Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 2nd class stamp only , get free proof of posting from any PO counter dx  
    • Hi,  It has been a long time but I have had confirmation claim will proceed to hearing in roughly 1 months time.  I was wondering if anyone could advise on defence please.  A few questions I have are: 1) I didn't notify VCS that I was not the driver of the vehicle and the judge may look negatively on this point.  I did not receive any direction in correspondence from VCS  that I should inform them if I was not the driver and that was going to be the foundation for may argument on this point. 2) The vehicle is stopped at a zebra crossing.  Based on the images from VCS for around 10 seconds.  At that time there is someone standing near the zebra crossing and someone else enters my vehicle.  I was going to raise the point that stopping at a zebra crossing when someone is standing near it is to be expected.  I was also going to ask the question how you can have a no stopping zone when there are zebra crossings where the driver is required to stop. 3) The no stopping zone is clearly signposted, however, no drop off or pickup is not clearly signposted with one small sign at the zebra crossing, parallel to the road and on the passengers side.  I was going to challenge that no-drop off or pickup is clearly signposted.  4) VCS mentioned my initial defence was generic and clearly copied from the internet.  It covered 1) Claimant not being in a position to state if the Defendant was the driver at the time.  2) No evidence that claimant's contract with landowner supersedes byelaws & signage isn't legally binding contract. 3) No contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on speculative charge. I am interested to know if anyone has had success or been unsuccessful with this 'generic' defence. 5) If I should submit an updated defence to the court based on questions 1, 2 & 3.  Or if it is better to only raise these points in court? Thanks.  Any guidance would be appreciated  
    • I honestly don't know, Baz. In addition what I don't  understand (from that pamphlet) is this: The s88 criteria are quite clear and don't need a medical professional to interpret them . The one most relevant to his topic says that an application is not a "qualifying application" if a relevant disability has been declared. The problem with the word "may" is how does the applicant establish whether me "may" driver under s88 when he has not complied with its conditions? I don't know the answer to that either. But to further muddy the waters, the pamphlet says this (about : But the s88 statute says absolutely nothing like that at all. It simply says that if you have declared a relevant disability s88 does not apply. The DVLA pamphlet is simply confusing as far as I can see. That's actually my opinion and that's what I would stick to if it was me making the application. But I'll seek a few opinions from others over the next couple of days.
  • 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

Anger as Government says people heavily in debt can pay off bailiffs with credit cards


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5243 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

Spamheed no matter what I say you will never agree. :rolleyes:

 

I don't see where I decried your post, nor disagreed with you in any way at all, if you say that the majority of an HCEOs warrants are business related then I would defer to you immediately as it is not something I have any knowledge of at all.

 

I merely asked the question: that if business related warrants are a speciality of the HCEO, what are you as an HCEO doing trolling a consumer debt site?

 

surely that expanse of knowledge gained from pursuing business debt would be far better served on a forum serving that sector as it would be far more likely to be relevant than it is here, and you as (allegedly) an HCEO would be less likely to keep dropping the spanner as it were

Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly. I have read lots of posts and do have sympathy with the situations people find themselves in. I don't mean to sound uncaring at all and my posts relate to my situation only... Just thought it would be an idea to post from the perspective of someone who is 'on the other side' of this and equally frustrated! :Cry:

 

Rob

 

There are of course simpler methods such as third party debtor orders, I'm sure it wouldnt take too much effort to find the bank details of the offender and costs (at £100.00) are immediately recoverable...... assuming they have any cash in the bank

 

Lets not encourage and line the pockets of HCEO's for the sake of it no matter how badly you may have been treated.

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spamheed no matter what I say you will never agree. :rolleyes:

 

Hi HCE

 

Guess you remember me from another thread,as you know I prefer to see all posts and take a balanced and objective view.

 

For what its worth I cannot and will not advocate the use of HCEO's in matters of an individuals debt as there are alternatives to the fee bearing regime of that office.

 

However......... what is your stance on the use of credit cards for settling court judgements?

 

Having viewed many forums there appears to be an overwhelming percentage of those in a financial mess, would not the HCEO's and the lenders position be one of perpetuating fraud if it could be shown that the debtor was already in a position whereby they could not service their debts?

