Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have never heard of any such law. Please post a link to what you have read online that explains this law. And please confirm whether you were ever married to or in a formal Civil Partnership with your Ex.
    • Today has been hectic so  have been unable to complete the whole thing. If you now understand it and want to go ahead with a complaint to the IPC, fine. If not then I won't need to finish it. But below is my response to your request  on post 64. No you don't seem stupid, the Protection of Freedoms Act isn't easy to get one 's head around at first. The part of the above Act referring to private parking is contained within Schedule 4 which you can find online under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Section 9 of SCH.4 relates to how the parking scrotes have to perform so that they can transfer their right to pursue the keeper from the driver when the PCN is still unpaid after a certain amount of time. In your case the PCN was posted to you the keeper and arrived within 14 days from when they claimed a breach occurred. That means they complied with first part of the Act. The driver at that time was still responsible to pay the charge demanded on the PCN and PCM now have to wait for 28 days to elapse before they can write and advise the keeper that as the charge has not been paid, that they now have the right to pursue the keeper. They claim they sent the first PCN on the 13th March, five days after the alleged breach and it arrived on Friday 15th March. So to comply with the Act they have to observe Section 8 subsection 2f   (f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------So the first PCN was deemed to arrive on the 15th March and for 28 days to have elapsed is when the time is right for them to write and say you are now liable as keeper. So they sent the next PCN on the 12th April which is too early as you could still have paid until midnight of the 12th. So the earliest their second PCN should have gone to you was  Saturday 13th April so more likely on Monday 15th April. The IPC Code of Conduct states "Operators must be aware of their legal obligations and implement the relevant legislation and guidance when operating their businesses." So by issuing your demand a day early, they have broken the Act, the IPC Code of Conduct, the DVLA agreement  to abide by the law and the Code of Conduct not to mention a possible breach of your GDPR .   I asked the IPC  in the letter on an earlier to confirm that  CPMs Notice misrepresenting the law was a standard practice for all of PCMs Notices or just certain ones. Their distribution  may depend on when they were issued and whether they were issued in certain localities or for certain breaches. Whichever method used is a serious breach of the Law and could lead to PCM being black listed by the DVLA . One would expect that after that even if the IPC did not cancel your ticket, PCM could not risk going to Court with you nor even pursuing you any further.
    • thanks jk2054 - do you know any law i can quote (regarding timeframe) when sending the email as if i cant they'll probably just say no like the normal staff have done? thanks.
    • I lived there with her up until I gave notice. She took over the tenancy in her name. I had a letter from the council and a refund of the council tax for 1 month.    She took on the bills and tenancy and only paid the rent. No utility bills or council tax were paid once she took it over. She will continue to not pay bills in her new house which I'm now having to pay or will have to. I have looked online I believe the police and solicitors are going by the partner law to make me liable.   I have always paid my bills and ensured her half was paid then see how much free money is over.   She spends all her money on payday loans and rubbish then panics about the rent. I usually end up paying it or having to get her a loan.   Stupidly in my name but at the time it was because she was my partner. I even paid to move her and clean and decorate her old house so she got the deposit back. It cost me £3000 due to the mess she always leaves behind.
  • 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

Received Court Papers From HFO. Is My Defence Okay?


witpig
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4647 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

Info for HFO Services at companies House

 

Name & Registered Office:

HFO SERVICES LIMITED

KINGS PARADE

LOWER COOMBE STREET

CROYDON

SURREY

CR0 1AA

Company No. 05120067

 

 

 

spacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifStatus: Active

Date of Incorporation: 05/05/2004

 

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

Company Type: Private Limited Company

Nature of Business (SIC(03)):

7487 - Other business activities

Accounting Reference Date: 31/12

Last Accounts Made Up To: 31/12/2009 (FULL)

Next Accounts Due: 30/09/2011

Last Return Made Up To: 05/05/2010

Next Return Due: 02/06/2011

Last Members List: 05/05/2010

Previous Names:Date of changePrevious Name

16/07/2004HFO SERVICES LIMITED

03/08/2004ROXBURGHE (UK) LIMITED

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

For your information just to add to what CD said earlier about it's impossible for HFO (Caymen) to own the debt. The reason for this being is the existance of a document between HFO services and HFO Capital (caymen) called CP2. This document basically says that all accounts past, present and future bought by HFOC (caymen) are automatically reassigned straight to HFO Services, without exception. So it is impossible for HFOC to have owned this for more than a split second. This agreement runs from Jan 06 to jan 11.

