Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Russia’s economy has been cut off from the global financial system - but it is still growing. Why?View the full article
    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] 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 has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. 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 the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 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. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • 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

Help with appealing PCN


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5011 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

Hi

 

I’m posting this in the hope that someone can tell me if there’s a way to appeal against this PCN (copies attached).

 

I had off-street parking for my car but this suddenly came to a stop, so I had to put the car on the street in a residents/pay and display bay over the bank holiday weekend. Sunday was fine as there are no parking restrictions on this day but I forgot to move it the next morning (bank holiday Monday) and the buggers got me!

 

I have now got a residents’ permit but too late to avoid this I’m afraid.

 

I know I was parked illegally but I really resent paying these exorbitant fines and the aggressive way these regulations are enforced, which makes the whole regime nothing more than stealth tax in my view and that’s why I am trying to avoid payment – simple as that!

 

If anyone can help I would be most grateful…

 

All the best

 

H

Picture.jpg

Picture 2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

PCN details are too small to read.

Your options as far as I can tell are to go down the mitigation route and/or find a reason to appeal and hope that the LA generate a foul up or do not pursue.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PCN fails to comply with reg 3(2)(b)

 

(2) A penalty charge notice served under regulation 9 of the General Regulations must, in addition to the matters required to be included in it under paragraph 1 of the Schedule to the General Regulations, include the following information

(a) that a person on whom a notice to owner is served will be entitled to make representations to the enforcement authority against the penalty charge and may appeal to an adjudicator if those representations are rejected; and

 

(b) that, if representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified for the purpose before a notice to owner is served

(i) those representations will be considered;

 

In any further appeal include the following paragraphs.

 

“The PCN fails to comply with regulation 3(2)(b) contained within Statutory Instrument 2007/3482 and it is therefore my belief that the PCN is not lawful.

 

Although the PCN does say that representations will be considered, it fails to make the recipient aware of the period of time they are lawfully entitled to in which to submit such representations. The lawful period is given by regulation 3(2)(b) and it is given as any time before the NtO is served and as such a PCN must convey this fact to the recipient.

 

Such failure could prejudice the recipient in that they may only believe they have 28 days to submit an informal representation when the truth is that they have as long as it takes for the authority to serve the NtO. For instance, a person (where the NtO has not yet been served) may only remember about the PCN on the 30th day after service and as the PCN implies you can only challenge within 28 days that person will not appeal. However, that person is lawfully entitled to appeal informally if no NtO has yet been served.

 

Considering this fact I expect you to cancel this penalty charge forthwith. If you do not cancel then I will require you to explain fully why you think the PCN does comply with regulation 3(2)(b).”

 

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?...p;filesize=8355

Don't be surprised if they reject this as they will not willingly accept that all their PCN's are invalid but if you present this appeal point to an adjudicator accompanied with a copy of a compliant PCN (such as the London ones often seen on site) you should win without too much bother unless the adjudicator is dim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Bogs Dollox I am in your debt!

 

You really know your stuff that's for sure - thanks for taking the time out to look at this and for sharing your knowledge with us - I for one really appreciate it :o)

 

Will get the letter off today and promise to keep you all posted so watch this space

 

H

 

PCN fails to comply with reg 3(2)(b)

 

(2) A penalty charge notice served under regulation 9 of the General Regulations must, in addition to the matters required to be included in it under paragraph 1 of the Schedule to the General Regulations, include the following information

(a) that a person on whom a notice to owner is served will be entitled to make representations to the enforcement authority against the penalty charge and may appeal to an adjudicator if those representations are rejected; and

 

(b) that, if representations against the penalty charge are received at such address as may be specified for the purpose before a notice to owner is served

(i) those representations will be considered;

 

In any further appeal include the following paragraphs.

 

“The PCN fails to comply with regulation 3(2)(b) contained within Statutory Instrument 2007/3482 and it is therefore my belief that the PCN is not lawful.

 

Although the PCN does say that representations will be considered, it fails to make the recipient aware of the period of time they are lawfully entitled to in which to submit such representations. The lawful period is given by regulation 3(2)(b) and it is given as any time before the NtO is served and as such a PCN must convey this fact to the recipient.

 

Such failure could prejudice the recipient in that they may only believe they have 28 days to submit an informal representation when the truth is that they have as long as it takes for the authority to serve the NtO. For instance, a person (where the NtO has not yet been served) may only remember about the PCN on the 30th day after service and as the PCN implies you can only challenge within 28 days that person will not appeal. However, that person is lawfully entitled to appeal informally if no NtO has yet been served.

