Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm sure I've said before that it's fine and dandy bringing in rules that favour you or your party, but you have to consider how it would play out if your opponents get in and want to use the same rules...
    • Its Gaelic celebration and bonfires today - Beltane Quite fortuitous for tomorrow lets hope
    • look on the bright side - it would allow Biden to do what he likes ...
    • Few tweaks as the run order was completely messed up and the main point of your defence (reconstituted agreement) pushed to the bottom of the statement.   I, XXXXXX, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim and further to my set aside application dated 1 November 2022. 1.The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts in person in the opening paragraph. It is my understanding they must serve notice to any hearsay evidence pursuant to CPR 33.2(1)(B) (notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence) and Section 2 (1) (A) of the Civil Evidence Act. 2.  I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. 3. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights.  This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information).  The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 4.  I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 5. The alleged letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address.  I have attached a copy of my tenancy agreement which is marked ‘Appendix 1’ and shows I was residing at a difference address as of 11 December 2018 and was therefore not at the service address at the time the proceedings were served.  I have also attached an email from my solicitors to the Claimants solicitors dated 14 July 2022 which was sent to them requesting that they disclose the trace of evidence they utilised prior to issuing the proceedings against me.  This is marked ‘Appendix 2’. The claimants solicitors did not provide me with these documents. 6. Under The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 a Debt Buyer must undertake all reasonable enquiries to ensure the correct address of a debtor, this can be as simple as a credit file search. The Claimant failed to carry out such basic checks. Subsequently all letters prior to and including ,The Pre action Protocol letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 and the claim form dated 14th February 2020 were all served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018. 7. Upon the discovery of the Judgement debt, I made immediate contact with the Court and the Claimant Solicitors, putting them on notice that I was making investigations in relation to the Judgement debt as it was not familiar to me.  I asked them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.   The correspondence to the Claimant Solicitor's is attached and marked ‘Appendix 3’ 8. On (insert date) I successfully made application to set a side the judgment. The claim proceeded to allocation, 9. The claimant failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis on the 2 February 2024 'The Claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents.' None of these documents were received by the court nor the defendant by that date. (insert date you did receive the documents) I then sent a Data Subject Access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided. Details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 4’and the copies of correspondence between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 5’. Remove irrelevant 10.The claimant relies upon and has exhibited a reconstituted version of the alleged agreement. It is again denied that I have ever entered into an agreement with Barclaycard on or around 2000.  It is admitted that I did hold other credit agreements with other creditors and as such should this be a debt that was assigned to Barclaycard from another brand therefore the reconstituted agreement disclosed is invalid being pre April 2007 and not legally enforceable pursuant to HHJ Judge Waksman in Carey v HSBC 2009 EWHC3417.  Details of this are attached and marked ‘Appendix 6’. The original credit agreement must be provided along with any reconstituted version on a modified credit agreement and must contain the names and address of debtor and creditor, agreement number and cancelation clause. 11. Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to disclose a true executed legible agreement on which its claim relies upon and not mislead the court. 12. It is denied I have ever received a default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974.The claimant is put to strict proof to evidence from the original creditors internal document software the trigger of said notice.  13.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. 14. Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the original assigned agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. Signed                 ………………………………………………….. Name                  XXXX Date                     30 April 2024   Run 3 copies Court /Claimants Sol/File
    • As one of you mentioned above I've been in a mess for nearly 20 years now and I'm ready to sort my credit report out now - the main reason I got into second round of debt is my kids being unwell and the state considering them not unwell enough for extra help so despite my son being in hospital for 3 months in one year we got extra zero help and I eventually lost my job and got into debt to just so I can be تا my sons hospital bed at his time of need - my life basically fell apart and all these debts got me again 
  • 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

DVLA : "Fined" for not taxing scrap car


Falcon262
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4758 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

Thought I'd share my problem

 

Eleven months ago I scrapped a car - just before it's tax expired.

 

Sent off the bit of the registration doc for this - a few weeks later got call from DVLA - don't know exactly what was said as wife handled it and it was quite a while ago, but at the end everything seemed ok - like they said "did you scrap this car" "yes" "ok then bye".

 

Start of March I got a letter from "Inter-Credit International" accusing me of ignoring letters from DVLA and offering the opportunity to agree to an "out of court settlement" to avoid being taken to court for being the registered keeper of an unlicenced vehicle.

I replied - sent them a letter from the scrap yard confirming when the car was scrapped and stated that there were no "ignored letters".

They replied telling me that the information I supplied did not release me from the "fine"

I replied pointing out that this was the first time a "fine" was mentioned - previously it had been an offer to reach an out of court settlement and asking which court had imposed the fine.

They replied insisting I pay the "fine" immediately.

