Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Oh No its started again ..DCA grrrr


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5012 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

ive just noticed looking at one of the letters that philips are acting " on behalf of" lowells and dont actually "own" the alleged debt should I be getting in touch with lowells ?they have all my sar stuff and I thought theyd given up on me once they could see that I actually dont owe anything and that the debt is made up entirely of "charges" ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will you pleases please stop worrying about these cretins.

They have no legal powers whatsoever, take the steps Angry cat as suggested

If one of their monkeys turn up just tell them to leave they are trespassing.

Lester take charge of this situation.

I have no legal training, any knowledge I have has come from this forum, and my own experiences. Always balance up any advice you get with your own common sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will you pleases please stop worrying about these cretins.

They have no legal powers whatsoever, take the steps Angry cat as suggested

If one of their monkeys turn up just tell them to leave they are trespassing.

Lester take charge of this situation.

 

I know its just that I thought this was all over years ago.I followed all the advice on here about sar and cca to the letter dealing with lowells and never heard nothing again and then out of the blue all this.

As im sure you know,its just awful to have some aggressive bullying f*ckwit on the phone trying to threaten you to the point where you feel you cant answer it. I cant help it I actually feel like theyve "got in" :( . Thankyou for your reassurance .I DO appreciate it .

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your last payment was over 6 years ago the debt is STATUTE BARRED and that's the end of it.

 

It's an OFFENCE for anybody to pursue a debt once it's statute barred and never mind throwing the book at them --you can chuck THE WHOLE LIBRARY back in their faces and they will have to bear the costs.

 

They can add a million quid a day charges to it and it wouldn't make any difference.

 

DO NOT ADMIT to the debt since this might be a guise in getting you to do something which stops the debt from becoming statute barred if it is shortly about to become statute barred.

 

You need to know when you last paid anything on this debt -- a SAR for 10 GBP is the best way to proceed on this one since this will have the date of last payment.

 

In any case CCA crappyquest / lowell or whoever the DCA is as well just for "nuisance value" as the chances are they won't have the paperwork available within the legal time period.

 

This will be a VERY WORTHWILE 1 GBP spent.

 

NEVER EVER get stressed out by these **** and bullies -- even if it goes to court a court can't make you pay what you don't have and finally these days the courts seem to be getting a little tired of antics from the DCA's.

 

Incidentally and "Bankruptcy" threats are also nonsense since this will cost THEM a lot of money and can only be done for debts over 750 GBP. The Court will take a dim view of this process being used as scaremongering tactics on smallish amounts of debts.

 

Cheers

jimbo

Edited by jimbo45
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please stop with the .... .... it makes it very difficult to read. Thank you :)

 

If they do come to your door and refuse to leave you would be well within your rights to throw a bucket of water (or something) over them whilst you wait for the police to arrive in response to their 'breach of the peace.'

 

I hear you zazen ,no more .... :)

Thats just the thing though, expecting them at my door,its impacting on my enjoyment of my home and not that im bothered what the neighbours think ( trust me) but id have to deal with it all very publicly within the confines of a shared courtyard.

I feel like ive been invaded by some greedy thief. Surely they wouldnt be stupid enough to "refuse" to leave,like im somehow going to put my hand in my pocket and magically produce 600 quid that I dont owe them. Me,im still fed up about it all immensely and feel that ive had my quiet life taken off me. My phone went earlier and I wouldnt answer it, theres a way that makes you feel . It turned out to be a friend, im reduced to fielding my calls and having to phone folks back ,poor beyond belief.

If theyre that convinced I owe them money and that im a "wont pay", why dont they just take me to court ? Thats actually something id love to ask them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your last payment was over 6 years ago the debt is STATUTE BARRED and that's the end of it.

 

It's an OFFENCE for anybody to pursue a debt once it's statute barred and never mind throwing the book at them --you can chuck THE WHOLE LIBRARY back in their faces and they will have to bear the costs.

 

They can add a million quid a day charges to it and it wouldn't make any difference.

 

DO NOT ADMIT to the debt since this might be a guise in getting you to do something which stops the debt from becoming statute barred if it is shortly about to become statute barred.

 

You need to know when you last paid anything on this debt -- a SAR for 10 GBP is the best way to proceed on this one since this will have the date of last payment.

 

In any case CCA crappyquest / lowell or whoever the DCA is as well just for "nuisance value" as the chances are they won't have the paperwork available within the legal time period.

 

This will be a VERY WORTHWILE 1 GBP spent.

 

NEVER EVER get stressed out by these **** and bullies -- even if it goes to court a court can't make you pay what you don't have and finally these days the courts seem to be getting a little tired of antics from the DCA's.

 

Incidentally and "Bankruptcy" threats are also nonsense since this will cost THEM a lot of money and can only be done for debts over 750 GBP. The Court will take a dim view of this process being used as scaremongering tactics on smallish amounts of debts.

 

Cheers

jimbo

thanks for that jimbo :). Can I just quote you a second . "Even if it goes to court ", I honestly would rather have it dealt with by a court than the swines that are dealing with it right now.I feel that a court would find in my favour ( or at absolute worst make me pay a minimal monthly amount from my benefit) and thats why theyre not getting on with taking me there. Does that sound about right ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look we keep going over the same thing here.

Is the debt statued barred or not?

You just keep finding reasons to panic.

If someone knocks at your door and I very much doubt they will pass them the letter through the letterbox and tell them to F.O.

Why do you want to go to court and pay a debt that is SB?

If you want to pay it make them an offer of a sum that you can afford if that is £1 a month so be it.

Just please stop repeating the same thing every time someone advises you.

Follow the advice given.

I have no legal training, any knowledge I have has come from this forum, and my own experiences. Always balance up any advice you get with your own common sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look we keep going over the same thing here.

Is the debt statued barred or not?

You just keep finding reasons to panic.

If someone knocks at your door and I very much doubt they will pass them the letter through the letterbox and tell them to F.O.

Why do you want to go to court and pay a debt that is SB?

If you want to pay it make them an offer of a sum that you can afford if that is £1 a month so be it.

Just please stop repeating the same thing every time someone advises you.

Follow the advice given.

 

I actually dont think its statute barred ,if it was id just tell them to foxtrot oscar its 3 and a half years since I last heard anything about this ( lowells ) but Iwrote and told them then that I didnt acknowledge any debt to them and did the sar thing at which point I never heard another thing off them.I dont quite know when or who I last made a payment to , I was passed round like an abused child for a bit.

Sorry about the panic thing but I suffer from mental health problems and I do have anxiety/panic attacks, I wish I didnt but I do :(. Will be sending philips a "disputed account " letter in the morning and telling them I have made an sar request to capital one .Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...but I suffer from mental health problems and I do have anxiety/panic attacks, I wish I didnt but I do

 

If that is the case, you should include within your letter that, you are familiar with the;

MALG Guidelines on Good Practice.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...