Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • To carry on from the above post it may be helpful to go through their WS using their numbers. 9] motorists do NOT accept the contract when entering the land. First they have to read it and understand it and then they realise that a] "No stopping" is prohibitive and cannot offer a contract. b] the signs around the bus stop do not mention who issued the No Stopping signs so it could not have been issued by VCS since the IPC CoP states that their signs should include the IPC logo and the creditor be identified.  10]There is no mention of £100 charge for breaching the No stopping request or if there is it is far too small to read even for a pedestrian. 11] no matter how often VCS say it, it is NOT a contractual clause   22]" the claimant has given the Defendant its contractual licence to enter the site". No it hasn't. This is a road leading to the airport. All sorts of people are going to the airport-travellers, taxis, fuel bowsers, airport staff, companies delivering food and drink for each aircraft, air traffic controllers, buses. It is absolutely ridiculous to attribute VCS wth any sort of permissions. The land owners yes, but not VCS . There can be no sort of analogy between a car park and a major thoroughfare where VCS have no place as it is not relevant land.   23] there can be no contract as there is no offer only a prohibition. And it is not relevant land no matter how Mr Walli attempts to prove otherwise. 25] VCS may have won a few times but none quoted was on an airport covered by the RTA and its own Byelaws. They also have lost more cases than they have won using their prohibitive signs. 26] First one has to consider if there is a contract. Is it relevant land? No. Does a valid contract exist betweer VCS and Peel? NO.  27] the signage at the bus stop may show the conditions ie  no stopping, and restricted zone but not the terms ie is there a charge for stopping and who is the creditor. The last section of the sign is illegible  29] already stated that a WS between VCS and peel is not a valid document 31] it will need more than the Claimants feather to outweigh the case against the Defendant no matter who was driving. 32] there is no law of agency involved. This is not a case of employer/employedd relationship. VCS are muddying the waters because they have no way of transferring the driver's liability to the keeper 33] this a red herring. There is no list of highways at all  on the Highways act 1980 so this is a deliberate strategy to debunk the fact that this road is not relevant land. VCS are put to strict proof that it is relevant land not covered by the Road Traffic Act nor by Byelaws. 34] there ican be no comparison between a railway station and an airport. Totally fatuous analogy.  35] yes the landowners can bring in their own terms but what the cannot do is overrule Byelaws and the Road Traffic Act. 39] surely the paralegal cannot be that ignorant of PoFA. If Bye Laws are involved then the bus stop is not relevant land and so the specious argument about FGW is rubbish   36] what on earth is he talking about with Permits. There is no mention of permits on the signage and even if there were  would it mean that Permit holders were allowed to stop on No Stopping roads? There are enough examples on CAG to counter act their idiocy on continuing charging the extra £60   46] VCS had NO reasonable cause to apply to the DVLA for the Defendants details. No valid  contract with the landowners No stopping is prohibitive therefore cannot form a contract the event happened on a bus stop over which VCS has no jurisdiction the signage either does not show that there was a charge of £100 for stopping, or the font size was too small for a motorist to be able to read it  the signage does not show the Creditor which fails the IPC CoP so not valid the WS contract does not appear to authorise VCS to pursue motorists to Court Given all these factors it seems that VCS have breached the GDPR of the Defendant quite substantially and it would appear right that an exemplary award is made against VCS in the hope that they will drop all further cases at Doncaster airport where they are pursuing motorists on non relevant land.   48] what is this guy on? You weren't in a car park you were on a bus stop 59] this case is totally without merit. I am not surprised that the paralegal will not be turning up. Some statements are pretty close to perjury and others are designed to mislead or misdirect. None of the analogies seem appropriate or relevant. Could have been said in at least half the time without the repetition and trying to make a case where none was there. One particularly bad example of misdirection was in the photographs. The Clearway sign shown near the bus stop is very unclear  unlike the Clearway sign two photos before it which may well include terms and conditions. The one by the bus stop is totally different.      
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote...   your defence doesnt need any return of docs.. carefully read what has been posted here and in the other threads i pointed to in your old thread merged here too.   redwood/harwood or STA or brachers.   just use our enhanced google search box.   uni fees is useful too.   this guy is just in front of you    
    • I have just spent last few hours registering and signing up and filling in all the details.   Below is a POC I have drafted.   The defendant is a parcel delivery company DPD (UK) LIMITED On 09/08/2021 the defendant agreed to deliver the claimant's parcel containing a PlayStation 5 Disc Version value £530, to an address in the UK. The delivery fee of £7.79 was paid by the claimant. Parcel tracking number: ???????? Parcel reference no: ????????? The defendant failed to deliver the parcel and have reported it as lost on 20/08/2021. The defendant refuses to refund the full value of the item and the delivery fee. The claimant seeks £530 being the value of the item, £7.79 delivery cost and legal fees.        (Sorry for being stupid but this POC is supposed to go where it says    " Claim details Why you believe you’re owed the money: " right? Reason why I'm asking is because I don't see anywhere it specifically says what are your particulars of claim)   Tomorrow being the 15th day, I will be ready to click it off (assuming the POC is ok)    I have read a few more hermes/packlink etc stories where they were resolved and gives me hope I will regain my lost money.  Will carry on reading up as much as I can.  
    • You don't submit a defence with the DQ...why are you going over old ground? Just complete the DQ as per my guidelines as posted above and file serve it a few days before 11th Oct.     .
    • Do we use the same defence. My concern is that it should not even be going to small claims court. The debt is for the company TME which had to close down as it could not sustain itself and they are asking my husband to pay for it personally.  There were also 2 other directors involved with the company.                
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

