Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You can edit the answers to be in red or would you like me to do it? HB
    • Apologies dx100uk  I did not put the answers in red  Thank you all for your patience. H
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ?  Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? 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 4546384809766042. The defendant faild 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. The dbt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  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. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?  Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.  It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment?  May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
    • Just an update for all. I received about a letter every other week, increasing in threat levels. Then I hadn't had one for a about two weeks, then Saturday received a carbon copy of the very first letter they sent me in February. Made me laugh, rinse and repeat. 
    • So, your response was not received by the SCP as you did not send it with a valid stamp. Therefore, from my two option in post #14, the first option is the only one available to you, but you do not have the option of asking to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level as the reason the SCP did not receive your response was down to you. Here's a reminder of what to do: Respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box state that you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. This is a tried and tested method to deal with your problem and is almost always successful. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor.. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary. If you are required to attend, your case will be taken out of the SJ procedure and you will be given a date for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court. If that is the way they do it in the area involved you will have to attend, see the prosecutor and offer your "deal" in person. 
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4843 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

This is a follow on from "the bailiffs have broken into my back garden". sorry its such a long thread....

 

my depression has got so bad now, mostly because of this, that I'm now seeing a psychotherapist - so I can at least talk to someone - she phoned a lawyer and he said that Councils can often "negotiate" how much they will accept to return to my car (apparently, a bit like the "poll tax" - i wasn't very aware when that mallarky was going on ) -

 

It is quite clear from my correspondence with Waverley that he simply WILL NOT address the issue of costs - every time I ask him about costs he continues to FAIL to address the EXACT amount. This is evident in 2 letters he has written to me ... he simply says "... and bailiffs costs ...". he knows that the costs are disproportionate to the amount owed but he just detracts from answering the question. He keeps going on about me applying to the court for the costs to be taxed. He simply fails to "get a grip" on the fact that Waverley have instructed the bailiffs and the bailiffs are acting as agents for Waverley so, ultimately, it surely must be Waverley who decides what costs can be adminsitered.?????

 

Currently, as per my psycho, I asked Waverley what was the minimum amount they required and they simply said get in touch with the bailiffs b....... well, I attach all the emails going to and fro....

 

My question is, shall I apply t the court for a summons as previously suggested so I can show how the bailiffs have acted uneasonably (incidentally, my landlord has noticed the back gate has a huge chunk missing...... I obviously pleaded ignorance...and the neighbours have informed her that "dodgy" people have been round..... I've now been served notice to quit etc.,etc.,) or what on earth shall I do?

 

.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P{padding:0px;}.ExternalC lass body.ecxhmmessage{font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}

Alexander's bailiffs

 

please see copy correspondence.

 

How much do you "legally" require to return my car - my children are not at school, I am not at work nor am I at college and I would pleased if we could resolve this matter so my family can return to normal.

 

 

To:

Subject: RE: Council tax account: 12449105

From: [email protected]. uk

Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 16:01:57 +0000

 

Dear

 

Thanks for your e-mail.

 

I suggest you contact Alexander's for the exact amount required as Waverley does not necessarily know all of the charges that are being accrued. I suggest you contact the bailiff's office on [email protected] o.uk or telephone 0208 661 2515 between 10.00 am and 4.00 pm.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Simon Piper

Principal Revenues Officer

 

Direct line: 01483 523104

 

 

 

From: r

To:

Date: 07/02/2011 15:18

Subject: RE: Council tax account: 12449105

 

 

 

Dear Mr Piper

 

Can you please tell me what is the minimum amount you require to return my car.

 

Thank you

R

 

To:

Subject: RE: Council tax account: 12449105

From: [email protected]. uk

Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 14:42:31 +0000

Dear

Thank you for your e-mails dated 2 February.

As you are aware, your payment of £251.69 has been credited to the enforcement's fees in accordance with regulation 52(4) of The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992.

