Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I did not receive a notice via post but in my claim status it shows my claim was transferred to a court I requested in my DQ, as it is closer to me.    Defense I filed:  1.       The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2.       The defendant paid the lead tenant a fixed sum monthly bill without fail for the extent of the rental period of the accommodation their contract was associated with who was responsible to make payments to the claimant, ending in June 2023. 3.       After moving out, a month later, the claimant wrote to state that an outstanding sum existed. Further stating, as one of the 10 tenants at the time, I now owed them the full sum instead of my 1/10 proportion of said debt, as 10 students were at the dwelling. They also intimated that they were legally allowed to charge me the full sum if the other renters were not to pay their share under some equal and joint severity rule. 4.       Despite sending numerous requests prior to the court claim being raised for copies of said bills for said utilities covered by the agreement, the claimant failed to send any clear bills. This included a CPR 31.14 on xx/xx/xxxx sent via post. 5.       The defendants stress that they acted in good faith to settle the outstanding balance, as evidenced by the confirmation received from the claimant.  Any subsequent demands for additional payments are unwarranted and contradict the claimant's previous acknowledgment of settlement. 6.       Pursuant to OFGEM code of back billing rules the alleged charges relate to charges which have not been billed correctly by Co-operative Energy and are therefore prevented from charging. With the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to: - a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement. b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed. c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. 7.As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation                  that the money is owed. 8.It is therefore denied that the defendant is indebted to the claimant as alleged or at all.
    • Paint is a free programme on any Windows PC. But don't worry, the choice here is not either perfection or nothing. As you say, use your scanner, save the file ... and then use the "choose files" option when you post to CAG to add the file. We can do all the redacting and converting to the correct file type at this end.  The important thing is just to get the info to us. Why not do an experiment this afternoon and see if the above works?  
    • I see they're trying to round up asylum seekers and lock them up for about three months so they can be put on planes to Rwanda. I'm a bit surprised that this is legal.  
    • thought for the day "Prime ministers need a big strategy that tells you where you’re going, you need a bunch of tactics that get you there, and you need the ability to take everybody else with you."   Now I know you are all thinking 'why is the  UKs destination Rwanda ???
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

When should I contact my PDL's re payment agreements


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4091 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

Full marks to you for wishing to pay this but never ever pay more than you can afford and never, ever speak to Clarity on the phone - they will try and get you to incease the payments etc and threaten you. I had Clarity phoning me every 2 from 8 in the morning until 8 at night, until I set Trading Standards on to them.

 

Are Pounds Til Payment a very dodgy looking company based in Malta? If they are I would be challenging their validity to collect this debt from you and the amount of interest charged etc. IMO I would send a CCA request to Clarity and request the credit agreement and supporting information, link below, it is your right to do this. You may find that Clarity just refer the account back to PTP and you here no more from them.

 

CCA Request

 

CCA letter to send with a £1 postal order by recorded delivery, do not sign. They have 12 plus 2 working days to reply. If nothing valid is received you can send a letter to put the account in dispute and this should stop them contacting you.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?414-CCA-request-letter

 

Account in Dispute letter to send after 12 plus 2 working days

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?436-Failure-to-provide-a-copy-of-the-agreement-within-the-prescribed-timescale

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 269
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 4 weeks later...

I have had ENOUGH of PDE. They keep calling me and I keep telling them NOT to call me because they won't accept my offer, so what is the point of calling me! They send me texts and emails telling ME to call THEM and tbh I have had enough. The last straw is this - received an email from them

 

Dear customer- Payday Express has been trying to contact you without success. We have instructed our agent to call within the next 3 days between the hours of 8am & 7pm. If this is not convenient please call us on 0800 012 6347 to arrange a more suitable time.

 

What a bunch of liars! God only knows how many times I have emailed them and told them on the phone not to call me! Sent them this back:

 

Despite numerous emails requesting communication via writing only, you have continued to harrass me. I suggest you read the paragraphs below that are emboldened. I DO NOT wish your agent to visit me, in fact, you would have to make an appointment with me in order for you to carry this out.

 

My "fair and reasonable" offer still stands. I am willing to pay you £55 per month for my original loan plus one month's interest only initially for a period of 3 months. You can then review it as my mortgage arrears will be paid in full.

 

If you do not think this is fair then I suggest that you sue me. However, I intend to vigorously defend any action.

 

I only wish to communicate via email or letter so please do not telephone me or send me texts.

PARAGRAPHS FROM THE OFT DEBT COLLECTION GUIDANCE

Final Guidance on Unfair Business Practices

July 2003 (updated December 2006)

 

OFT664

 

THE DEBT COLLECTION GUIDANCE

2.5 Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive.