 

I believe what happened was DVLA "lost" the info I sent them to show the car had been scrapped - by losing it and not updating the system I am still the registered keeper, even though I am only shown as this because DVLA didn't do their job - they then left it almost a year to give me chance to lose things.

Not only do I believe it's basically a 'set up' to gain money I've said so in the reply the reply I just sent them with the Secretary of State for Transport on copy - though I used words like "flawed system" "possible incentive to perform duties that can be expected from them".

 

Don't know what's coming next (maybe case for "libel" DVLA vs me) - do know it could be more interesting as I first though as technically they could be right - I could be the "registered keeper", but if I am it's only because DVLA didn't update their system.

 

My main worry is that I don't think we copied or sent by Recorded Delivery the info to DVLA - we were moving house at the time and too be honest as we'd just moved back to the UK and DVLA had been good at sending the registration documents of the car and it's replacement (ie two cars) so it didn't worry me at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds like your in a similar situation to me, mine was a lot more complicated but as it was well over a year ago I have nothing left about that car, I have no idea if I sent it recorded delivery or not.

 

I now have two fines which is making me nervous for court as two together make it look like its me not notifying them but I know I did so im going to defend it as best I can.

 

There must be some sort of purge on at the moment for these letters to be coming out. If I was the registered keeper of my car I should have at least received a tax reminder yet Ive heard nothing about this car since it was taken away

Link to post
Share on other sites

One point that I think is quite important is that under the current system you remain the "registered keeper" until DVLA change their records - you have no ability to control this.

To me it looks like they "forget" to do this - then leave it a LONG time (in my case 10 months) before they contact you - that's far too long and seems to be more because after this amount of time it can be expected that anyone scrapping a car has long forgot the details / lost any paperwork like recorded delivery slips, if they used them.

Basically the current system is flawed in that it gives DLVA an incentive to make mistakes - if they had changed the details when informed they wouldn't be able to ask for an 'out of court settlement' (which was the first letter received) or be able to issue "fines" or start court cases.

Add to this that a court case is zero cost to them - the costs come from "public funds" and they have staff lawyers who they have to pay anyway so it's worth their while NOT to change the "registered keeper".

 

I have no doubt I'm the not only one - I'm pretty sure that many many people will have simply paid the "out of court settlement" thinking they made a mistake, forgot to tell DVLA etc, and that will be the end of it - I can't see that happening as by paying the "out of court settlement" the person has effectively admitted guilt - so if the DVLA send another letter next month or next year whoever paid has a harder job defending themselves as they are now a "repeat offender".

 

I managed to get a letter from the scrap yard confirming they scrapped the car - the "debt collection company" rejected this even though it shows the car was scrapped (not given to the scrap yard but actually dismantled) before a) the previous tax had expired b) the date on which they say I was the registered keeper of an unlicensed vehicle - that what made me realize they are not doing this because I didn't tell them (failure to notify) they are sticking with insisting I was the registered keeper and on that they could be correct - but only because they did not update their system.

 

Good luck with your case

One point is that once I worked out the game I started copying the Secretary of State for Transport in on the mails, inc the one where I noted the flaw in the system - doubt if he'll take any notice of my lone letter so if ANYONE is having the same problem I'd suggest they also copy him - he's the only one that can really change the system.

Edited by Falcon262
Missed a "not"
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all,

 

I've just had a letter today from Inter credit with the following intro...

 

 

As you have ignored all previous letters, the DVLA is currently preparing a claim against you as the registered keeper of an unlicensed vehicle. (blah blah blah) otherwise legal action through the courts etc etc (does this look familiar guys and gals ?)

 

The real beauty on this one is that I went into my local DVLA office after scrapping my vehicle and wrote a letter and had it witnessed, dated and receipted by a member of their own staff at the office. I ALSO got a reciept for claiming the rest of the tax back from the vehicle and at the same time registered my new vehicle (again receipt dated and signed at the counter by the DVLA and my change of address for licence and BOTH vehicles.

 

 

I went through the letter route as I had lost the log book for the now scrapped car and at their suggestion had wrote the letter confirming make, model, who and where registered to as well as the reg number. Again I have copies and reciepts on DVLA letter headed paper so if any funny business went on I could prove they have recieved instructions that the vehicle and the local office will forward to Swansea on my behalf.

 

I didn't expect another receipt by post as I had made sure I had covered my arse whilst at the DVLA office.

 

I personally can't wait for them or inter-credit to take me to court, not sure of the legality on pending cases etc and the media but am really looking forward to putting DVLA to shame nationally in the press for their shabby service and their very shady practice with scare tactics to basically extort money from you. Especially if they can't be arsed to make sure they have a case in the first place

 

Oh, before I forget ... they say several letters ? this was the first one after aforementioned visit to the DVLA office over 12 months ago !

 

How much is this costing the honest taxpayer every time this bunch of tw@£s decide to try it on ?

 

bring it on I say !

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...