 

This document CP2 has been used in court by HFOS themselves so it is in the public domain.

 

So if they are claiming it was sold to HFOC it could not be Dublin in that time period. If it was HFOC caymen then they owned it for a split second before assigning it to HFOS.

 

OK I think I'm starting to get it. I've looked through Companies House and agree I cannot find HFO Capital at all, but I can find HFO Services. Does anyone have a link to this letter that says all debts purchased by HFO Capital are transferred to HFO Services?

 

EDIT - I have (finally) managed to figure out how to scan the ICO for information and have found HFO Capital, both listings (thanks arrow). I have a warm feeling that perhaps my defence can also rest upon the assumption that any company not registered with Companies House cannot pursue a debt.

 

Basically it all seems to rest upon this notice of assignment that they claim to have sent but actually didn't?

 

So what is to stop them from fabricating one and saying "Golly gosh! We sent this years ago!"

Edited by witpig
Link to post
Share on other sites

That is exactly what they do. As proven by one NoA I’m looking at right now – supposedly sent by Barclaycard to a Cagger, dated August 2007, stating that Barclaycard had sold his account to HFO Capital based in Dublin.

 

How clever of Barclaycard to do that. HFO Capital based in Dublin did not exist until December 2007.

 

Whoops! A false document entered into court as true with a statement of truth! Wonder how they’ll explain that to the judge...

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is exactly what they do. As proven by one NoA I’m looking at right now – supposedly sent by Barclaycard to a Cagger, dated August 2007, stating that Barclaycard had sold his account to HFO Capital based in Dublin.

 

How clever of Barclaycard to do that. HFO Capital based in Dublin did not exist until December 2007.

 

Whoops! A false document entered into court as true with a statement of truth! Wonder how they’ll explain that to the judge...

Must have been sold to Salaka then....

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm... Well it would seem my only defence to their fabrication would be a copy of, or some kind of declaration from, Barclaycard stating that they sold the debt on to HFO at such and such a time. Bearing in mind a SAR request can take 40 days (and I bet some sh**y god has declared it must be working days) I'm not really going to have time to be able to say that HFO Capital is not legally able to enforce the debt.

 

So again it seems I have come full circle and am hoping that my defence lies upon the fact that they are not able to produce an original copy of the CCA in court.

 

Any thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm... Well it would seem my only defence to their fabrication would be a copy of, or some kind of declaration from, Barclaycard stating that they sold the debt on to HFO at such and such a time. Bearing in mind a SAR request can take 40 days (and I bet some sh**y god has declared it must be working days) I'm not really going to have time to be able to say that HFO Capital is not legally able to enforce the debt.

 

So again it seems I have come full circle and am hoping that my defence lies upon the fact that they are not able to produce an original copy of the CCA in court.

 

Any thoughts?

 

I have sent you a PM.

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm... Well it would seem my only defence to their fabrication would be a copy of, or some kind of declaration from, Barclaycard stating that they sold the debt on to HFO at such and such a time. Bearing in mind a SAR request can take 40 days (and I bet some sh**y god has declared it must be working days) I'm not really going to have time to be able to say that HFO Capital is not legally able to enforce the debt.

 

So again it seems I have come full circle and am hoping that my defence lies upon the fact that they are not able to produce an original copy of the CCA in court.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Its 40 Calender days - but get the SAR in as soon as you can.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When sending the SAR to Barclaycard make sure it includes a request for the Notice of Assignment.

 

Be intersting to see what comes up.

 

Yeah I agree - I pretty much put a request for everything in! It will be interesting to see if any of it matches up (not that HFO have provided me with anything to compare it to!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, well have heard nothing back from Turnbully or anyone else (not that I was expecting to) so am sending off my embarassed defence (many thanks BA and coledog!)

