Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Regretfully it does. Have you actually seen any papers which show what you were charged with (rather than what you were convicted of)? It is unusual not to be “dual charged” but if you were not charged with both, you are where you are. If you had been charged with both offences and providing you were the driver at the time, you could, after performing your SD, have asked the prosecutor to drop the “Fail to Provide” (FtP) charges in exchange for a guilty plea to the speeding charges (you cannot be convicted of speeding unless you plead guilty as they have no evidence you were driving). You will have difficulty defending the FtP charges. In fact, it’s worse than that – you have no chance of successfully defending them at all because the reason you did not respond to the requests is because you did not receive them and that’s entirely your fault. No it’s not correct. Six months from 18/11/23 was 18/5/24 so, unless they were originally charged, the speeding offences are now “timed out.” There is one avenue left open to you. If you perform your SD you must serve it on the court which convicted you. You will then receive a date for a hearing to have the matters heard again. Your only chance of having the matters revert to speeding (and this is only providing you were the driver at the time of those offences) is to plead Not Guilty, attend court and ask the prosecutor (very nicely, explaining what a pillock you know you were for failing to update your  V5C) if (s)he is prepared to raise “out of time” speeding charges, to which you will offer to plead guilty if the FtP charges are dropped.   This is strictly speaking not lawful. Charges have to be raised within six months. Some prosecutors are willing to do it, others are not. But frankly it’s the only avenue open to you. There is a risk with this. I imagine you have been fined £660 (plus surcharge and costs) for each offence. The offence attracts a fine of 1.5 week’s net income and where the court has no information about the defendant’s means a default figure of £440pw is used.  If the prosecutor is not prepared to play ball you can revise your pleas to guilty. A sympathetic court should give you the full discount (one third) for your guilty pleas in these circumstances but they may reduce the discount somewhat. The prosecution may also ask for increased costs (£90 or thereabouts is the figure for a guilty plea). So it may cost you more if you have a decent income (I’ll let you do the sums). But MS90 is an endorsement code which gives insurers a fit of the vapours. One such endorsement will see your premiums double. Two of them will see many insurers refuse to quote you at all. So you really want to exhaust every possibility of avoiding them if you can. One warning: do not pay solicitors silly money to defend you. Making an SD before a solicitor should attract just a nominal sum (perhaps a tenner). That’s all you should pay for. You have no viable defence against the FtP charges and any solicitor suggesting you have is telling you porkies. The offer to do the deal is easily done by yourself and you can save the solicitor’s fees to put towards a few taxis and increased insurance premiums if you are unsuccessful. In the happy event you find out you were "dual charged", let me know and I'll tell you how to proceed. (Seems a bit odd hoping you were charged with four driving offences rather than two, but it's a funny old world!).    
    • Just the sort of people you despise eh Jugg  You would be much happier among your mates in that room with Rayner begging for votes 
    • I see the trial of the real criminal in the Biden Family has started rather than the sham political persecution of Trump    Biden will of course try to distance himself as far as possible to no avail  Even more votes for The Donald🤣    
    • Savings platform Raisin UK is offering a £50 bonus for new customers who sign up for an account.View the full article
    • With Farage back in the news, here's a reminder of his interview with Claire Byrne on Irish TV a few years ago.  
  • 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

Cabot/Morgans claimform - 2 debts cap1 card + Barclaycard - *** Settled on F&FS ***


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4386 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

Yes Coledog wasn't you the one 2 months ago posting " embarrassed defences everywhere" same one for every thread.I gave you some advice then.

Yes, I did but I know my limitations and was trying to learn, still am. That was for the people with split claims mainly who were similar cases but I was trying to adapt them to the POCs.

 

And I got the sample from a Sticky thread

 

I am happy to look at any approach that helps people deal with the system and it is largely self help as people have to deal with this themselves in the end, we can only guide.

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 221
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes, I did but I know my limitations and was trying to learn, still am. That was for the people with split claims mainly who were similar cases but I was trying to adapt them to the POCs.

 

And I got the sample from a Sticky thread

 

I am happy to look at any approach that helps people deal with the system and it is largely self help as people have to deal with this themselves in the end, we can only guide.

 

With respect CD I dont think you are in any position to guide anyone in the Legal Forum with regards to CPR and Court procedures. perhaps a fewmore months in the Debt Collection Forum.

