Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • lolerz
      Advice needed regarding Eviction

      By lolerz · Posted

      Please see my comments on your post in red
    • WiltshireGuy81
      Advice needed regarding Eviction

      By WiltshireGuy81 · Posted

      Thanks for your reply, I have another 3 weeks before the notice ends. I'm also concerned because the property has detoriated since I've been here due to mould, damp and rusting (which I've never seen in a property before) rusty hinges and other damage to the front door caused by damp and mould, I'm concerned they could try and charge me for damages? As long as you've documented and reported this previously you'll have a right to challenge any costs. There was no inventory when I moved in, I also didn't have to pay a deposit. Do an inventory when you move out as proof of the property's condition as you leave it. I've also been told that if I leave before a possession order is given I would be deemed intentionally homeless, is this true? If you leave, yes. However, Your local council has a legal obligation to ensure you won't be left homeless as soon as you get the notice. As stated before, you don't have to leave when the notice expires if you haven't got somewhere else to go. Just keep paying your rent as normal. Your tenancy doesn't legally end until a possession warrant is executed against you or you leave and hand the keys back. My daughter doesn't live with me, I'd likely have medical priority as I have health issues and I'm on pip etc. Contact the council and make them aware then.      
    • dx100uk
      General question about CCJ's if not enforced or extended after 6 years

      By dx100uk · Posted

      extension? you mean enforcement. after 6yrs its very rare for a judge to allow enforcement. it wont have been sold on, just passed around the various differing trading names the claimant uses.    
    • BazzaS
      Sold shoes to a platform. Tracking shows no issues but company claim empty box received - Should I apply to strikeout?

      By BazzaS · Posted

      You believe you have cast iron evidence. However, all they’d have to do to oppose a request for summary judgment is to say “we will be putting forward our own evidence and the evidence from both parties needs to be heard and assessed by a judge” : the bar for summary judgment is set quite high! You believe they don't have evidence but that on its own doesn't mean they wouldn't try! so, its a high risk strategy that leaves you on the hook for their costs if it doesn't work. Let the usual process play out.
    • Andy111
      General question about CCJ's if not enforced or extended after 6 years

      By Andy111 · Posted

      Ok, I don't necessarily want to re-open my old thread but I've seen a number of such threads with regards to CCJ's and want to ask a fairly general consensus on the subject. My original CCJ is 7 years old now and has had 2/3 owners for the debt over the years since with varying level of contact.  Up to last summer they had attempted a charging order on a shared mortgage I'm named on which I defended that action and tried to negotiate with them to the point they withdrew the charging order application pending negotiations which we never came to an agreement over.  However, after a number of communication I heard nothing back since last Autumn barring an annual generic statement early this year despite multiple messages to them since at the time.  at a loss as to why the sudden loss of response from them. Then something came through from this site at random yesterday whilst out that I can't find now with regards to CCJ's to read over again.  Now here is the thing, I get how CCJ's don't expire as such, but I've been reading through threads and Google since this morning and a little confused.  CCJ's don't expire but can be effectively statute barred after 6 years (when in my case was just before I last heard of the creditor) if they are neither enforced in that time or they apply to the court within the 6 years of issue to extend the CCJ and that after 6 years they can't really without great difficulty or explanation apply for a CCJ extension after of the original CCJ?.  Is this actually correct as I've read various sources on Google and threads that suggest there is something to this?.

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Dissecting the Manchester Test Case....

PriorityOne

By PriorityOne
in Debt Collection Agencies

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4648 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 3.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

satnewbie

satnewbie

Posted
Posted

What members on here have to understand is that these forums are monitored. Now let us be honest....... somebody puts up a scan, covers the name and address and the reference BUT leaves the name of the bank or the name of the solicitor etc......... then they leave the amount claimed.

 

So simple logic. X bank has been referred to. They check who owes (let us say) £12,0354.11p (a unique figure which to find one the same will be I would say 1 in one trillion) and bingo. They know what is being asked, what the reply is to be expected, they can work out the IQ of the person involved (how a post is made, the english, there are a lot of things that give a game away).

 

You aint got a chance. The "brief" (barrister) will be told all of this so he can run you round his little finger. Solicitor rules of conduct state that a solicitor CANNOT mislead the court. So most judges will believe "him/her" and not "you". In my experience, most judges also are in favour of banks and institutions and against the "man in the street". They look at you as "the person trying to get out of a contractual agreement".

 

Read your "story". Understand it. Read the draft letters. Understand them. Jeez if you read McGuffick v RBS the letter sent for the s.77 application is the same as on here!!!! Read the posts on here. Read AND MOST OF ALL understand the CCA1974. Read the case law referred to. Read them again. See which parts of the Act and of the case law referred to apply to you. Most of all, stop trying to take the easy route. i.e. I post a question. I get a reply quoted letter and I just cut and paste. Most probably they have read it and will be expecting it.