The liability order granted to the Council on 22 July 2010 is in the sum of £354.69. The bailiff has been instructed to enforce payment of the unpaid liability order and the enforcement charges, hence the removal of your motor car and its impending sale at auctionlink3.gif unless the outstanding debt is paid in full.

Schedule 5 of the regulations does not comment on the total level of fees that may be incurred by a debtor when a liability order is enforced. A number of the fees are a percentage of the sum owing or fixed sums while the charges for a bailiff attending are required to be reasonable. If you wish to challenge the fees you may apply at your own expense to have them taxed in the county courtlink3.gif.

You will note from regulation 45 (1) that the costs incurred in enforcing a liability order may be recovered by distress and the sale of goods. If you are aggrieved by the levy you may appeal to the Magistrates ' Court at your own expense under regulation 46. There is no requirement for the bailiff to separate the enforcement charges and pursue them through the County Court.

Yours sincerely

Simon Piper

Principal Revenues Officer

 

Direct line: 01483 523104

 

 

From:

To:

Date: 02/02/2011 12:04

Subject: RE: Council tax account: 12449105

 

 

Dear Mr Piper

 

Your bailiff contiues to come to the property pursuing the amount of £866.19 even though the council tax of £251.69 has been paid. They are obviously acting on your instruction and as you will know that under Regulation 45 Schedule 5 of the Council Tax Administration and Enforcement Regulations do not allow for fees of this amount. You are fully responsible for the bailiff's actions. You will be aware that he cannot use a Liability Order to pursue me for costs and it is he who must make an application through the small claims court for these fees.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Please note that all correspondence is being copied in to Mary Orton, Director of Waverley

 

To:

Subject: Council tax account: 12449105

From: [email protected]. uk

Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:37:34 +0000

 

Dear Ms S

 

Thank you for your letter dated 24 January received today in reply to my letter dated 15 December 2010.

 

I note that you have made arrangements to pay Waverley £251.69. This is not accepted as full and final settlement of the debt owing to the Council as it does not satisfy the amounts due in law from you. In accordance with The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 the payment, when received, will be credited to the costs and charges first. Assuming your payment of £251.69 is received the balance of £103.00 will remain unpaid, in addition to the bailiff's fees.

 

The bailiff's fees have been incurred as a consequence of your not paying the council tax owing to Waverley and I explained in my letter dated 15 December the actions taken by Waverley prior to the bailiff attending. If you wish to challenge the level of the bailiff's fees you may apply to have them taxed by the county court.

 

In the meantime I expect the bailiff to continue to enforce the liability order dated 22 July 2010. I urge you to settle the debt in full with the bailiff immediately in order to prevent the bailiff's fees increasing further.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Simon Piper

Principal Revenues Officer

 

Direct line: 01483 523104

We are passionate about improving lives, leisure, environment, value for money and subsidised affordable housing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the reply I've just got back from Alexanders bailiffs which completely ignores my earlier email asking them for a figure to return my car! Is ther nothing I can do?

 

Dear Ms Stewart

 

I am writing regarding the vehicle EU02 LCP Renault Megane, which our bailiff Mr T Cooper had removed. It is now with the Auctioneers and will be sold in the next auction as a non runner, as it does not have the keys or log book with it. This will result in a low sale price. However, if you send us the keys and the log book, the vehicle will sell for considerably more. Thus reducing your debt further with Waverley Borough Council and ourselves. Clearly getting the best price for the vehicle would be to your advantage.

 

If you would like to discuss the matter further, please do not hesitate to contact our office on 020 8661 2515 between the hours of 10am - 4pm .

 

 

Kind Regards

 

Deborah Harding

Administrator

 

Contact telephone number

020 8661 2122

9am - 5pm

 

Alexander's Commercial Services Limited

Company Reg. No 3498683, UK

Reg. Office: 75 Park Lane, Croydon CR9 1XS

Link to post
Share on other sites

RH - Lets go back to the beginning and work out the legitimate fees for them, as they are clearly (typically) incapable.

