Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • 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 then 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. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  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.
  • 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

HFO service ltd and my case Oct 2010


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4955 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

I will try to keep it short as an sure you have heard it all

 

I recieved a letter from HFO on 12/9/2010 saying they were sold my debt by barclaycard etc, gave me the date it was sold to them, how much it was and now is. Lets say it is nearly a mortgage! in the Tens of thousands.

 

I called them spoke to them, asked for more info and denied all over the phone. A week later i get a letter saying the last payment was made on the account to barclaycard on 24/9/2010.

 

I knew it was nearing satute barred period.

 

I wrote them asking for credit agreement clearly stating i do not admit the claim. I did not sign the letter and included a £1 standing order.

 

It has taken them 1 month to reply with a front sheet of the agreement with my signature on it which i supposed bought me more time.nI got the letter and credit agreement yestarday 28/10/2009.

 

Clearly 1 month and 4 days after the last payment date. of to put it into the limitatons act law, 4 days after "the cause of action accrued" I understand the cause of action as the day you missed first payment which is 1 month after your last payment? (please correct me if i am wrong)

 

I now know that as i have not admitted the claim in the 6 years, have not paid in the 6 years and they have not taken me to court in the 6 years, is it statue barred?

 

I know their is no court claim against me as i did a credit check and it came clear on court cases and i actually asked HFO if they had taken me to court yet and they said no.

 

HFO say no it is not SB as they wrote me in Sept 2010 and i recieved the letter and that is when i contacted them, therefore it does not matter that i did not admit the claim so they will see me in court.

 

What are my chances of winning if i go to court and should i be getting a solicitor involved? They are blooming expensive!

Anyone konw something i have missed so far and any other actions i should be looking to take or is it just wait and see time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their merely writing to you does not undo the SB. If you do not acknowledge the debt, that’s it – it has now gone. They are telling you a lie. Once you have stated it is SB – and they offer no proof that it is not – they are in serious breach of the OFT guidelines:

 

Statute barred debt

2.13 This guidance applies to the pursuit of debt regardless of its age. We will be

carrying out further work on this aspect of debt recovery including analysis of

relevant legislation and practice throughout the UK.

2.14 In the past we have dealt with a number of statute barred debt cases governed by

the Limitation Act 1980, which applies to England and Wales. Based on that

experience our position with regard to England and Wales remains:

a. we accept legally the debt exists

b. it is the methods by which the debt is collected that can be

unfair as follows:

• it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from

the creditor during the relevant limitation period

• if a creditor has been in regular contact with a debtor before the debt

is statute barred, then we do not consider it unfair to continue to

attempt to recover the debt

• it is unfair to mislead debtors as to their rights and obligations, for

example, falsely stating or implying that the debt is still legally

recoverable and relying on consumers not knowing the relevant legal

provisions, and

• continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they

will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to

harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of

Justice Act 1970.

 

Note that they have not been in REGULAR contact.

 

So there you have it. Make it clear to these idiots that any further contact will be reported to the police as harassment.

 

Complain to the OFT and your local Trading Standards anyway. They deserve all the aggro they get by telling blatant lies like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep ignore!

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m guessing they acquired the debt sometime in 2007, and have done nothing about it since? It’s their own fault then. If they knew how to run a business properly, they might stand a chance. If I owned the company, I would make sure heads rolled for cock-ups like this.

 

I would also aver that threatening legal action when the debt is SB is a contravention of another OFT rule:

 

False representation of authority and/or legal position

2.3 Those contacting debtors must not be deceitful by misrepresenting their authority

and/or the correct legal position.

2.4 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. falsely implying or claiming authority, for example, claiming to work on

instructions from the courts, claiming to be bailiffs or, in Scotland,

sheriff officers or messenger-at-arms

b. falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when it legally

cannot, for example, referring to bankruptcy or sequestration proceedings

when the balance is too low to qualify for such proceedings or claiming a

right of entry when no court order to this effect has been granted

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest you get a complaint into Trading Standards, the OFT and the Ministry of Justice. HFO are behaving very badly here. Writing to you does not reset the statute barred clock nor keep it ticking from that point. They are very economical with the truth and with their figures, they like to slap on backdated interest to 2007.

 

I still find it very hard to believe that a company would not chase debts worth 10s of thousands from the day they got them. Something is clearly very amis with their business administration if they have missed these debts in all that time.

 

We really need a good audit of this firms internal processes - including the assignments and allocations after assignment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You gotta laugh at their inept foolish employees, where do they get them from??? I know they like to recruit ex burger flippers from the golden arches but jeez!

Here is the list of organisations you need to complain to for their immature threats;

OFT&TS via http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/contact

 

http://www.justice.gov.uk/contactus.htm

 

Local MP http://www.writetothem.com/

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

Thanks all, advice appriciated.

I will wait to hear from them again before i put in any form of complaints. I was suprised to learn they had not got court actions underway from ages ago as the debt is huge, i certainly cannot afford to pay it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...