Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

stayed cases, have you heard anything yet


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4301 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 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Julian

Yes the case is about unauthorised overdraft charges and whether the terms are unfair or not. Whichever wat it goes then the same principal would be applied to whatever the charge is for. If the charge is unfair for unouthorised overdrafy yhen it follows its unfair regarding returned payments.

Its only my opinion but i would think that if a judge was in a mind to stay a case, he would take the above into consideration if the bank put it in their request for a stay.

Knowing the way the banks work, they have probably already thought about that and even if they do and the test case is lost by them, then I think they will turn tails and argue that the result only encompases unauthorised overdrafts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump

 

Just claim as per normal

 

I think the quick way is to look at Wiki

If you think this post has been of help, please click on my SCALES on the left - thanks :-) :-x

 

Peter Anderson

Me Vs Morgan Stanley - WON £490

Me V's LTSB - Private & Bus Acc - £18.8k (since Oct1997)

inc: S.69 Interest (and growing daily) -;)

Please remember to DONATE when you have WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to be a common misconception that the test case is solely about Overdraft charges - these of course include all penalty charges under the UTCCR - so not really sure what other charges you think you can claim - without wanting to repeat what has already been said - continue your claim as normal!

Link to post
Share on other sites

there were some Abbey claims they were set for 17th in the blackpool CC, i have been informed they are automatically stayed as of yesterday, i know there are barclays set for the 24th August, they are Staying those also.

TOTALLY debt free as of 2007, Fantastic,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

now i am mad i have been waiting to hear from the court since 21st aug i havent had nothing i also put in a letter and letters for the stay to be thrown out on the grounds that shabby didnt attempt to offer a settlement as ordered by judge by the 17th aug i still havent heard anything nothing to my letters etc

i think it is awful not getting a reply or to tell me they are staying

etc

hugs

roxie

xxxxxxxxxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello all, well i got a letter today weds

blackpool county court has asked for n244 and that a hearing date will be sent

as there is alot

i have put it all in my thread

abroadgirl v abbey

please if anyone can help me please will you take alook at all my letters and my n244 i have filled in

i havent sent it just yet i will be faxing it all later once i know it is all alright and that i have got everything and not missed anything out

ty for all help

hugs

abg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I have a hearing date for 12 Nov to have stay set aside at Blackpool county court. Does anyone else? My claim is against Halifax and I am hoping to prove that they have wasted time in replying to all my correspondence having prior knowledge of "test case" and using this inside information to my detriment.

=======================================================================================================

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

Halifax Won £1180.00

NatWest Won £876.00

Halifax 2 N1 submitted 20/07/07 stayed 24/08/07 N244 Application filed 31/08/07 hearing set for 12/11/07 rescheduled for 29/01/2008. Application dismissed stay still in place.

Charity Group £200 compo for lost passport.

HM revenue & Customs; demand for WTC overpayment £632.12. Disputed, their error. Did not have to repay.

All opinions expressed are my own and have no legal standing and no connection to CAG

 

All errors/typos etc are not my fault the blame lies with the spelling gremlins

 

<<<<<< If any of this has been helpful, PLEASE click my scales

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you had to apy £65 for the application?? They wrote bak to me asking for it, cnt afford to keep dishing out cash, want it coming back to me! Now wondering whether to write in again, what did you put in your letter hun?

 

Jo x

 

 

Hi Jo,

when I filed application I asked for a hearing, but they only took £30.00 for fee and said that if DJ decided on a hearing then I would not have to pay for it, then when I got notification of hearing date the letter said if I wanted hearing I would have to pay extra £35.00 so it has cost the £65.00 in 2 installments. You cant win with them. They are as bad as the banks for grabbing your money!!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/85201-stonedecroze-halifax-2-a-32.html#post1106882

 

If you follow this link it will take you to the letter I used. I am trying to prove abuse of process and abuse of privalidged information to have the stay lifted. Just hope it works as I cannot plead hardship.

 

If any of this info is of use to you, feel free to take it.

 

Stone.

=======================================================================================================

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

Halifax Won £1180.00

NatWest Won £876.00

Halifax 2 N1 submitted 20/07/07 stayed 24/08/07 N244 Application filed 31/08/07 hearing set for 12/11/07 rescheduled for 29/01/2008. Application dismissed stay still in place.

Charity Group £200 compo for lost passport.

HM revenue & Customs; demand for WTC overpayment £632.12. Disputed, their error. Did not have to repay.

All opinions expressed are my own and have no legal standing and no connection to CAG

 

All errors/typos etc are not my fault the blame lies with the spelling gremlins

 

<<<<<< If any of this has been helpful, PLEASE click my scales

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

i have 2 of my claims in court, they were filed last year, the were duely stayed, i opted not to apply for them to be lifted expecting the OFT to be sorted by mid 2008. Now it seems this is gonna take another year and the banks will get an extention to the waiver, are the cases that were stayed, automatically put back into the system or do we have to send yet another form to the courts, i am wishing now i had applied for the stays to be lifted , is it too late to do that now.

TOTALLY debt free as of 2007, Fantastic,

Link to post
Share on other sites

are the cases that were stayed, automatically put back into the system

Yes

 

or do we have to sent yet another form to the courts,

No

 

i am wishing now i had applied for the stays to be lifted ,

Very very few succeeded, so you would probably have wasted your time

 

is it too late to do that now.

The judge may give guidance on stays at the Case management Conference on May 22nd

Link to post
Share on other sites

...and the waivers granted to banks, and by extension the guidance to courts, is permanently under a three month review...if the banks start bullying their customers the waivers and stays should be lifted...

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

are the cases that were stayed, automatically put back into the system

Yes

 

or do we have to sent yet another form to the courts,

No

 

i am wishing now i had applied for the stays to be lifted ,

Very very few succeeded, so you would probably have wasted your time

 

is it too late to do that now.

The judge may give guidance on stays at the Case management Conference on May 22nd

 

took the words out of my mouth. I wrote to the court with regards to mine as I was going away and it was pointless me changing my plans to go to a hearing that would've not ruled in my favour. I know EXACTLY how you feel, I'm even more p-ed because someone got their money literally a week before me, then they started all this 'staying' rubbish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 5 weeks later...
hi i had a claim for halifax credit card in june 07 before the test case, heard nothin since then got a letter today from the halifax stating they have sent a letter to court to request that my claim remains in place? did this happen to you

As ar as I am aware the OFT test cse does not apply to credit cards. So any claim for unlawful charges should proceed as normal.

HALIFAX: 13/01/07 Sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter (marked as rec'd 16/01)

Paid in full in March 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

had a similar thing with Barclays - letter recieved from them on Friday (25 July) says they have applied to the CC where my claim is and asked for the stay to remain in place "to the full and final conclusion (including all appeals) of the test case". I have sent a letter of objection to the CC pointing out the banks agreement with the FSA and their recent 6 month extension.

Do you think Barclays are trying to pull a fast one ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are credit card cases being stayed? Has something changed over the last few months?

HALIFAX: 13/01/07 Sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter (marked as rec'd 16/01)

Paid in full in March 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...