Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • where does anything say its a penalty charge please? sit on your hands , stop begging to everyone await if/when you ever get a letter of claim. thread title updated     
    • Hi all, new member, being advised by someone on another forum but looking for the opinion of others to help me decide what to do.  Bit of a long one but I am looking for some quite specific advice or signposting to somewhere that may hold the correct information. Long story short, I bought an Audi on finance years ago and traded my old car in under the diesel scrappage scheme, brilliant. This allowed me to reduce the value of my brand new car by £7,000 Fast forward a few years later and I fell into hardship. Unfortunately I could no longer afford the car and despite my best efforts at trying to negotiate some kind of support from VWFS (Audi financial Services), the car was subsequently marked stolen and I was pulled over at the side of the road using Tactical Pursuit and Contain. My car was then recovered back to the finance company. I struggled for a while, bought an older car to get myself by and eventually got my finances back on track. Then in September of last year I became aware of a CCJ against me filed by VWFS, for the shortfall of the agreement minus the value of the car which was sold at auction. This caused me to do some research into my agreement, legislation and also consult some legal advice. Using another forum and speaking to retired vehicle finance lawyers, it turned out I may have some grounds to apply to set aside the CCJ at a Court hearing, so I drafted some documents and a witness statement and I was successful in setting aside the CCJ, on the grounds that VWFS had no evidence that I had traded in my old car as a part exchange. Now this is where things get complicated. My whole defence on winning the case against VWFS and disregarding liability for the shortfall rested on the fact that, with my old car as a part exchange, I had paid in more than a third of the agreement and VWFS could not repossess my car without a court order or they would be in breach of Section 90 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and I would be entitled to all sums paid under the agreement. I took this all the way, noting that the CCA 1974 and the Consumer Credit Agreement Regulations 2010 state that a deposit is defined as any exchange of goods or by any other means a reduction in value of a purchase by means of a transfer. I recently had my day in Court but as a litigant in person, was cross examined by an all singing all dancing Barrister and of course he persuaded the Judge that I had no case, and that my car traded in under the scrappage incentive was not to be classed as a deposit, despite it literally being written in legislation, amongst other reasons why I found the HP agreement to not be properly executed. I am now appealing this decision as I strongly believe the Judge has misinterpreted the law, What I really need for this to be successful is someone who is knowledgeable in the field of Vehicle Finance to help me understand if I have a possibility of overturning this case, as I have no doubt at all that my car should be classed as a part exchange and a deposit and it is blatantly written in the legislation that the finance companies are bound by. I would massively appreciate if someone can help me decipher this legislation and its application in the sense of my HP agreement, I simply do not understand how I can trade in my car and it not be classed as a part exchange, or a deposit. Similarly, if someone is able to find the exact wording of the terms and conditions of how the Diesel Scrappage Scheme was managed in 2018 that would be an absolute life saver! Thanks so much in advance, this is not a straight forward nor a well documented case but I believe I am onto something and I believe there will be other people in my position who have lost their cars without knowing this clause and could well be entitled to reclaim all sums under the agreement
    • we know them well. you TOTALLY ignore them. NO DCA is a BAILIFF  
  • 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

Claimform/ Link/GE capital/woodchester


elrib
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4507 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

Application on an N244 with a WS stating why the claim should be struck out. Your argument could be that you require finality, and they have failed to comply with CPR properly, for example – but beware that if they have failed so far to produce the proper paperwork, they may simply take their time locating it and then request the stay be lifted. The advantage of going for strike out is that they put up or shut up.

 

But it really depends on the strength of your case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi All

 

Have a default notice can this be used in a defence.

 

Date served, 4th july 2008

Remedy by, 18 july 2008.

 

Notice of termination 19 july 2008.

 

Thanks for any help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will need a lot more info, are they demanding the arrears or the full amount, what is it, how old is it, how was it obtained?

 

Default notices can be rectified, so if you tell them it is wrong, for whatever reason, then they will simply issue you with an enforceable DN.

