Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is the letter headed Letter of Claim/before Claim or similar? If not, it sounds like more of the threatogram chain. If you're not sure, post up an anonymised copy of the letter and we'll check. HB
    • So guess what, we have received a final demand letter for £100. It states if payment is not made by 11/06 they will have no option but to forward the case to their litigation dept with a view to commence County Court Proceedings. So just wondering if anyone has any advice. Do we ignore this? or do we need to take action? Thanks 
    • hi dx, thanks for helping just re-reading everything this morning and I must have missed this one from uncle in his thread "What you should not do, is not contact the Banks and simply default on payments. "  are you in disagreement with this based on your last sentence?
    • Thanks for the reply and clarification, that might just explain why in my case contact has pretty much ceased. Though with such companies it doesn't mean they won't ever threaten to return to court as a tool to force one's hand if they feel they are not self informed on their chances etc.  But concerning how last year they tried to use the CCJ to get a charging order and the court granted an intirum order on our mortgage using the CCJ that would have been a good 2-3 months beyond the 6 years, should the court not have checked the age of the CCJ in the first case or would they always grant an interim order simply off the back of a CCJ being produced without even checking the age of it?.  Had I not defended that action at the time they may well have got a default using a CCJ older than 6 years which could be a concern going forwards. At the time when I contacted the court to question the paperwork for a final order application the clerk suggested people don't get informed when companies apply for interim charging orders, they are automatic if a claimant has a CCJ and people only get contacted once a date for a final order application goes through. kind of begs the question if such companies can continue a seemingly backdoor method to attempt default action if un-defended if the initial application doesn't need to check the age of a CCJ?.
    • Hello!  Wondering if someone can help with this.  I suspect not but worth a go.  I appreciate the "contract is with the seller" line, which is what Evri has fed me but wanted to see if someone with experience in these things could suggest anything else I could do here.  I appreciate there are many topics about lost parcels - My parcels weren't lost, until the driver walked up to my door with them and then decided to make them lost/stolen... I'll summarise what has happened.  Wednesday of last week - Evri delivery driver stole / walked off with 3 of my parcels.  -  Arrived outside my properly, took photos (3 separate photos as its 3 separate deliveries) of the tops of the parcels (pointlessly zoomed in on just the labels, couldn't see anything else, other than a small piece of the pavement and a little weed, which doubly confirms it was outside my door as I can see the same plant), marked the order as delivered and walked off with them.  He's marked on the Evri GPS marked that he was outside.   -  3 different deliveries, from the same company (same boxes etc.), but 3 separate tracking numbers. -  Went through the Evri bot which opened a case on each tracking number.  I then phoned them and left a voicemail explaining what had happened. -  24 hours later had a canned response asking me if the packages had turned up and to check around etc..  I responded explaining again what happened and that they've definitely been taken. -  4 days later,  this morning, I get a response telling me to ask the merchant to refund me. I've responded to this message with a long email, repeating what I said, that I believe the driver has stolen these packages and that he took those suspicious top down shots of the packages, marked them as delivered without ringing or knocking etc.  I've said that I expect them to investigate further, but I gather they won't. In my several messages to them initially and later, I told them I don't care about a refund and wanted the parcels.  They contain some sentimental stuff, nothing of high monetary value, hence me going to this trouble.  I only paid £25 for the contents. I did contact the merchant when this first happened and they asked me to wait a few days.  They ended up refunding me despite me asking them not to and that I wanted them to escalate it with Evri because this appears to be a case of theft.  They didn't seem bothered - Refunded me and told me to go back to Evri and escalate it with them? So - Is there any way to compel Evri to conduct a proper investigation with this driver?  Search for my parcels? I have quite a lot of deliveries handled by Evri (not out of choice) - They used to have a fantastic chap and I rarely had any issues.  He has been replaced by a new guy and I believe the route is handled by this same guy who I believe has taken my packages.  Naturally, I fear this is going to happen again in the future if no investigation occurs. Appreciate any assistance - Thanks for reading. Al.  
  • 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

Default Notices and Token Payments...


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5262 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

Morning people.... :-D

 

I've been thinking about the position creditors may find themselves in after issuing a DN, doing nothing about it re. legal action for years.... because they seemed happy collecting token payments instead.