Now lets leave it at that.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear me. Come on guys ... let's drop the handbags business we are all trying to be helping each other here and I certainly need help and I am grateful to those that are giving it. Right then ... to return to the business at hand, Andy you are telling me to add the line in RED that you have confirmed. Other than this do you feel this is ready to submit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heathrow if you can give me a little more time to run through it again I understand that the deadline was not today.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please contribute by all means, and agree to disagree if need be, but please be polite, I am guilty of giving the worng information in the past, but luckily have been corrected on most occasions. It is a constant learning process for all...A forum likes this gives people chances to add to what has been written and if need be give an opinion on why the comment/advise isn't right. Nobody is perfect !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a little pressie from the Cabot Fan Club that may help you people....Ken Maynard is going to be sooooo pleased to be reading this and it comes with all our love:

 

Subject matter: In House solicitors - Think MORGANS, they are Cabots in-house solicitors

 

 

EU Court rules that in-house lawyers are not covered by legal professional privilege

 

Summary

On 14 September 2010, the European Court of Justice held that, in the field of competition law, internal

company communications with in-house lawyers are not covered by legal professional privilege.

 

Background

The judgment follows a dawn raid by officials from the European Commission and the Office of Fair Trading ("OFT") of Akzo Nobel Chemicals and its subsidiary Akcros Chemical in 2003. The European Commission and the OFT have wide-ranging powers under EU and UK competition law to undertake investigations, raid companies' premises and take copies of documents. During this investigation, a disagreement arose in relation to the application of legal professional privilege to two e-mails with Akzo's in-house lawyer. Akzo Nobel and Akcros challenged these decisions before the EU General Court, which were dismissed by the General Court on 17 September 2007. The firms appealed against that judgment to the Court of Justice. - (The appeal was Dismissed ! LOL)

 

That means anyone being sued by Morgans can get via their SA R all communications between the departments

 

Don't you just love the EU?:lol:

 

Anyone wants some bed time reading - here ya go.. http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/eu/cases/EUECJ/2010/C55007_O.html&query=title+%28+Akzo+%29+and+title+%28+Nobel+%29+and+title+%28+Chemicals+%29&method=boolean

 

 

xx Ken !!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, have I got this wrong then? - In the field of competition law

 

On 14 September 2010, the European Court of Justice held that, in the field of competition law, internal

company communications with in-house lawyers are not covered by legal professional privilege.

 

Before anyone get's too excited, I'll get this checked out as I don't want to send people on a wild goose chase! What is 'Competition law' by comparison with what we are doing...? why should it be any different?

 

Back soon.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Since my last post on 24 November I have sent the CPR 31.14 request to Morgans and they recieved this on 25th. They have not responded in the time period that I gave them nor have I heard anything further. I feel attack is probably the best form of defence so does anyone know whether I should now proceed with an application to have this claim struck out? If so wha\t is my next step?

Any help will be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have returned my part of the claim to the court stating that Ido not admit the claim and intend to contest it. This was done online within the stiipulated time and I also sent my CPR 31.14 request to Morgans by Recorded Delivery that they signed for on 25 November but they have failed to respond to my request to supply copies of both agreements referred to in their claim . This has obviously well exceeded the 7 day limit and they have not requested more time to supply. I now intend issuing an N244 to have the case struck out. What is your advice please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you need to ring the court ASAP as you should have submitted a defence, ask them what your optons are. You need a formal reminder to Morgans re: not responding to your request.

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Heathrow

 

If you could just refresh were we are, I assume you submitted your defence on-time.Have you received acknowledgment from the Court? Has the Claimant responded? Is the claim stayed?

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Thanks guys. I submitted the documents online to the Northampton clearing centre stating it was my intention to contest the claim. I also sent a request by recorded delivery to Morgans (CPR 31.14) that they received on 25 November. I received an electronic acknowledgement from the court but I have had no response whatsoever thus far from Morgans. Hence my request to know whether I should apply to the court to have the action struck out.

Any advice please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to ring the court and check the date for filing a defence as you need to do this even if it is an 'embarrassed' one. You can also contact the claimants solicitor and ask them to agree an extension if they have not provided the supporting documentation by the required date but you have to make sure you meet the defence deadline.

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Andyorch do you mean have I applied to the court for a stay (adjournment?) because since I filed my response to the action I have heard nothing more from anyone.

 

No have you submitted the defence as per post number 19 that I amended for you? I know you have Acknowledged Service and your plea was to defend but this is all really pointless if you have not submitted that defence on time. If you did submit on time then refer back to my post number 49.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would allow a little more time due to to the xmas holidays then check with Northampton if the claim is stayed.If so then you have option to make application to have the claim struck out or request the Court ti issue an order that they respond.Its a catch 22 because they may just set a side your application then respond or they may not, but allow a little more time before making further expense on application.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

N149 or N150 Heathrow?

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy. Form N150. I have also received N152 Notice that Defence/Counterclaim has been filed. Is it safe to include a letter to state that the Claimant has failed to provide the documentation to support their claim under CPR31.14 and therefore I believe the case should be struck out for non-compliance?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...