Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
  • 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

Urget Help - Robinson Way, Captial One - Summons Recived


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5119 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

Firstly just calm down.

 

This is only the beginning and you'll have months and months before the end.

 

They may have replied to your CPR request but have they stuck to the court deadlines?

 

Did you send Crap One the SAR request that you was advised to do on the first few responses to this thread?

 

This will give you the NOA and default notice.

 

Jogs

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks for the reply havinastella.

I didnt send the SAR request as I assumed that as I requested the default notice and NOA on the CPR request they would have to send me them.

I phoned the court on friday and the case was due to be stayed today at 16:00. Up to now I do think they have kept upto date with all the deadlines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did they plead in POC that the account was assigned and that a default notice was issued. If yes, then write back saying they have not complied with 31.14 request and give them 7 days to provide copies. Tell them that you are unable to prepare your and file your defence until they have disclosed and ask them to agree to an extension of time that you are to file your defence.

 

When do you need to file your defence by?

R

 

bump?

any advise on the absence of default notice and NOA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have sent an embarrassed defence off already. not sure when i will get the allocation questionare.

The particulars of the claim are:

The claimant claims that outstanding monies Due and payable by the defendant under a credit agreement whereby the defendant agreed to repay with interestlink3.gif the value of credit obtained.

The claimant claims

1. The sum £****.**

2. Interest pursuant to S69 of the county courtlink3.gif act 1984 at the rate of 8% from **/**/07 to the date hereof *** days is the sum of £*****

3. future interest accruing at the daily rate of 2.15 4 costs

nothing regarding the default

Link to post
Share on other sites

those POC are similar to what they sent me , i used the embarased defense too and the judge just looked at their POC and wouldnt have it

 

point 1 of your defense i assume was as below?

 

1) The claim as pleaded does not contain sufficient particulars to permit me to file a properly particularised and pleaded defence.

 

 

send a cpr 31.14 request too

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi straftat I sent in a cpr 31.14 and only got a CCA and statements back, no default notice and no NOA.

I used the embarssed defence and the judge refused to give them a default judgement. just getting myself prepared for the next steps.

hows you case with these going?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Post Judgment interest is not allowed for CCA Judgments by The County Courts(Interest on Judgment Debts) Order 1991 at p.2(3)

 

Interest shall not be payable under this Order where the relevant judgment—

(a) is given in proceedings to recover money due under an agreement regulated by the

Consumer Credit Act 1974[

Even if the agreement states they are entitled to post judgment interest (they will have to prove it with the agreement), they cannot claim it until after judgment bdebt has been repaid and only then by way of a NEW claim. It cannot be part of the current claim.

 

On an earlier point, yes a default notice, termination and assignment is still necessary for them to make a claim in their own name and for the full balance on the account as opposed to the arrears,

R

 

I have sent an embarrassed defence off already. not sure when i will get the allocation questionare.

The particulars of the claim are:

The claimant claims that outstanding monies Due and payable by the defendant under a credit agreement whereby the defendant agreed to repay with interestlink3.gif the value of credit obtained.

The claimant claims

1. The sum £****.**

2. Interest pursuant to S69 of the county courtlink3.gif act 1984 at the rate of 8% from **/**/07 to the date hereof *** days is the sum of £*****

3. future interest accruing at the daily rate of 2.15 4 costs

 

nothing regarding the default

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have not pleaded default or assignment therefore under 31.14 they do not have to provide them, but you will be dealing in your argument the fact that they would need to have an absolute assignment to claim in their own name and the account defaulted and terminated to claim full balance.

 

R

 

hi straftat I sent in a cpr 31.14 and only got a CCA and statements back, no default notice and no NOA.

I used the embarssed defence and the judge refused to give them a default judgement. just getting myself prepared for the next steps.

hows you case with these going?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm considering sending the solicitors a letter telling them that as they have now produced the CCA that I requested some time ago that I would be willing to re-enter into a payment plan, as long as they stop the claim.

 

do you think they would accept this?

I think this also would show the judge that all the letters I have sent requesting to see the CCA were serious and that they should have produced it in the first place.

 

any advise on this approach?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm considering sending the solicitors a letter telling them that as they have now produced the CCA that I requested some time ago that I would be willing to re-enter into a payment plan, as long as they stop the claim.

 

do you think they would accept this?

I think this also would show the judge that all the letters I have sent requesting to see the CCA were serious and that they should have produced it in the first place.

 

any advise on this approach?

 

Could you post the agreement?

 

PW

Edited by paulwlton

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here is the CCA please have a look and any advise/comment would be greatfully recieved.

 

http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/gazzasaki/Cap%201/moddedcap11.jpg

 

http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/gazzasaki/Cap%201/1057_002.jpg

 

I think its enforcable but maybe you experts can find something.

 

Cheer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi helpmeoutplease

 

Right I maybe wrong but, it states all be it very small that it is an application form so you could use this in an argument :

 

The Application Form was therefore a pre-contractual agreement to enter into a prospective full-regulated credit agreement with the Claimant in the event that the Defendant’s application was successful.

 

Section 59 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 states that 'an agreement is void if, and to the extent that, it purports to bind a person to enter as debtor or hirer into a prospective regulated agreement.’ The Defendant therefore contends that this pre-contractual document, not being a regulated credit agreement in itself, and insofar as it purports to bind the Defendant to the terms of an actual prospective regulated credit agreement, is void and of no effect.