 

This situation has happened to me more than once. More recently, one of my creditors got very bolshy with me after growing fed up with these token payments and threatened all kinds of nasties..... so they got a CCA request. Nothing remotely enforceable turned up, so I stopped paying. They then decided to issue a 2nd DN; hoping (presumably) that I'd forgotten about the 1st one (Default still on credit file though ;)). I then had great joy in pulling them up over this as part of a formal complaint and they quickly wrote back stating that this 2nd DN was NOT in fact a proper DN, but merely a Default letter :rolleyes:. Yeah right....

 

They then sold it by Absolute Assignment.

 

The stupid, near-sighted DCA who bought the account is now stuffed on a number of levels as I see it. No CCA anyway (CCA, 1974), but more importantly for the purposes of this thread... an original (1st) DN that no-one can find but would be incorrect now anyway due to the token payments and, a misguided belief that the 2nd one must be valid.... because the creditor has told them so.

 

Ok... discuss. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PO

 

I am interested in this. I have for some years paid MSDW (now Goldfish). I CCA'd them (start of 2008) and then they ignored me and sold on to Crapbot. They did DN me prior to the sale. It is incorrect with no date etc and shows that in order to remedy the default I had to pay £0.00. It showed I owed them no money in arrears. The DN is headed 'Goldfish' bank and an account number that I worked out was the MSDW card. I never knew they had taken it over.

Crapbot did after a year find an illegible and incomplete 'application form' but that is it, and have just started proceedings.

I am about to submit a defence, but the DN is wrong, can Crapbot issue another, I thought they couldn't ?

 

Appreciate your input on the whole DN issue.

 

I have started a thread, but not really picking up any advice.

 

Thanks

 

Cups:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see Cabot try and default an account with a £0.00 balance. :confused: You say they're going to court with this? Methinks someone doesn't really know what they're doing at Cabot Towers.... that's really quite "special". :D

 

My understanding is that an account cannot be defaulted twice... there's a letter in the templates section somewhere about it by tomterm8. I've got it on a different pc if you can't find it.

 

If they've already issued proceedings against you, then the Judge might be want to see this DN.... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems to be a grey area for people on here, but in terms of CCA 2006 in particular, the good old token payment might be more useful than we think... since their history would surely invalidate a DN issued prior to them starting or.... (in my case) while they were being paid.

 

So... even though a creditor/DCA may be able to produce evidence of payment history, how would they determine the correct amount owing if token payments were made on either side of a DN being issued.... ?

 

I can't see how the DN would stand up.... if defended, which means the creditor/DCA could stand to lose out in court if they fancied their chances of trying to get increased payments and a CCJ to cement them in.

 

What do people think?

 

:)

Edited by PriorityOne
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I have the DN and they have not sent me one in the bunch of docs that are shown as 'representations' of documents. They have also only sent me statements for a year or so. They also state that they 'have requested acopy of the deed of assignment from the original creditor' it is all very strange.

 

Cups

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cabot's DN with the £0 on it? Are these "representations" because they've got themselves carried away by the Manchester cases, I wonder? :cool:. I wouldn't be surprised.... Cabot seem to like games.

 

I'm not familiar with your case Cups.... but if you've requested a CCA and they haven't complied, then the account remains legally unenforceable under CCA, 1974; s127 (3).... but if the request refers to an Agreement made under CCA, 2006 (after April, 2007) then the Judge has more leeway in court re. payment history and so on (to the original creditor in this case, it seems).

 

Whatever the scenario, I think it would be advisable to pull Cabot up over the DN. I'm assuming that they're talking about the "Notice" of Assignment and not the Deed itself.... in order to show they have the authority to default you. If the account's already been defaulted by the previous creditor however, then it can't be defaulted again.... and on what basis? £0? :rolleyes:

 

Are they trying to wriggle out of the implications of this on your credit file by including a £0 figure? I wonder.... :cool:

 

Questions... questions.... Cabot are a strange bunch though...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to sit down and go through it all, they have dn'd me at 'Goldfish' when I asked for a copy of the agreement. The one they have sent is illegible (and took a year to find) and has a definite omission in a big bit that is 'just blanked out'. Cabot say they don't know what is there?

 

All very strange

 

Cups

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for that, I will put it in my defence. The DN is completely wrong so they cannot go any further. They have not sent me any letter before action either, which I know is their new thing that makes it all okay for them to go to court.

 

I am going to go through it all this w/end and type up a defence, there are lots of holes in their case.

 

I don't not want to pay but do not want them to get enforcement. If they were reasonable at any step of the way then I would negotiate, which I think is most people's gripe with the DCA's.

 

I will update thread with defence soon

 

Cups;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...