 

Considering this fact I expect you to cancel this penalty charge forthwith. If you do not cancel then I will require you to explain fully why you think the PCN does comply with regulation 3(2)(b).”

 

Results within Legislation - Statute Law Database

Don't be surprised if they reject this as they will not willingly accept that all their PCN's are invalid but if you present this appeal point to an adjudicator accompanied with a copy of a compliant PCN (such as the London ones often seen on site) you should win without too much bother unless the adjudicator is dim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello again

 

I have now received a reply from the parking nazis at Brighton & Hove and predictably enough they are refuting the claim that the PCN is invalid.

 

I have attached a .pdf to this post - just in case anyone would like to see if they can spot a procedural snafu, or maybe suggest the best way forward from here.

 

Also, I am ashamed to say that the buggers got me again, this time on a double yellow at 08.14 on a Sunday morning (pcn as below).

 

1gt1f4.jpg

 

fbas7a.jpg

 

Does anyone think it may be worth going down the mitigation route on this one, bearing in mind that there are a tiny amount of bays (maybe 40) for about 300+ dwellings in the street where I live, and of these only 4 are residents only, the remainder being pay and display - this is why I'm always getting done! On the Saturday evening when I parked the car, the neighbouring streets were full with some being forced to double park and there was simply nowhere to put my car within reasonable walking distance. I was going to move it first thing but didn't realise they would be out on the prowl so early (the car was first spotted at 07.42 according to the PCN!) Past experience tells me that they would not be at all sympathetic to such a plea, and my other concern is that this may close the door on any procedural appeals against this PCN in future, should the plea for mitigation go unheard.

 

Also can anyone offer an opinion on whether the statistic above re available parking space availability (or lack thereof) may cut any ice with, and be likely to be heard more sympathetically by the adjudicator if it came down to it?

 

TIA for any help as always

 

Harrystottle

scan.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

what a crap response from them, they don't agree, it conforms to guidelines - what about conforming to statute. I would take it to adjudication and expect them to drop out. add to the adjudication appeal that the council avoided responding to your point - they didn't address the quoted regs at all did they. typical slimey stuff. what do you have to lose by taking it to adjudication ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

good point - well made :o)

My thoughts on the latest one were that I could just go down the same route with it, questioning the legality of the PCN and going to adjudication again if they send the same response.

 

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

bump!

 

Does anyone think it may be worth going down the mitigation route on this one, bearing in mind that there are a tiny amount of bays (maybe 40) for about 300+ dwellings in the street where I live, and of these only 4 are residents only, the remainder being pay and display - this is why I'm always getting done! On the Saturday evening when I parked the car, the neighbouring streets were full with some being forced to double park and there was simply nowhere to put my car within reasonable walking distance. I was going to move it first thing but didn't realise they would be out on the prowl so early (the car was first spotted at 07.42 according to the PCN!) Past experience tells me that they would not be at all sympathetic to such a plea, and my other concern is that this may close the door on any procedural appeals against this PCN in future, should the plea for mitigation go unheard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

bump!

 

Does anyone think it may be worth going down the mitigation route on this one, bearing in mind that there are a tiny amount of bays (maybe 40) for about 300+ dwellings in the street where I live, and of these only 4 are residents only, the remainder being pay and display - this is why I'm always getting done! On the Saturday evening when I parked the car, the neighbouring streets were full with some being forced to double park and there was simply nowhere to put my car within reasonable walking distance. I was going to move it first thing but didn't realise they would be out on the prowl so early (the car was first spotted at 07.42 according to the PCN!) Past experience tells me that they would not be at all sympathetic to such a plea, and my other concern is that this may close the door on any procedural appeals against this PCN in future, should the plea for mitigation go unheard.

 

Inconvenience is unlikely to win as mitigation in my opinion unless you have walking problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking more in terms of the issue of the lack of availability of parking spaces rather than the inconvenience of not being able to park eg "40 bays for about 300+ dwellings in the street, and of these only 4 are residents only". Does this count for anything with adjudicators do you think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi Folks

 

I've just received the Notice of Rejection of representations from the L.A. I have been searching for an image of a PCN that differs from this one in as much as it gives a clearer indication of the time that is available to make representations (BogsDollocks was saying that London PCN's are compliant as opposed to this one which is not). Could anyone please point me in the right direction?

 

Thanks in advance

 

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi All

 

I have now received the reply from my LA regarding my appeal to the adjudicator and I wanted to post this in case anyone had any comments or thoughts about their arguments.

 

One question: I have notice a couple of things that I would like to take issue with, so would I be able to make my comments known to the Adjudicator at this stage?

 

Thanks in advance for any help you may be able to give

 

H

BH BS.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...