Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ACI are part of the Perch Capital group along with TM legal.  
    • Thanks jk2054 - email now sent to OCMC requesting an in person hearing.
    • You can easily argue your case with no sign on the nearest parking sign
    • Same issue got a fine yesterday for parking in suspended bay which was ending at 6:30 yesterday, next thing I see a fine 15 minutes before it. The sign was obstructed 
    • Hi all, an update on the case as the deadline for filing the WS is tomorrow i.e., 14 days before the hearing date: 7th June. Evri have emailed their WS today to the court and to myself. Attached pdf of their WS - I have redacted personal information and left any redactions/highlights by Evri. In the main: The WS is signed by George Wood. Evri have stated the claim value that I am seeking to recover is £931.79 including £70 court fees, and am putting me to strict proof as to the value of the claim. Evri's have accepted that the parcel is lost but there is no contract between Evri and myself, and that the contract is with myself and Packlink They have provided a copy of the eBay Powered By Packlink Terms and Conditions (T&Cs) to support their argument the contractual relationship is between myself and Packlink, highlighting clause 3a, e, g of these T&Cs. They further highlight clause 14 of the T&Cs which states that Packlink's liability is limited to £25 unless enhanced compensation has been chosen. They have contacted Packlink who informed them that I had been in contact with Packlink and raised a claim with Packlink and the claim had been paid accordingly i.e., £25 in line with the T&Cs and the compensated postage costs of £4.82. They believe this is clear evidence that my contract is with Packlink and should therefore cease the claim against Evri. Evri also cite Clause 23 of the pre-exiting commercial agreement between the Defendant and Packlink, which states:  ‘Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 A person who is not a party to this Agreement shall have no rights under the Contracts (Right of Third Parties) Act 1999 to rely upon or enforce any term of this Agreement provided that this does not affect any right or remedy of the third party which exists or is available apart from that Act.’ This means that the Claimant cannot enforce third party rights under the Contract (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 and instead should cease this claim and raise a dispute with the correct party.   Having read Evri's WS and considered the main points above, I have made these observations: Evri have not seen/read my WS (sent by post and by email) as they would have recognised the claim value is over £1000 as it includes court fees, trial fees, postage costs and interests, and there is a complete breakdown of the different costs and evidence. Evri accepts the parcel is lost after it entered their delivery network - again, this is in my WS and is not an issue in dispute. Evri mentions the £25 and £4.82 paid by Packlink - Again, had they read the WS, they would have realised this is not an issue in dispute. Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency   This supports the view that once a user (i.e, myself) selects a transport agency (i.e Evri) that best suits the user's needs, the user (i.e, myself) enters into a contract with the chosen transport agency (i.e, myself). Therefore, under the T&Cs, there is a contract between myself and Evri. Evri cites their pre-existing agreement with Packlink and that I cannot enforce 3rd party rights under the 1999 Act. Evri has not provided a copy of this contract, and furthermore, my point above explains that the T&Cs clearly explains I have entered into a contract when i chose Evri to deliver my parcel.  As explained in my WS, i am the non-gratuitous beneficiary as my payment for Evri's delivery service through Packlink is the sole reason for the principal contract coming into existence. Clearly Evri have not read by WS as the above is all clearly explained in there.   I am going to respond to Evri's email by stating that I have already sent my WS to them by post/email and attach the email that sent on the weekend to them containing my WS. However, before i do that, If there is anything additional I should further add to the email, please do let me know. Thanks. Evri Witness Statement Redacted v1 compressed.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

statute barred: how to tell?


drees5761
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4995 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

Send a SAR request to the OC (NOT any DCA chasing you). It will cost 10 GBP.

 

DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THE DEBT EVEN IF YOU HAVE MADE PAYMENTS IN THE PAST as this starts the clock ticking again.

 

Once the debt is SB'd then thats it -- 100% defence at law FOR EVER.

 

SCREW the CRA's -- I HATE them almost as much as the DCA's -- or in fact EVEN MORE since there is TOTALLY NO TRANSPARENCY over what happens when people refer to your CRA and there appears to be no limit to the amount of data they can supply to 3rd parties.

 

I'd LOVE to get one of these bozos on breaking something in the Data Protection acts -- but I suppose as they collude with the Banks there will always be some reason why THEY get away with it but we would be stung with a prosecution and / or a heavy fine.

 

Cheers

jimbo

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

If you check you credit file and something is not there that doesn't mean that no debt exists - it may just be that it has never been recorded with that credit agency.

