Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you!    It was bought on my debit card    
    • Hi. Welcome to CAG. How was the car purchased?  
    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
  • 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

Worried please help/ British Transport Police


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4901 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

The issue of asking for a discharge is one of those 'advocacy' questions.

 

You have to plant the seed of considering a discharge, without directly asking for it. I think (and only trying it would tell) that if you march into Court, tell them that they should give you an absolute or conditional discharge, the Magistrates may well say 'no, £175 fine, £110 costs and £10 compensation.'

 

However, if you explain to the Court that you are hard up, andyou have spoken to 'advisers' who have told you that you would have to pay for a proper solicitor, and, as a first time offender, you don't really know what procedures are, you could explain that someone had told you that the Court can give an absolute discharge. It plants the seed without you asking.

 

This is part of the danger of taking 'on-line' advice. If I am wrong, or if another 'reader' mis-understands what I am trying to say, it is 'you' that will suffer, with no comeback against 'me' for my comments. I don't know the Magistrates who will hear this case. I don't know how they reacted to the last bit of similar naughtiness. I cannot see what they look like. Or what you look like, for that matter.

 

completely understood re this is only advise.

 

truth is I cannot afford a solicitor but I am by no means broke.

 

I will plant the seed on honest grounds cause i did actually consult a solic over phone and basically did realsie would cost me too much money for something I would be fined for anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was involved with a case of 'public peeing' brought under the good old Essex Good Rule and Management Orders (For the life of me, I can't remember the enabling Act) many years ago. The father of the accused was a local business man, Round Table, Lions and so on.

 

Te accused had been in 'a club', where both the booze and the birds were cheap. At the end of the night, as was always the case, there were bus loads of Special Constables and a handful of 'regular' officers outside. Drunkenness all around, swearing, pushing and shoving, and the odd bit of pugilism.

 

The 'lad' wandered away from the crowd, he could see that some things were going 'badly'. He avoided the punch ups, but the cold night air affected his bladder as much as the beer had fogged his judgement. He stepped into a rose bush (anybody ever read Tom Sharpe? He must have got the idea from somewhere) and did 'what he had to do'.

 

Stepping from the bush, he found two rotund special constables, who promptly arrested him for 'D&D'.

 

Dad was called, and somehow I was caused to attend the 'nick'. Charge room sergeant (No CPS in those days!) decided that 'D&D' was a tad harsh, as every person leaving the club was 'D' and 90% of them were disorderly. The lesser charge was laid, dad took son home. I think it cost him £25.00 at Billericay Magistrates.

 

In the grand scheme of things, there were many worse things happening outside that club that night, never mind all of the other general villainy that took place in the rest of the town.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the best bit of advice anyone can give in my opinion.

 

It isn't a major offence, in my opinion it is damned silly and inconsiderate, others may take a different view, but it isn't going to have earth shattering consequences if you deal with it rationally and are polite, say sorry, take the punishment (if any) in a mature manner, then move on.

 

I thought I'd better add, that obviously doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken seriously, in my book it is the failure to deal with minor antisocial activities firmly that allows the proliferation of such actions. If there is a minor stigma attached that prevents a repeat, then that's all part of life's learning curve.

 

I'm sorry if that offends anyone, it is purely a personal opinion and as others have pointed out many times, that's all any of these posts are really.

.

 

understood

Link to post
Share on other sites

:whoo:

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...