marsdons Baliffs recovering for CSA

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4220 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Hi. I am new to this forum. My husband has had a liability order for £2003.00 in arrears from 2000 to 2003. This was issued in Sept 2009. We heard no more from the CSA. On 19/1/10 we got a letter from Marsdons asking for payment in full in 7 days, or they will attend to levy distress remove goods etc.. This would involve further costs.


He is assessed as £0 due to ( despite both working full time) we make very little money.


My husband has contacted the CSA who would not discuss it.


From the great info on this forum I have drafted a stat Declaration stating that all goods in the property are soley mine and not my husbands. I can have this witnessed by a solicitor on Monday.


Unfortunatley the letter they sent does not have an address or fax number The internet only offers reg. office address.


We have 2 vehicals at the house both are commercial and leased and needed for work. I intend to send them the agreements as proof. Can any one advise where I would send them the contact number std code is 01273.


Is there anything else i should do to get Marsdons to pass back to the CSA.


They are due on tuesday!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am new and am not sure I have posted this in correct place but here goes. My daughter has been going out with a man for the last 4 years. He has received a letter stating that he owes back money to the CSA and that they canforce him to sell his house. The house he owns is in joint ownership with his previous girlfriend and has no equity in it at all. They are in the process of signing it over to his ex girlfriend only. The problem is he is also on my daughters mortgage since last year. It is on a house that was my in my daughters name only and after being together for 3 years decided on a joint mortgage. Can the CSA or a company on their behalf force the sale of this house. She has a child from a previous relationship and a one year old with her partner and is pregnant again. She is really worried that they will take her house from her. Can anyone advise on this matter please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

HI. I posted about a Month ago ( on this thread) I sent letter to both Marston officers and faxed - Stat dec informing all property at the address was mine and sent details of car owned by buisness and also on hp. I have heard nothing until this morning. I have recieved a Removal notice.

It looks like they have ignored all my letters and faxes -- Can they do this?

Mletter was clear and taken off one of the letters on this forum. it explained that i know my rights etc... I asked that they return the case to the csa and my partner would happily speak with them. Are they allowed to simply ignore letters and documentation proving ownership???

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent letter to both Marsdon officers and faxed - Stat dec informing all property at the address was mine and sent details of car owned by business and also on hp.


cant see them removing the cars as you have provided proof that they do not belong to you could be a scare tactic

did you send the letter recorded delivery


as a rule the company that sent the bailiffs is responsible for all bailiffs actions I'm not sure if this works with csa

however to be on the safe side i would send the csa all the information you have sent to Marston Group along with the letter you received today

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you . I didnt send it recorded as i read somewhere that they wont sign for them. I did put 'this document is delivered by royal mail and i deam it to be served on you by the ordinary course of post a=in the meaning of section 7 of the interpretation act 1978 and there fore your responcibility and in your own interests that this letter is handed to the relevant person with in your industry'. Got that from the forum.


I will do another covering letter and will send all letters again, this time to the csa as well.


Can they still ignore? Really getting to my wits end with this. any help in a covering letter would be very greatly apprieciated. Also the amount has gone from £2003 to £2093? with no explanation.

Sorry fro rambling. I have just found out that my son is deaf and needs an opparation. He needs me to be concentrating on him, not this.

Please, any advice to get it back to the csa and away from my door so my partner can arrange payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not to good with letter i start to ramble


send something along the lines of


I today received a removal notice from Marstons

a Stat dec informing you that all property at the above address belongs to myself details of car owned by business and is on hp. was also sent in this letter on (date) this information was also faxed to you on (date)


It would appear from your letter received (date) that you did you not receive or are ignoring previous information sent

I have therefore included this information again in this recorded delivery letter


A copy of this letter and all previous correspondence has now been sent CSA with an offer of payments

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...