Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you!    It was bought on my debit card    
    • Hi. Welcome to CAG. How was the car purchased?  
    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
  • 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

Facing disciplinary action for being innocent


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5172 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

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The meeting didn't actually take place, it got postponed.

 

They didn't copy his signature, they just signed his name at the bottom of a handwritten piece of paper. It didn't even look like his signature.

 

The search part of his contract says exactly what I wrote, nothing about a stop and search policy or anything, but I've got to read his handbook to make sure. And the first time he got searched, it was the supervisor who searched him and his belongings thoroughly, because she said he HAD to be searched, even though I thought it couldn't be the person who was the accuser??? And the last time, the search was done by a bloke he works in the kitchen with

Link to post
Share on other sites

The meeting didn't actually take place, it got postponed.

 

They didn't copy his signature, they just signed his name at the bottom of a handwritten piece of paper. It didn't even look like his signature.

 

The search part of his contract says exactly what I wrote, nothing about a stop and search policy or anything, but I've got to read his handbook to make sure. And the first time he got searched, it was the supervisor who searched him and his belongings thoroughly, because she said he HAD to be searched, even though I thought it couldn't be the person who was the accuser??? And the last time, the search was done by a bloke he works in the kitchen with

 

That counts If it was just his name at the bottom of a peice of paper they would have typed and printed the statement they were trying to pass that off as his and if you hadnt picked up that it wasnt his they would have more than likely written something in the notes of the meeting "shown copy of statement signed by defendant"

 

seriously some companies are THAT devious!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is getting interesting by the post (if I may say)...

 

a) he gets searched, first time, by his supervisor... she is a woman!

 

b) they just signed/wrote his name on a hand-written 'piece of paper' and call it a statement SIGNED by your son...

 

c) and the third time around the 'bloke' from the kitchen search him!

 

You want to check that handbook of employment...

 

You want to request copy, or copies of the statement(s) granting them right to search by your son, along with a true and signed copy, or copies of the 'stop and search' form(s) filled in by supervisor/manager...

 

This is absolutely unbelievable... but I must admit that I am not shocked...

---Aut viam inveniam aut faciam---

 

***All advice given should be taken as guidance... Professional advice should always be taken before any course of action is pursued***

 

- I do not reply directly to any PMs, but you are more than welcome to enclose a link, in a PM, to your post. Thank you -

Make a contribution to this site... Help the CAG keeping on helping you for FREE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really in two minds whether or not to contact the police about this myself, because what the girl we spoke to informally today said, is that after the hearing, the decision is hers, but from her attitude, she's saying that he's guilty already.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can... go to an employment lawyer/solicitor... ACAS and/or CAB...

 

You MUST gather all of the evidence first, if at all possible...

---Aut viam inveniam aut faciam---

 

***All advice given should be taken as guidance... Professional advice should always be taken before any course of action is pursued***

 

- I do not reply directly to any PMs, but you are more than welcome to enclose a link, in a PM, to your post. Thank you -

Make a contribution to this site... Help the CAG keeping on helping you for FREE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont also believe you can be searched by your accuser either? In this case the woman.

 

Im off to check the stop and search proceedures for my company but i believe they are government issued i.e government guidance with a few extra items added on company headed paper. so they should be the same but you wont find that out till you get all the docs through.

 

I believe your accuser has the right to be present however i dont think they can search you themselves.

 

WRT the fact that she is a lady searching a man that is quite a problem in itself.

 

Did you ask if the theft had been reported to the police whilst you were there?

Link to post
Share on other sites

May I ask if the place he works at is part of a chain?

---Aut viam inveniam aut faciam---

 

***All advice given should be taken as guidance... Professional advice should always be taken before any course of action is pursued***

 

- I do not reply directly to any PMs, but you are more than welcome to enclose a link, in a PM, to your post. Thank you -

Make a contribution to this site... Help the CAG keeping on helping you for FREE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I told the manager to phone the police if he thought my son was guilty and ge said they wouldn't come as there is no CCTV so according to him there is no proof.

 

The chain he works for, according to their website, is the 2nd biggest restaurant chain in the country

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should inform the HR department, at the Head-Office, of what is going on at that branch...

 

I am pretty sure they would act upon your detailed letter very fast...

---Aut viam inveniam aut faciam---

 

***All advice given should be taken as guidance... Professional advice should always be taken before any course of action is pursued***

 

- I do not reply directly to any PMs, but you are more than welcome to enclose a link, in a PM, to your post. Thank you -

Make a contribution to this site... Help the CAG keeping on helping you for FREE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worth a try. I phoned them yesterday to ask what their policy was regarding searches and they said, after going to find a handbook, that in the case of missing cash, then a more thorough search could be done. They didn't however say that it could be done more than once

Link to post
Share on other sites

I told the manager to phone the police if he thought my son was guilty and ge said they wouldn't come as there is no CCTV so according to him there is no proof.

 

The chain he works for, according to their website, is the 2nd biggest restaurant chain in the country

 

Hope that is in the transcript of the interview as if he believes there is no proof WTF are they still doing harrassing your son!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Inform them of the 3 searches... one by a woman (his supervisor), forged your son's signature, forged an instrument with intent to use (the erm... statement)... that money has gone missing... and nothing has been found in any of your son's belongings or on his person...

---Aut viam inveniam aut faciam---

 

***All advice given should be taken as guidance... Professional advice should always be taken before any course of action is pursued***

 

- I do not reply directly to any PMs, but you are more than welcome to enclose a link, in a PM, to your post. Thank you -

Make a contribution to this site... Help the CAG keeping on helping you for FREE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...