 

Do you believe that legislation would protect the HCEO in such circumstance?

 

Thanks

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rob is using an HCEO and you'd be wrong Caro.

 

Most judgments that are enforced by HCEOs are against businesses, usually on behalf of other businesses.

 

 

...Then Rob is clearly misguided!!!

 

Can't believe it. Listen Rob don't use an hceo, because they will only rip the debtor off! The debtor is paying them a stack of pointless fees and that will put more stress on the debtor, this is clearly a no brainer?

 

Cash that could be going to you is going to the hceo for doing v little, so issue a Stat Demand instead. You can do this yourself at no cost other than printer ink.

Edited by danboy381
typos

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi HCE

 

Guess you remember me from another thread,as you know I prefer to see all posts and take a balanced and objective view.

 

For what its worth I cannot and will not advocate the use of HCEO's in matters of an individuals debt as there are alternatives to the fee bearing regime of that office.

 

However......... what is your stance on the use of credit cards for settling court judgements?

 

Having viewed many forums there appears to be an overwhelming percentage of those in a financial mess, would not the HCEO's and the lenders position be one of perpetuating fraud if it could be shown that the debtor was already in a position whereby they could not service their debts?

 

Do you believe that legislation would protect the HCEO in such circumstance?

 

Thanks

 

Gez

 

I personally do not have an issue with defendants using credit cards to pay their judgments. The money is owed to a creditor that is out of pocket, so if borrowing is the only way to pay it then so be it. As always, the newspaper article has used the highest APR rates for their headlines.

 

Payment is a byproduct of the HCEO carrying out his duty. It is at the request of defendants that payment is taken by credit card. Remember, payment is only made to prevent the HCEO removing the goods they are sent there to remove.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...Then Rob is clearly misguided!!!

 

Can't believe it. Listen Rob don't use an hceo, because they will only rip the debtor off! The debtor is paying them a stack of pointless fees and that will put more stress on the debtor, this is clearly a no brainer?

 

Cash that could be going to you is going to the hceo for doing v little, so issue a Stat Demand instead. You can do this yourself at no cost other than printer ink.

 

Rob, wouldnt listen to this guy too much. You've only got to read his posts to see what type of person he is.

 

You have chosen the best route for your case. Please keep us informed of any developments.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm. I simply do not think it is good economics to pay one debt off by creating another. An ethos proven, repeatedly, by our incumbent government! All that does is shift the debt from A to B without any attempt to address or reduce it.

It is, as our cousins across the water may say, a no-brainer.

If Enforcement Agents were to be realistic in their payment plans then there would be very little problem. Unfortunately they'd rather try for the whole cream cake now and sod the consequences. Just try taking one slice at a time chaps...

Rae.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anger as Government says people heavily in debt can pay off bailiffs with credit cards - Telegraph

 

"A low income family putting a debt of £1,000 on a credit card charging interest at 40 per cent, would have to pay an extra £400 of debt every year."

 

The scary thing is, this example would still work out cheaper than the charges applied by many bailiffs

 

This suggestion demonstrates just how isolated politicians are to the world of ordinary the citizens

 

It's frightening to think these stupid people are able to pass laws which affect our daily lives

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anger as Government says people heavily in debt can pay off bailiffs with credit cards - Telegraph

 

"A low income family putting a debt of £1,000 on a credit card charging interest at 40 per cent, would have to pay an extra £400 of debt every year."

 

The scary thing is, this example would still work out cheaper than the charges applied by many bailiffs

 

 

What happens if you DON'T have credit cards -- and it's against ALL sensible advice to borrow MORE money - especially at high interest rates to pay off ANOTHER debt.

 

If in debt you should only EVER borrow more money if you need food / other essentials.

Never - whatever the circumstances BORROW MORE to pay off debts -- A COURT will only make you pay what you can afford -- maybe as little as 1 GBP a month in some cases.

 

In any case most Bailiff's charges are ILLEGAL anyway so don't pay them AT ALL.

 

Cheers

jimbo

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see an elephant in a gray pin stripped suit, wouldnt like to be the tailor that makes it though, but you can bet he will make some better choices then half the officials that seat on the seats of government.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...