 

The Defendant’s application for credit was successful and a line of credit was provided. However, no subsequent regulated credit agreement, fully setting out the proposed terms and conditions and containing all the terms, information and statutory statements as prescribed by the Consumer Credit Act, was ever provided by the Claimant for the Defendant to sign and agree to. The credit facility was therefore given with no agreement made for repayment.

 

 

 

I hope this helps :)

 

kindest wishes

 

wish me well

Edited by wish me well
adding the last paragraph
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, prima facie, the two documents shown in your scans were not on the same piece of paper -- one has fold creases, the other one doesn't; and the protrusion in the black area at the bottom is in different places... Do you concede that those were "within the four corners of the agreement"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi helpmeout

 

Right with regards to buzzman's coments take a look at the case notes below, the argument was the terms and conditions were not supplied at the same time as the agreement was signed and this case was won:

 

Quote from the case above:

 

by HIS HONOUR JUDGE LANGAN QC, I refer you to the case notes below:-

Mitchell Vs Bank of Scotland (June 2009)

'The key words in Section 61(1)(a) are the reference to a document itself containing all the prescribed terms, and conforming to the regulations under Section 61. This language is clear and specific, and ensures that mere reference to terms contained in another document will not suffice. The document must contain the prescribed terms, just as the signed document referred to in Section 127(3), which might save the day, must however contain the prescribed terms. The construction contended for by the defendant is entirely consistent with the language of Section 61(1), and is also supported by Professor Good in his encyclopaedic work - see Good & Consumer Credit Law and Practice volume 2, 2B 5.121, and see also the comments at 2B 5.247. There the learned author draws a distinction between the language of paragraph (a) contain and paragraph (b) embody. It is respectfully submitted that the court should adopt the same reasoning in determining this issue in favour of the defendant, irrespective of whether or not it finds that the defendant was supplied with documents other than the credit agreement itself'

 

Put them to strict proof that the terms and conditions were "within the four corners of the agreement" ;) Right I have seen it makes a reference to section 23 of the terms and conditions overleaf, can you confirm it says section 23 please, the reason I ask is there are only 3 sections on the terms and conditions you have been sent. I may have read it wrong, its ever so small. Worth asking though I thought.:) If this is the case, there is your proof that the terms and conditions you have been sent with your agreement are NOT what was supplied (if any) at the time you signed.

 

Good luck helpmeout, I will try and think of any other arguments you could poss use.

 

Kindest wishes

 

wish me well

Edited by wish me well
asking a question about section 23
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here is the CCA please have a look and any advise/comment would be greatfully recieved.

 

http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/gazzasaki/Cap%201/moddedcap11.jpg

 

http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/gazzasaki/Cap%201/1057_002.jpg

 

I think its enforcable but maybe you experts can find something.

 

Cheer

 

Why do You think it's enforceable?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul,

 

Some of us really dont know what to look for when we first start out I know cos I was one of them, i.e. the prescribed terms and conditions on the same document as signature. Helpmeout, there are non of the prescribed and required terms on the doc you signed, put cap 1 or who ever is taking you to court to strict proof that the said prescribed terms and conditions were on the same document.

 

Have you managed to take a look at the agreement that has your signature on it, does it say "Section 23"?

 

Kindest wishes sent :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul,

 

Some of us really dont know what to look for when we first start out I know cos I was one of them, i.e. the prescribed terms and conditions on the same document as signature. Helpmeout, there are non of the prescribed and required terms on the doc you signed, put cap 1 or who ever is taking you to court to strict proof that the said prescribed terms and conditions were on the same document.

 

Have you managed to take a look at the agreement that has your signature on it, does it say "Section 23"?

 

Kindest wishes sent :)

 

Helpmeout believed the document enforceable because the supplier is implying that the prescribed terms was set out on the reverse.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and thanks for all your input.

making me feel a little bit more hopful about this.

It does say section 23 on the signed copy and states that section 23 is related to how they will use my information.

the second sheet which I assumed was the reverse of the signed sheet on has 3 sections.

section 3 is the use of information section.

My reason for thinking that the agreement was enforcable was due to the fact is was on 1 sheet with the repayment terms on the reverse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres your defence,

 

deny that the terms and conditions were present on the document you signed or the terms and conditions they are suggesting were on the back cannot be the same that were on the ORIGINAL contract, and put the claimant to Strict Proof that they were. The ones that they have sent with your agreement do not tie into that document in anyway shape or form, it clearly says section 23 on the reverse, but according to the terms and conditions they have sent you, there are only 3 sections?? Get my drift? ;)

 

Good luck

 

wish me well :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have the proof thanks to them sending you a made up version of the alleged agreement.

 

They have just added the required prescribed terms and conditions needed on a regulated agreement, you can prove that the suggestion of those particular terms and conditions sent to you are not from the reverse of YOUR agreement as they do not tie in with what is stated on the document you signed.

 

:)

Edited by wish me well
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I really think you could use section 59(1) of the CCA for another argument, (suggestion to the judge;))

 

Section 59 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 states that 'an agreement is void if, and to the extent that, it purports to bind a person to enter as debtor or hirer into a prospective regulated agreement.’ The Defendant therefore contends that this pre-contractual document, not being a regulated credit agreement in itself, and insofar as it purports to bind the Defendant to the terms of an actual prospective regulated credit agreement, is void and of no effect.

 

It states in several places on the form with your signature that it is an APPLICATION FOR CREDIT and IF sucessful you would be BOUND to the terms and conditions blah blah blah

 

What does anyone else think to this?

 

Please be aware that I am learning more everyday but I am no where near an expert on anything

 

All suggestions are just to get you going. Good luck Helpmeout

 

kindest wishes

 

wish me well

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...