Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
    • Less than 1% of Japan's top companies are led by women despite years of efforts to address the issue.View the full article
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5194 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

This is my brothers dept

 

Balliffs come yesterday with a bill for £210 but brother has paid council tax bill on december 1st.

 

 

So he rung balliff this morning balliff says he made 2 visits in november and at £24.50 and £18 and then a visit in december after council tax paid for £40 then anouther visit in january for £24.50 then the visit yesterday for £110 for removal of goods. My brother did not even know he had been.

 

 

Where does he stand?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

your brother owes the bailiff firm £42.50 for 1st 2nd visit

 

I would think the £40 charge in December is a levy & walking possession fee

the £110 fee yesterday is attendance/van fee

 

from your post it doesn't look like the bailiff has been in his house to levy goods

did the bailiff leave a notice of goods and inventory this would more than likely have a car levied on it

 

get your brother to write a letter/e-mail offer to pay the £42.50 1st & 2nd visit fee tell them as far as you are concerned that this should satisfy your obligations regarding bailiffs fees as there has been no levy on your account

however if they disagree with this you want a screenshot of your account and a copy any notice of seizure goods and inventory as you believe you should have been left a copy of this at the time of the levy

 

tell them if they cant or are unwilling to supply a copy of the notice of seizure of goods

you want to know what goods were levied the date & time of levy and the name of the bailiff that done the levy

Link to post
Share on other sites

But what if he keeps putting the amount owed up by £110 every visit?

 

He Can't - but he will use the fact you don't know your rights and screw you for every penny he can. What you need is a statement of the account to see where and when fees were applied. If they are claiming a levy then a seizure notice should have bben left which details the goods seized - it may be the levy is invalid because they have seized goods which are exempt or are on Hp for example. Can you list any further details.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it not true that the Levey for distress is for the council tax, and now that that has been payed he would have to apply for a new Levey for distress from the courts?. For what he is claiming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it not true that the Levey for distress is for the council tax, and now that that has been payed he would have to apply for a new Levey for distress from the courts?. For what he is claiming.

 

Follow Hallowitch's Post *2

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The purpose of a visit is to levy upon goods. The statutory fee scale provides that a bailiff can charge £24.50 for "attending to levy where no levy was made" ( in other words, that you were not at home when he visited).

 

ALTERNATIVELY the bailiff can INSTEAD charge a levy fee...HOWEVER he can only charge a levy fee is he does levy upon goods. This will be done by EITHER gaining "peaceful entry" into your home ( should be avoided) and listing goods on a Walking Possession or otherwise by levying upon goods OUTSIDE of the house. This would normally be a vehicle but can be a caravan, lawnmower or other worthwhile garden equipment. In this case, a Notice of Seizure would need to be provided as proof. Your signature would not be required.

 

 

IF...and ONLY if a PREVIOUSLY levy has been made, a bailiff can return at a later date to remove the goods PREVIOUSLY levied upon.

 

In the case that you have mentioned it would appear that the bailiff has applied fees for the first and LAST part...but MISSED out the middle bit !!!

 

The bailiff is WRONG..but hopes that you don't know it.

 

He is attempting to charge an "attending to remove" fee without a previous levy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pay them nothing, Do not recognise them as being able to collect council tax. TT and PT might disagree, but pay these thugs nothing. I did this and debt was handed back to the council, btw it is not a debt it is a TAX!

Link to post
Share on other sites

calvi, with respect and not wanting to appear too pedantic, isn't a tax also a debt? At the very least something that has to be addressed and paid? Perhaps, if you will, a legal debt?

Rae.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A tax is not a debt, until a court makes it such. This is what people are missing, taxation becoming debt, we did not incur this debt, they created it from a tax. Say you borrow £10,000 and you default on that loan, then yes you are liable, but say you borrow nothing and me as head of the country states, u will pay £10,000 for nothing as a tax, does that automatically become a debt?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...