 

IF you are not capable of "the fight" then arrange a monthly minimal payment. Look at all the pros and cons. Look at every angle.

 

Most of all, after having read the caselaw, the cases they will use, the Act etc try and make a statement for court which will show that they have no reasonable prospect of success and make them discontinue.

 

p.s. Just some advise

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
straftat

straftat

Posted
Posted

well i can only speak from my limited experience and it was good, the judges were firmly in my favour in all 4 cases that i had go to court

 

mostly because they were the claimants , they were the professional institutions yet a total newbie like me (the defendant) with the help and advice on here was able to easily hold my own because they were not aware or showed total disregard for basic consumer law and best practice

 

the impression i got was that the judges were sick to the back teeth of these DCAs and their dubious practices

 

i got this feeling in my last case when the judge tore a strip of their rent a lawyer over poor POC and winked at me while she tried to bumble her way through the CPR rules and directions book

 

remember , they have thousands of claims to work on every day and its all a numbers game to them

you only have your own case and its yours , do your homework and you cant lose

 

just my take on it

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dotty50

Dotty50

Posted
Posted

Or wait, sit tight and see if they take action. If they have an easy target they are much more likely to issue and then it is up to you to defend or make an offer accordingly.

 

Very good advice on here is NEVER be the claimant, leave it to the other side!

Link to post
Share on other sites
bustthematrix

bustthematrix

Posted
Posted

Hmmnnn, never be claimant on the less clear CCA and unenforceability issues. The CCA was setup to protect so it has little that can be used to 'attack'. CPUTR has a little bit more.

 

When talking about reclaiming refunds of credit card/loan/mortgage arrears fees and charges though, this advice changes.

The matrix is intrinsically flawed. Within it is the program for it's own destruction. If you are reading this, you are in the matrix and it's days are numbered...so watch out! :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites
basa48

basa48

Posted
Posted
What members on here have to understand is that these forums are monitored. Now let us be honest....... somebody puts up a scan, covers the name and address and the reference BUT leaves the name of the bank or the name of the solicitor etc......... then they leave the amount claimed.

 

So simple logic. X bank has been referred to. They check who owes (let us say) £12,0354.11p (a unique figure which to find one the same will be I would say 1 in one trillion) and bingo. They know what is being asked, what the reply is to be expected, they can work out the IQ of the person involved (how a post is made, the english, there are a lot of things that give a game away).

 

You aint got a chance. The "brief" (barrister) will be told all of this so he can run you round his little finger. Solicitor rules of conduct state that a solicitor CANNOT mislead the court. So most judges will believe "him/her" and not "you". In my experience, most judges also are in favour of banks and institutions and against the "man in the street". They look at you as "the person trying to get out of a contractual agreement".

 

Read your "story". Understand it. Read the draft letters. Understand them. Jeez if you read McGuffick v RBS the letter sent for the s.77 application is the same as on here!!!! Read the posts on here. Read AND MOST OF ALL understand the CCA1974. Read the case law referred to. Read them again. See which parts of the Act and of the case law referred to apply to you. Most of all, stop trying to take the easy route. i.e. I post a question. I get a reply quoted letter and I just cut and paste. Most probably they have read it and will be expecting it.

 

IF you are not capable of "the fight" then arrange a monthly minimal payment. Look at all the pros and cons. Look at every angle.

 

Most of all, after having read the caselaw, the cases they will use, the Act etc try and make a statement for court which will show that they have no reasonable prospect of success and make them discontinue.

 

p.s. Just some advise

 

And it is amongst the best advice I have read here for a while.

 

The ONLY template letter anyone should use is the s78 request. After that you should have a reasonable idea of what you are doing and formulate your own response letters. If you can't then you have a lot of reading to do!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...
PriorityOne

PriorityOne

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Of course, a clever poster could lead a litigious creditor on a merry dance if they were to let slip they frequented this site and made themselves identifiable ;)

 

They'd have a job on their hands, although as I know for a fact that at least one DCA employs someone to frequent these forums on a daily basis..... it does pay to keep your wits about you if you don't wish to be identified.

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
PriorityOne

PriorityOne

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

I havent read the thread but were any of the people in this case forum members? What were their thoughts on this outcome?

 

Not to my knowledge..... although it stands to reason they could have been. Sometimes knowledge can be a dangerous thing and in these cases, it was open to far too much interpretation by greedy consumers who should have done their homework more thoroughly.

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...