Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So I just found a couple abandoned traffic cones locally by some bins.   A bit squished but free!  So have placed them on the land.  Will wait to see if the cones get moved and signs ignored again this week before I consider rocks/ boulders.
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later the your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. So if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place and park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and then unload the children followed by reloading the children getting seat belts on etc before driving to the exit stopping for cars, pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
    • Hi  no nothing yet. Hope it stays that way 😬
  • 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

1st Credit demands more money then i can afford


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4985 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 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hiya, i did recieve something through the post with the complaint response, which they claim is their notice of assignment. It is on 1st credit letter headed paper, the date on it is 31/08/2006 and it basically says that they give me notice that Lloyds tsb has assigned 1st credit ltd all of the banks rights in to and under the above detailed account. Thay say they have been appointed by Lloyds tsb to administor the account. It says the full outstanding amount is owed to 1st credit. I should contact the office immediatly blah blah blah.

 

However in August 2006, Connaught was the DCA (i know they are the same vultures). And in August 2006, Connaught knew of my current addreess, so why is my old, old address on this stupid excuse of a 'document'??? They know full well that i didn't live there at the time, or they would have done if they were the true owners of the debt. If they were going to send a NOA back in 2006, then wouldn't they send it to the address i was living at?? In other words, do you think that this is a genuine NOA?? (i don't really know what one looks like). I think they are taking the micky.

 

Also, i certainly will be reporting these low lives to anyone and everyone i can think of, including OFT, TS, CSA. If not just for me, for everyone else that has been bullied by these muppets.

 

Still no SAR from Lloyds, that may take time.

Edited by weston83
Link to post
Share on other sites

You need an NOA from LTSB on LTSB letterhead - and legally (Law of Property Act 1925) it should be sent registered post, although recorded delivery is now regarded as acceptable. Again you need to tell 1st crud to "prove it". Any DCA (or indeed any fraudster - same thing?) - could knock this sort of thing up and demand you pay them now instead of the OC. If the OC hasn't confirmed this you would be taking a risk paying any third party.

 

IMHO it has NO legal standing whatsover - and since it was clearly sent to a long outdated address it wasn't even "served". If you want to rattle their cage a bit more then ask them to prove it was sent registered post (as required) and show proof of who signed for it. Don't highlight it was sent to an out of date address. You may even get something back with your own signature - which WOULD be interesting!

 

You need to SAR LTSB and see what that throws up - send Account in Dispute letter to 1st Crud.

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigdebtor, u are fantastic, I thought it looked a bit dodgy when i read it. I will most certainly send an account in dispute letter, i'll have a look for a template on this site, as my writing skills are awful. I have send an SAR to Lloyds, will push it with them for a response if i don't hear from them.

 

I will certainly not be giving these clowns anymore money until i have cast iron proof of the debt, i can't believe that they tried to pull the wool over my eyes. Fraudsters!!!!!

 

Well we'll see what they come up with now.

 

Thanks again for that advice

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're welcome. I'm pretty sure there is a template- but let me know if there isn't and you want a copy of one I've done (but I think I did it from a template from CAG).

 

Google 1st Credit and you'll find out about how the OFT views them! They seem to be the OFT No. 1 target for not playing fair.

 

Good luck

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not surprised the OFT is on to them, i watched the Panorama documentary and was sickened at the way these agents treated the debtors. I have done loads of research on 1st credit and they're website makes them look like a nicey, nicey bunch of samaritans who 'only wants to help the debtor' and who sympathises with the debtor, i had to laugh. because when i googled them, i did not find one posative comment on the muppets, i read about how the OFT are closely monitoring them, i hope they get theie lisence taken straight off them!!

 

I can't seem to fand a template specifically for disputes, do you mind if i use your template? To be honest with you i don't think 1st credit have got hald the paper work they need in order to take me to court, they are useless lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should look closely at any default notices, termination notices issued by LTSB.

 

I have seen some on here where the amount to rectify the situation is not given properly by LTSB (ie £xxx + interest up to the date paid in). I am sure that makes the default invalid & everything following rather dodgy. They might even decide that they don't need to send any copies of DNs etc - maybe for that reason.

 

That might make the sale of the alleged debt rather interesting ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to see what the SAR to LTSB throws up.

 

Dodgy DN's don't seem to be as helpful to the debtor as they once were - according to some recent posts on Pinky 69's "Invalid DN thread".

 

In the meantime 1st crud should be given enough rope to hang themselves by monitoring how they behave after getting an "Account in Dispute" letter.

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree - but they still don't have the sense to read and understand what we say and use our superior knowledge to put right their dodgy ways. As long as we don't mention specifics about any particular cases I think such general comments can be made quite safely.

 

After all, the Banks have known for 34 years what SHOULD go into a compliant DN - it's public domain information - but they STILL get it wrong - and I place 1st crud a long way further back in evolution than the Banks!

 

I do hope they read this!

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks 2grumpy, babybear and BD, thanks BD for the template letter. I shall be writing the muppets a letter tommorrow when i have the day off, it shall be very intresting to see their response. I will also push the OC to respond to my SAR request. I shall get to the bottom of this. Oh and BD, how to i click on your star. Sorry i am so incompetent on this site lol. Computers and me do nopt really mix.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ps...if they do trawl this forum, then they probably won't have the intelligence to understand half of what is said. I will be on to them big time. Thanks again peeps, hopefully this experience i'm having will work out ok in order for me to pass on the knowledge and help other people on this site, i've learned a hell of a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...