 

Please read this carefully and correct me where i am wrong.

 

I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt that they called once and you were not in - we can clear up the details latter with a 'screen shot' their record of what has happened.

 

So...

 

Origional sum = £354.69

 

First visit no levy (maybe) =£24.50

Second visit (levy) =£34.68

Removal of car =£300.00 max

 

 

Total possible =£713.87 + possible storage fees etc, i'll have a look into it.

 

 

How much have you paid them so far?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me where i'm wrong.....

 

So despite the fact that the CURRENT maximum total is £713.87 AFTER visit, levy and removal, it seems:

 

You 'owed' £700 in December - have you a written demand / e-mail for this?

 

By Jan 25th it had risen to £866-19 PRIOR to the removal of your car? Again, have you a written dated demand / e-mail for this?

 

Think carefully, is this correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites

RH - Lets go back to the beginning and work out the legitimate fees for them, as they are clearly (typically) incapable.

 

Please read this carefully and correct me where i am wrong.

 

I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt that they called once and you were not in - we can clear up the details latter with a 'screen shot' their record of what has happened.

 

So...

 

Original sum = £354.69

 

First visit no levy (maybe) =£24.50

Second visit (levy) =£34.68

Removal of car =£300.00 max

 

 

Total possible =£713.87 + possible storage fees etc, i'll have a look into it.

 

 

How much have you paid them so far?

 

Was going to ask the same thing myself in a different way

 

liability order £354.69

1st & 2nd visit fees £24.50

levy fee £35

 

Total outstanding at date of the levy £414.19

can you tell me what date/ amounts are written on the notice of seizure

can you tell me if you have had any bailiff letters before the levy and what date/ amount is on it

can you tell me if there were any bailiffs letter after the levy (but before removal) the date /amounts on it

can you tell me if there any bailiffs letter /paperwork (looking for a removal form) when the car was removed and the date/ amounts of it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Original summons (I presume its the LO) £351.69.

First visit £24.50 (with the intention to levy but NO levy)

I pay the entire council tax bill of £251.69

This leaves £100 out standing on LO.

Then, 2nd visit - car clamped (or so they thought)

Then 3rd visit - removal of car - £300 max (you say)

The current maximum according to their notice now stands at £864.50, this does not take into account levying the car, nor storage (which I believe can only be £2.50 per day according to CAB)

I do not have a written demand for this but I do have it in writing, somewhere

yes, by 25th Jan it had risen to £866 PRIOR to the removal of my car - I don't have a written demand but I do have it in writing, right beside me dated 2nd Feb.

 

Alexanders have just emailed me a response which now follows and I have asked them if this includes the £251.69 already paid:

 

.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P{padding:0px;}.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage{font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}Dear Ms

 

Thank you for your email.

 

Please be informed that to release your vehicle, we require the full outstanding balance, which is £864.50 plus £15 per day storage costs. If paid today, then the total needed will be £954.50.

 

If you need any further information, do not hesitate to contact our office.

 

 

 

Kind Regards

 

Deborah Harding

Administrator

 

Contact telephone number

020 8661 2122

9am - 5pm

 

Alexander's Commercial Services Limited

Company Reg. No 3498683, UK

Reg. Office: 75 Park Lane, Croydon CR9 1XS

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any money until m y tax credits come through and that will only be £200 adn we will have to go without groceries. the only other alternative is not to pay the rent at the end of month - my car isn't worth £1000 or more even with the keys and log book - it really is an old banger.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I've got my paperwork.