I am wondering what people who don't have access to a solicitor or the CAG site put in the defence box on the court form? The defence I have copied and edited for my own use looks very prim and proper but I'm wondering if that will just p**s the judge off? Having read some of the other threads it looks like it can be a bit of a gamble as to whether you end up with some prig who thinks that mere members of the public shouldn't be allowed near a legal dictionary?

 

Might it be an idea to condense the defence down into my own words, a couple of sentences to fit into their box? The info will still be there, just easier to read!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, if you can put it in your own words it does sometimes look better. I keep defences short and simple, particularly the ones I've done lately for payday loan companies, just stating the facts is sometimes enough defence to cast doubt on the validity of the particulars of claim, ie parent company claiming on behalf of subsidiary.... in HFO's case HFO Capital claiming instead of HFO Services.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply! I must admit I'm re-reading my defence and whilst everything is there, and someone has obviously put real effort into it for which I am grateful, I'm thinking that if it comes to an actual court date I'm not going to be able to back it up with anything in person. I'll just be sitting there wailing "But it's not fair! They didn't reply to my letters!" Especially after reading a thread by VJ who said that in his hearing the solicitor appointed by HFO basically made stuff up.

 

At least if I look like an amateur from the start (even if a well-informed one) there won't be any onus on me to defend myself in solicitor-speak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So draft it in the words you are at ease with Witpig.No brownie points in this game for looking legalise.I would further contend that if push comes to shove you may have to explain your pleadings.

 

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

Maybe worth posting up what you are going to say so that others can look at it?

 

I just tried PMing you but apparently you are popular and have a full inbox! The message I was going to send isn't really that confidential so I shall post it here:

 

Hi! I didn't want to post up my defence as it was sent by ** and I didn't want their hard work to be made public when it was sent privately. For myself I'm not worried if HFO are watching as my defence is my defence whether they see it today or next week, but I did promise to ** that any emails would be kept confidential, do you know if ** came up with the defence by themselves or copied it from a public source?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on where you are, you could try and find a court buddy.

 

See here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/buddy.php

 

This link is so hard to find – mods, why is it not in the main menus???

 

That's a great idea thanks, and if I hadn't already found someone to provide support that link would have proved invaluable. I agree that such a useful resource should be far more accessible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just tried PMing you but apparently you are popular and have a full inbox! The message I was going to send isn't really that confidential so I shall post it here:

 

Hi! I didn't want to post up my defence as it was sent by ** and I didn't want their hard work to be made public when it was sent privately. For myself I'm not worried if HFO are watching as my defence is my defence whether they see it today or next week, but I did promise to ** that any emails would be kept confidential, do you know if ** came up with the defence by themselves or copied it from a public source?

 

The Defence is one I modified from another very learned CAGger, to fit a situation for another CAGger, which was a part claim and the claimants POC were very poor and difficult to plead against, the defence has been used by 2 people which have resulted in a stay, the claimant failed to respond to the defence after 28 days.

 

Now there is no guarantee this would be the case with you and what happens then you go to the allocation questioniare and you will be able to put further arguments in a witness statement, but we will cover that, if it happens.

 

So back to the defence, the important thing is the defence denies the claim and as every claim is different, you would have to modify anyhow.

 

If you are happy with posting up your defence thats OK, if not it can be checked over in private.

 

My big concern is missing the deadline and no defence being submitted.

 

PS HFO do read the threads.......

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a guest on today I notice.... hello whoever they are.

 

Defences can be templated but need to be amended to suit the particulars of the case and where you are with relevant documentation,

 

I am beginning to think that we should state that documentation was requested and refused BEFORE it got to the court stage and therefore we are NOT minded to give them time to seek the documents as they should have the documents when they made the claim... therefore as their claim does not have a legal basis it should be struck out and resubmitted with revised particulars when they have the documents. Having the original claim struck out rather than stayed might make them think twice before 'chancing their arm'.

 

What do others think of this approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...