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

I owe paypal £4000


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4873 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

Hi,

 

My friend got 4 macbook pros off the net a while ago (it was one of those pricing error things, she was lucky, it was only around for about 20mins) anyway, she didn't have an ebay account so I sold them under mine, and she agreed that I could buy myself a macbook and a iphone. As soon as the money went into paypal we spent it but we also transferred some into my bank, however one of them disputed and the money that was going into my bank (it was going to cover p+p as we had spent the rest) was placed on hold so I couldn't get them posted meaning the other two got mad and disputed. In the end I told the final guy to dispute as I will set up a new account and deal with him later. So now I owe paypal £3700. I have heard that they will get people to call you and write letters, which is fine. I can ignore them, and as for the calls, I can deal with those too. But I am wondering if anything else will happen? I am going to shut my bank account down too so they cant sting me there, but the way I am lead to believe things is that

 

I have signed nothing. They can't call baliffs because they need a ccj against me, they can't get one of those because I haven't signed anything....

 

Being perfectally honest buyers are not out of pocket, me and friend are not out of pocket and paypal chose to refund them, they could have said no....

 

Am I right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact you signed nothing is irrellevant, you entered into a contract with Paypal (electronically), I dont quite follow the details, it sounds strange you can claim that some of the (disputed) money was for P&P and therefore you couldnt post the other items, you should of used your own money to post the items !.

 

To be honest it all sounds rather odd and I wouldnt be surprised if the police were involved, whilst it is generally true that Paypal (and any DCA's they pass accounts onto) dont start legal action for smallish amounts I would of though that for £4000 they would and without a good defence you may well end up with a CCJ, you cant expect to just keep such a large amount of money (and I assume the laptops too ?)

 

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have known better than use paypal for that amount of cash. I use them lots but never for anything much more than £20 due to the fact that so many buyers get done over. I'd go along entirely with the previous reply on the other points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with andydd. Would not surprise me if paypal looked to involve the Police. If the Police are not interested that I would think the minimum you would expect are solicitors letters threatening court and if you don't repay anything you owed, this will end up in court. Having a CCJ on your record might prove costly.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you sold four macbook pros for just under £4,000, then you didn't actually send a single one of them to a buyer because you couldn't afford to post even one of them but you did spend a large chunk of the cash you received on a macbook and an iphone?

 

And these macbooks were bought cheap due to a website pricing error in the first place.

 

And now you want to know what the chances are that you will get away with it?

 

The Consumer Action Group is populated with people who try to help others who have been wronged by organisations and the paypal/ebay cartel is pretty near the top when it comes to creating problems for innocent people yet I personally feel no desire to offer you the slightest bit of help with your problem. This could be because I consider your actions fraudulent or at best immoral and believe any problem you face with Paypal and ebay is undoubtedly self inflicted and fully deserving of both a criminal investigation and a civil recovery.

 

This probably isn't the answer you sought coming to this website, you probably just wanted to get a fair estimate of the likelihood of you being able to hang on to both the £3700 cash and the four macbooks and the other macbook and the iphone.

 

I would however gladly help any one of your four buyers who came here because they were £100's out of pocket for a laptop purchased yet never received or anyone else at all who is having problems with the paypal/ebay refund system because purchased goods either didn't exist or were not delivered.

Edited by Jasper1965
  • Haha 1

As of 03/03/12 please do not under any circumstances wait for my further input or guidance on any current thread or defence of a court claim I might have been involved in on or through Cag.

Jasper1965

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Jasper, I have bought a product recently from a supposed friend and it looks mighty dodgy so down the pan for £250. sold my motor bike to acquire some basic stuffs when moving back into my home vacated by wife. To be ripped off by a friend is just the icing on the cake of two years of misery. Don't know if it is worth a small claims court... the other thing is I have to work with her.... hmmmmmm Come on to ever is up there give the Hippy a break.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]Happyhippy1959

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would however gladly help any one of your four buyers who came here because they were £100's out of pocket for a laptop purchased yet never received or anyone else at all who is having problems with the paypal/ebay refund system because purchased goods either didn't exist or were not delivered.

 

Although I believe that Paypal would of refunded the buyers, therefore it is Paypal out of pocket, If I was them I certainly would start legal action.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being perfectally honest buyers are not out of pocket, me and friend are not out of pocket and paypal chose to refund them, they could have said no....

 

Am I right?

 

No you are not right.

 

Paypal were left with no choice but to refund the buyers after you failed to send them the goods, it's in the t&c's, this guarantee is one of the primary reasons people use paypal to purchase from ebay.

 

The buyers may not be out of pocket but I'd wager that none of them are happy about having to wait for the dispute to be resolved just to get their money back, something that can take months to accomplish.

The only bit you are correct about is stating that you and your friend are not out of pocket, there's many would say you made a tidy little profit from this venture.

I'm also puzzled why you would sell a macbook and use the money to buy a macbook, only reason I can think of is that the original macbook didn't exist. Pretty sure that's how ebay etc. will see it too.

As of 03/03/12 please do not under any circumstances wait for my further input or guidance on any current thread or defence of a court claim I might have been involved in on or through Cag.

Jasper1965

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to the four laptops, sold again privately maybe?

 

Wheres the money?

 

Speant again maybe?

 

Please do not sell on ebay again. What gets me is the op seems to think he deserves sympathy and no one is out of pocket, which indicates to me a good CCJ slapped on backside will be a good result. I do hope your friend helps you pay your CCJ, not, as it is you they will be after, guessing your friend will dissapear!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt it dadofholly, probably do it for a living.... As Jasper say's think of the stress and worry the buyers had.!!!!! Experience myself of these Shi*sters and of being ripped off by so called colleagues and friends. Might slap a CCJ on a working colleague for £250.00. Unless she come's up with my money back. Dodgy iphone, should have gone with the old adage if it's to good to be true it probably is.!!!!!!!! buyer beware

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]Happyhippy1959

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...