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. contacting debtors at unreasonable times and at unreasonable intervals

 

b. pressurising debtors to sell property, to raise funds by further borrowing or to extend their borrowing

 

c. using more than one debt collection business at the same time resulting in repetitive and/or frequent contact by different parties

 

d. not ensuring that an adequate history of the debt is passed on as appropriate resulting in repetitive and/or frequent contact by different parties

 

e. not informing the debtor when their case has been passed on to a different debt collector

 

f. pressurising debtors to pay in full, in unreasonably large instalments, or to increase payments when they are unable to do so

g. making threatening statements or gestures or taking actions which suggest harm to debtors

 

h. ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

i. disclosing or threatening to disclose debt details to third parties unless legally entitled to do so

 

j. acting in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor either deliberately or through lack of care, for example, by not putting correspondence in a sealed envelope and putting it through a letterbox, thereby running the risk that it could be read by third parties.

2.12f: Visiting or threatening to visit debtors without prior agreement when the debt is deadlocked or disputed.

 

By 'deadlocked' we mean where a debtor (or debtor’s adviser) agrees there is a debt and has offered a repayment programme which has not been agreed by the creditor or debt collector. We are not saying that any offer must be accepted but we have seen cases where offers are disregarded and a debtor is told that 'we are sending field agents'. Many debtors are unlikely to understand this term and are likely to view the visit as a threat designed to make them offer more money when they can pay no more. Some letters appear to be designed to give this impression.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, these companies use the phone as they can bully people and leave no trace.... this is why the emails should be kept and can be used in evidence... the company may say that you have posted up on the internet that you are not paying, (I've seen it done in defences a couple of times lately) and when presented with the thread mentioned you can show a different angle, that you DO want to pay and you DO want to contact them.

 

Should it coume to court I have a good skeleton defence that has been used, and some case history to back it up. It is more of a witness statement than a fully particularlised defence but I have found you can't go down the same route as bank loans and credit cards with this area of the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

p.s. what are the differences between credit cards, bank loans and PDLs defences? Is it because of the very high interest rates on PDLs? Just curious really. Would like to know more :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends on the particulars of claim, the latest one states a COUPLE took out a loan - when only one person did - so their POCs are flawed straight away.

 

They mention the amount owing but don't tell you any fees added, default interest etc etc etc. It is the fees and default amounts which you argue differently. In most cases the claim is either discontinued or it goes to mediation and they accept the original loan amount plus one months interest (both have happened twice this year alone).

 

Its similar to a mobile phone scenario rather than a bank loan scenario due to the dodgy contract terms, dodgy APR calculations and dodgy POCs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they have charged me £100 default sum and said that there would be more charges added monthly. My original loan was £520 - total repayable - £650 (loan payment due on 28th Jan). If I SAR them it will have to wait until I get paid at the end of the month as unfortunately I don't have a tenner going spare to pay for it. :violin::-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

glo,

 

You wont be the only one theyll have to sue, 500 loan here to PD express, same situation, constant phone calls, never answered one of them, I keep forwarding them the same email with my repayment plan telling them I am not available by phone, I can go forever, it doesnt cost me a minute sleep.

 

Maybe ill see you in court!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Above all dont worry about it, there are a few this MAY happen that MAY happen. The 14 day threat will turn into months. You are in control or soon will be. Its not an easy road and in the next stages there are many fine people on here to assist you through it and allieve your worries. Keep us updated and people will advise you.

You are amongst friends and fine friends they are.

www.bellyup4blues.com Just Go There !!!

 

Woolwich Prelim Sent 5.12.2006 !!!

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 22.12.2006 (yeah I know)

16.1.2007 £1000 offer rejected

LBA sent 31.1.2007

N1 presented to Court 15.2.2007

Won / Settled 2 days before court date

£5200 plus int charges returned.

 

All and Leics S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 22.12.2006

2nd S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 15.1.2007

Statements received

Prelim sent 31.1.2007

LBA Sent 15.2.2007

Won £1500 on receiving court date..

Link to post
Share on other sites

A default notice should give you 14 CLEAR days to repay any ARREARS, not the whole sum, that is a wonderful piece to hang the company with, you need to get it to Trading Standards via Consumer Direct and the Office of Fair Trading asap as they are taking the proverbial. They are already carrying out item 1 in the letter which should come after 14 CLEAR days (NOT INCLUDING BANK HOLIDAYS - even some courts get this one wrong!) and have probably carried out item 5 as well... how right they are about Trading Standards though, they would be very interested in THEM!

 

Should they try court you can piece by piece use the dodgy default notice in your defence, it isn't an absolute defence anymore, only a partial one (absolute meaning they will more than likely discontinue than face a judge in person). Keep that safe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...