Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
  • 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
      • 160 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

Wagedayadvance


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4882 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

Anyone had any dealings with this company?

I am currently trying to get myself of the payday loan merry go round and am down to 3 (from 8)

Mostly they have been ok but what I have been doing is just defaulting and trying to reach payment plans and if they say no I just let it go to the d.c.a who so far have all accepted my £10 a month offers.

I also have had no calls at work from other companies what surprises me as I know they have had me number…?

So does anyone know what this company are like?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not too bad to deal with directly, depending on who you get and how much you owe. Offering £10 a month is a start but how many companies are involved and how much do you owe... you might be better snowballing the debts, ie paying off the smallest amount in two or three months and leaving the others to a smaller monthly payment and then they will start making you offers!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have only offered £10 per month to the ones with the d.c.a's i am/have offerd more to the ones still with the actuall companies.

 

breakdown is-

 

qq-750

ptp-530

m.shop-350

cash genie-156

w.d.a- 430

mr lender-150

lending stream-350

payday express-200

Link to post
Share on other sites

qq-750 with Mackenzie hall £10 per month

ptp-530 with clarity £10 per month

m.shop-350 with there head office £30 per month

cash genie-156 due to be paid in full this month (im good to pay this)

w.d.a- 430 due to default

mr lender-150 paid in full already

lending stream-350 due this month

payday express-200 defaulted last month not heard anything yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a carbon copy situation as you and wagedayadvance have asked for an I&E form before accepting my offer of £40pm off the balance of £312.50.

 

I'll let you lnow what they say once I send a very basic response to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wda are one of the better ones albeit they do like their I/e form. Up to you wether you provide it. They do pass to a dca if you don't reach agreement. A friend of mine refused to provide the form and has heard nothing for over 6 months. The dca just returned it to wda.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WDA are a stranmge commodity. I had a loan that was rolled over several times until i defaulted around 2008. They passed to a DCA in Liverpool (DRS??) who provided me with an inelligible CCA and i placed the debt in dispute.

This was in May this year and ive heard nothing since. Im surpised WDA have not contacted me or had another DCA chase it up. This is one i have not sorted out yet due to cleating all other debts this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

If there is any guys out there who have had dealings with these people please advice.

I recently had a loan with these sharks and paid it in full , well the d’d was accidently canx and they took it out on my card the same day (the due day) no problem.

The problem is they also took 3x £12 charges = £36 out as well. Obviously I was thinking what this is for.

So I emailed them to ask to be told they are default charges.

So I replied confused “why 3 charges as only 1 loan and 1 d’d”

I was told they take there payments out in 3 instalments as do many other p.d.l companys.

I have now gone through there complaints process and got a full and final response from them and fired a letter of to the ombudsman yesterday.

The basis of my complaint is the obviously these charges are excessive and mainly there charging structure where they take there payments in 3 instalments is clearly designed for to charge people silly charges if there payments don’t go through.

What baffles me is even making this point to them and telling them I will be taking this to the ombudsmen they still would not refund the charges.

Ha ho do you think the ombudsman will actually do anything, as the ultimate goal would be to get them to be forced to change this system of deducting in 3 instalments as it is clearly daylight robbery.

Anyone got any thoughts on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s too late for that now the letter is in the post to the fos.

As i was saying above the ultimate goal would be the fos making them change the way they reclaim there loans as there is no need to take it in 3 transactions. it is just done like that to charge you 3 lots of £12 if it does not go through. Hopefully my complaint will bring this to attention and hit them where it hurts "there pockets".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking about this the other day and would like your thoughts on it.

 

I have been on the payday merry go round for about 2 years now, I am nearly of and can’t wait only 2 to go.

 

Anyway that entire aside when I first started taking payday loans they would transfer the money the same day no charge.

Now the last year or so all of a sudden they have been asking for fees for this service I have even been asked for £25 by one company!

All the p.d.l companies tell me/us “it’s what the bank charge”

If that’s the case you’re telling me if I borrowed £100 when you didn’t charge this fee you would pay the charge and only make £5-10 pounds in total from lending a £100…. I think not.

 

I believe this is some fabricated lie to make more money and it needs to be brought to attention.

 

Anyone have any thoughts on this if I am totally wrong please feel free to shoot me down!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

26072004

 

Already checked it and just checked it again to be sure there is no mention what so ever of them taking there payments in 3 installments. Thats the main thing thats got my back up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They cant charge you extra because they have a policy of taking the payment in three instalments.

 

just looks like another money grabbing exercise.

 

Are they now saying you just owe them £36 for the unpaid DD's??. If so I would send them a chq for £12 (difficult to argue as the DD was not paid) and tell them to take you to court for the £24 - love to see that one go in front of a judge.

 

hopefully the FOS will make them see sense, but how many people do they do this too and they dont fight it and end up paying. The payday loan market is with us for good but some regulation is required and very quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

26072004

 

Too true. The problem with it is they took the charge strait out of my account along with me loan (without informing me). So they already have the money I am sure the fos will make them see sense and I will be launching a attack on the 3 payment structure through the fos. As like you said it is just another money grabbing exercise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...