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

hi

 

Its for a Loan taken out in late 2005.

The default Notice is for arrears. Dated the 4th july remedy by the 18th july, and then letter dated the 19th.

Headed, Notice Of Termination.

You have disregarded our previous notice of default and as a consequence we give you notice that we hereby

terminate the hiring and the agreement forthwith.

This has been around the block abit with other DCA.

E

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so when did you receive the DN? Dated and date received are two separate things.

 

It is highly unlikely that you will have received it on the same day it is printed so that goes in your favour for a start.

 

Don't inform of this, as all they will do is send you a correct DN, wait until they sell it to a DCA first before contacting them again. (IMO)

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

Looking through the paperwork this has been sold to Asset Link.

Not sure of the date received but would have been 1 or 2 days after the date on Notice.

E.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then GE still own this, they are simply using the fools Asset, as their gopher.

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

So if a creditor sells a debt on before the time allowed to rectify it, on the DN how can they possibly issue another one when they don't own the debt? Or can't they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually, the OC will issue a DN, which will either have the incorrect dates, ie it doesn't allow you the correct time period in which to rectify the account, or they demand the full balance instead if just the arrears, or there will be some other fault with it.

 

So if you say and do nothing after they have issued you with a faulty DN, then they terminate the account, and then sell it on to a DCA, you will be able to claim that the account was unlawfully rescinded and you accept their unlawful repudiation and will pay them the arrears, only.

 

The trouble with faulty DN's is that they can be rectified, so as soon as you let the OC know of it's failings, they rectify it and reissue you another one. Once it has been terminated and sold on the back of a faulty DN, there is no going back.

Edited by Bazooka Boo

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

Once it has been terminated and sold on the back of a faulty DN, there is no going back.

 

Evening Boo,

I received a faulty DN from Barclaycard October 2009. I was then contacted by various DCA's demanding the full outstanding balance. I have not notified BC or the DCA's as I do not wish to alert them. BC have never actually terminated the agreement in writing, although DCA's demanding the full balance might be considered termination. Basically, I consider it to be just another piece of ammunition in case they take it to court. I assume the termination will kick in if they sell the debt on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Boo

 

The debt was sold to Asset link in 2009 well after the default notice. it had been with a few DCA in the mean time.

I have had letter from Link to inform me that they bought the debt.

E.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking through the paperwork this has been sold to Asset Link.

Not sure of the date received but would have been 1 or 2 days after the date on Notice.

E.

 

Elrib, they seem to send out a lot of DN's by second class post, mine was dated 15 Feb and received on 19 Feb making it a 12 day DN. Worth rechecking your dates and storing as ammo in case of further action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rockwell

 

The DN sent only gives me about 10 days to fix and then I have a letter terminating the agrement, after that, debt was sold. Not going to let them know this but not sure how to use it against them if it gets that far.

E.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I too am of the same opinion, that if they demand the full amount, then that can be taken as the account is then terminated.

 

As you say, it is more ammo to throw at them if the need arises.

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

is there a act or case study that one could use as an example of a faulty default, I am sure I read somthing on this site but not sure where to fine it.

E.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Subbing also. Been AWOL for mothns and now catching up on many things which either have changed or may have changed and different information on the net. I've read that accepting the repudiation thing seems to mess up things but I don't understand how or why?? has anybody more information on this as it could change some of my 'defence' if needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK, UR is pretty much RIP, however!!!!!

 

If the OC issues a faulty DN (for whatever reason) and they then sell it to a DCA, (without being informed the DN is faulty) then the new owner can ONLY ever recover the arrears!

 

If the OC issues a DN which is faulty, and they are made aware of this, then all they need do it to issue you with a NEW DN which is enforceable so they can then enforce...

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

And when would be a good time to inform new owners of this fact? When threatened with court action? Or would they go back to OC and get them to issue new one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the OC sold the debt on, is there a Act or case which could be produce in court to show that they can only claim the arrears, As I sure a judge would not just take my word.

E.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...