demand for payment £xxxx.xx remaind due. The Claimant claims £xxxx.xx and interest under s69 County Courts Act 1984 and costs.

 

The demand for payment is nearly 50% more than the NoA states, and there was over £700 of unlawful default charges/interest in that transfer amount as well.

 

As far as I am concerned the prescribed terms must be in the signature document, not in the T&C's. As you say, Beau, they point you to the fact that they will contact the CRA's, but do not refer to the prescribed terms at all.

 

Alan

Edited by alangee
Changed title
Link to post
Share on other sites

It does say the enclosed T&Cs not attached T&Cs I think with the recent Waksman judgement this makes a difference as the PTs need to form part of the agreement even if stapled

 

I expect you remember signing this thinking I cant see any terms maybe they send these to me with the information about cancellation rights!!!

Live Life-Debt Free

Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume that as they mention the notice of assignment in their PoC, I can request (under 31.14) they show me a copy of the deed of assignment and proof of postage of the NoA, as well as a copy of the agreement.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have been looking through my Monument file - this thread relates to a claim against my OH - and I have a letter from Monument which states that the reply card that Cabot are relying on is in fact an application card. I know that we all knew that anyway, but it is nice to have it confirmed by the OC.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Wrote to Morgan outlining the fact that the prescribed terms in the T&C's they supplied were not the same as in my OH's, sending a redacted copy of her first statement to prove it, and offering them the chance to drop the claim.

 

They have replied with the following CPR18 request.

 

Copy of her credit agreement

Copy of T&C's that were relevant to her application

Copies of all Providian CC statements

Copies of all correspondence from Cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd.

 

I thought they were supposed to be in possession of all of those prior to making a claim!!

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pinky

 

I do not have the originals of anything except for the first few statements. They had already taken my OH to court without anything. By showing them a redacted statement - which has everything blanked out except for the actual amount charged in interest - I am trying to avoid it going any further. All they will get from me is more redacted statements. They sent me redacted documentation when I sent them a CPR18.

 

I have also replied saying that I believe they are on a "fishing" trip, because they do not have the evidence supporting their case.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Just a quick update on this.

 

Despite my wife having a solid defence against the claim by Cabot, Morgans refused to accept her evidence (interest in prescribed terms wrong), and were determined to continue with the case. As a result, we instructed a firm of solicitors, who convinced Cabot/Morgan of the error of their ways, and today we have heard that they have dropped their claim.

 

I would like to say a massive thank you to Paul (pt2537), for achieving in just a few weeks, what I had been unable to do in more than a year.

 

Can the mods update this to another success against Cabot? Thanks.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume that as they mention the notice of assignment in their PoC, I can request (under 31.14) they show me a copy of the deed of assignment and proof of postage of the NoA, as well as a copy of the agreement.

 

Alan

 

There are a lot of these letters from Morgans flying around at the moment - I've got two. There is a common theme here - nobody ever receives the notice of assignment from Cabot. I don't think they send them, but just knock something up if the debtor has the temerity to complain. Unfortunately, I've read on another thread, that at least one court will accept that on 'the balance of probability' Cabot did send the NoA.

 

There must be a lot of people on here - I'm one of them, who would be willing to sign a witness statement to the effect that this notice was never received. If enough people do this to persuade a court that the balance of probability actually lay in the other direction then this would surely be a blow to Cabot. I'm game - anyone else?

 

Regards.

 

Fred

Before you criticise another man you should first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, when you criticise him, you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes on.

 

Don't get me confused with somebody knowledgeable by all those green blobs. I got most of them by making people laugh.

 

I am not European, I am English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Mmmmm got one of these letters myself today, mine was reference an old peoples bank of conecticut,(who??) held by Citi financial, it goes back to at least 1999 as I have one old statement in my possesion and is the same account number so they cant try telling me it was a new agreemnet I signed

 

I have written back telling them the account was in dispute with Citi, so send it back to them.

I have also wrtten to Citi asking for a copy of the NoA The one I got with Cabot was a cobbled photocopy with a date different than the date on the letter they sent to me

Lets wait and see

I am back up for the fight again

onlyme

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...