 

03 Nov 2010 - "Notice Not to Move" from Alexanders (signed by non certified bailiff called Mr O'Neil) saying this vehicle is now seized AND "Notie of Seizure of Goods and Inventory" also dated 3rd Nov (stating the LO costs; costs of 1st attendance as £25.00; levy fee £35.00 ; Enforcement costs £270 - total due if paid immediately £696.19)

15 Dec 2010 - letter Waverley BC to me with breakdown of council tax and LO - £354.69

24 Jan - i wrote to council questioning disproportionate costs

25 Jan - Notice of bailiffs attendance - amount now £866.19

25 jan another notice of bailiffs attendance including costs £170 - car now clamped (or so they thought)

25 jan I move car

30 jan - council tax left my bank account - £251.69

2 feb Alexanders came back and found my car, towed it and left a notice saying "pursuant to the above order, the items listed below have today been seized and will be sold by public auction unless full payment including costs are paid by 7th Feb.

2 feb - Alexanders put thru letterbox a Notice of bailiffs attendance with an amount of £866.19 - Mr T Cooper

8 feb - Alexanders want £ 954.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, I['ve paid £251.69 already.

 

Here's the response frm Alexanders:

Thank you for your email.

 

Please be informed that to release your vehicle, we require the full outstanding balance, which is £864.50 plus £15 per day storage costs. If paid today, then the total needed will be £954.50.

 

If you need any further information, do not hesitate to contact our office.

 

Kind Regards

 

Deborah Harding

Administrator

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ministry of Justice Public Register of bailiffslink3.gif on 020 3334 6355 phone this number now and confirm he is not a certificated bailiff

 

03 Nov 2010 - "Notice Not to Move" from Alexanders (signed by non certified bailiff called Mr O'Neil) saying this

Link to post
Share on other sites

This one goes against the grain but as a last resort......

 

Since the likely hood of resolving this prior to the car being auctioned is between slim and nil, is the best outcome for reallyhardup that she:

 

1) Gives the keys and log book to Alexanders,

 

2) The car goes for more at auction

 

3) Recover what we can after the fact.

 

But first, i think a third party needs to contact Alexanders and Mr Piper letting them know that we know the facts. No offence, but because they've got got her flustered, they think RHU is a soft target, and that she will not follow through with legal action after this debacle is over.

 

We need to convince them otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just made the phone call and they say that there is a Mr Jean-Darren O'Neill (who also goes by the name of John). When he visited my property HE WAS NOT REGISTERED.

His registration ran from 16th November. So, when he visited my home on 3rd November, HE WAS NOT REGISTERED. Further, his registration ran from 17 Oct 2007 until 16 Oct 2009 (because its renewed every 2 years) and renewed on 16th Nov 2010.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a phone call on m y mobile from Alexanders from Debbie. She says they are having difficulties with their emailing system!!!! and that the amount of £954.50 DOES include the £251.69 I've already paid - what an utter rip off!! the removal fees were £250 she also says.

Time and Date noted.

Recording kept for possible future reference.

Edited by reallyhardup
missed a bit
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just made the phone call and they say that there is a Mr Jean-Darren O'Neill (who also goes by the name of John). When he visited my property HE WAS NOT REGISTERED.

His registration ran from 16th November. So, when he visited my home on 3rd November, HE WAS NOT REGISTERED. Further, his registration ran from 17 Oct 2007 until 16 Oct 2009 (because its renewed every 2 years) and renewed on 16th Nov 2010.

 

Phone croydon court (don't know the number) and ask for the date he applied to renew his certificate

I have a very bad feeling that as long as they have applied for the renewal they are OK

 

Its ok though I'm going to try another angle with a nicely worded letter to the leader of the council

Link to post
Share on other sites

So is there a glimmer of hope we can 're-set' the total due to to £414.19 - £251.69 = £162.50 Due.

 

Grounds to challenge some of the fees over and above the £414.19 (and possibly the levy fee itself:

 

1)The bailiff who carried out the levy was not certified at the time of the levy.

 

2)The levy was made to extort an unlawful "enforcement cost" of £270 over and above the legitimate fees. This unlawful enforcement cost made it impossible for the debtor to clear the balance prior to removal.

 

 

Must get to work now RHU, but return latter or tomorrow.(or sooner if curiosity overcomes the need to work!!)

 

I think we need to get this letter drafted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...