Are you saying you've checked your file and this debt has dropped off or are you not sure.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is six years since the last PAYMENT has been made on your account, not the last contact, if that was true then no debt would EVER become statute barred as all the creditor would have to do is write to you....

 

If the payment was made under duress (ie they kept phoning up and you paid to get statements which didn't arrive) or they CANNOT prove that the payment DID come from you or your representative then it is the preceeding payment which counts (had this in a case recently, DCA had used a strange payment of £3.75 and claimed it was from the alleged debtor, alleged debtor was able to prove without question of doubt their whereabouts the day the DCA claimed they contacted and got the payment!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the last payment on the account to whoever, but if the debt was stat barred then it makes no odds if who or when you pay after that, it's still stat barred.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about payment under duress... how would this work? I've noted that that there was a payment to DLC made after being threatened that goods would be removed from my parents house

 

There you go, you've just answered your own question, that would be a prime example of getting payment by duress, plus, exploiting the debtors lack of knowledge, obtaining money by deception, psychological harassment & intimidation to name a few!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Defaults are usually entered one month after the last payment or activity on the account in question, so it will be a safe bet that 6 years (5 in Scotland) from the default date the debt will be SB, any activity on the account, either by payment or acknowledgement that the account is in fact owed blah blah blah, resets the limitation period to zero and the time starts again. However once the limitation period has run it's course, nothing niet nadda can ever restart the clock.

:behindsofa: hello BB..

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If a payment is made after the default date does this reset the clock on the six years? Or is it still six years from the default date?

Yes it will reset the limitation clock, BUT if there has been a clear period of 6 years (5 in Scotland) and a payment is made after this period, then it does NOT reset the clock.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

in a bid to clear up my credit file ive recently emailed Hilsden to say my debt was SB and they replied that according to their records it isnt and that "Due to your recent contact I confirm the new date for ‘statute barred’ is now September 2016."

i.e they took my email to be acknowledgement of the debt !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Default dates do not count for statute barring, so I have been told by a legal bod.... it is definately the last payment that counts more than any other date, and the payment has to come from the original debtor to the original creditor or its collecting agent, it CANNOT be a payment from a collecting agent to a creditor which does not identify the originating source.... he was quite specific on this.

 

Apparently DCAs are now trying to get the Statute of Limitations changed to six years after the Default date and have the default date moved every time the debt is passed onto collections teams or sold... totally defeats the object of the Statute of Limitations!

Link to post
Share on other sites

in a bid to clear up my credit file ive recently emailed Hilsden to say my debt was SB and they replied that according to their records it isnt and that "Due to your recent contact I confirm the new date for ‘statute barred’ is now September 2016."

i.e they took my email to be acknowledgement of the debt !

 

Once it is statute-barred NOTHING can make it un-statute-barred.

 

A written acknowledgement CAN reset the clock , if not already statute-barred. I don't believe that emails can count as such although I may be wrong.

 

One thing I have learnt, both from these forums and from personal experience. There are no absolute truths as far as the law goes. The law can say one thing, but it seems that a contrary judge or lawyer can pretend it says something else. The main principle seems, for them, to be "what is legal is whatever they can get away with", and a good lawyer seems to be one who can bend the interpretation of the law to suit his own purposes, and who is able to convince others to accept that interpretation. So much of our social contract is based on smoke and mirrors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

contents of email was "I am writing to inform you that this so called "outstanding debt" is statute barred as it is over 6 years has passed since any payment was made to the account . Please see the attched screenshot of my credit file"

 

screenshot showed last payment was july 2004

Link to post
Share on other sites

Defaults are usually entered one month after the last payment or activity on the account in question, so it will be a safe bet that 6 years (5 in Scotland) from the default date the debt will be SB, any activity on the account, either by payment or acknowledgement that the account is in fact owed blah blah blah, resets the limitation period to zero and the time starts again. However once the limitation period has run it's course, nothing niet nadda can ever restart the clock.

 

I have just sent a statute barred letter to lowells re barclycard this afternoon, whats puzzling me is having checked my credit file with experian & equifax lowells are saying that my default date is 06/08. now I had the card in 2000, on experian it shows 36 months activity but nothing showing on equifax. Now I cant say exactly when I defaulted but took out a capital one card in 2007 to repair my credit rating so it was way before then I think probably around 2003/2004. strangely no mention of this debt on either file from barclaycard only lowells. how do i find out when the last payment was made?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Sending a Subject Access Request to the Origional Creditor should let you know the score regarding payments made on the account.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...