Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Firstly, I would like to thank everyone for their help in this matter. Since my last post I have received a reply from Plymouth Council Insurance Team concerning my wife’s accident (please see enclosed letter and photo of the offending Badminton post) which they deny any responsibility for the said accident. I feel that the Council is in breach of their statutory duties under the following acts: The Leisure Centre was negligent in its duty of care and therefore, in breach of the statutory duty owed under section 2 of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (the Act) to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all their employees, and others who might be affected by its undertaking, e.g. members of the public visiting the Leisure Centre to use the facilities. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 that requires employers to assess risks (including slip and trip risks) and, where necessary, take action to address them. The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) require the risk to people’s health and safety from equipment that is used at a Leisure Centre be prevented or controlled. I would like some advice to see if my assumptions are correct and my approach to obtaining satisfactory outcome to this matter are accurate. Many thanks   PLM23000150 - Copy Correspondence.pdf post docx.docx
    • Talking to them does not reset the time limit, although they will probably tell you it does, they'd be lying. Dumbdales are the in-house sols for Lowlife, just the next desk along. If Lowlifes were corresponding with you at your current address then Dumbdales know your address. However, knowing that they are lower than a snake's belly, you would be well advised to send them a letter, informing them of your current address and nothing else. Get 'proof of posting' which is free from the PO counter, don't sign it, simply type your name. That way then they have absolutely no excuse for attempting a back door CCJ.   P.S. Best course of action, IGNORE them, until or unless you get a claim form......you won't.
    • A 'signed for' Letter of Claim has been sent today so they have 14 days from tomorrow... Lets wait and see what happens but i suspect judging by their attitude they wont reply 
    • I am extremely apprehensive about burning our files.... I do not know why, so it is becoming an endless feedback loop. Scared to pull the trigger to speak in the desire not to mess up my file. 
    • Hi All, So brief outline. I have Natwest CC debt £8k last payment i made was 7th November 2018 Not a penny since. So coming up to the 6 year mark. Can't remember when i took out the  credit card would be a few years before everythign hit the fan. Moved house 2020 - updated NatWest as I still have a current account with them. Then Lowells took over from Moorcroft and were writing to me at my current address. I did get a family member to speak to them 3 years ago regarding the debt explained although it may be in my name I didn't rack it up then went contact again. 29th may received an email from overdales saying they were now managing the debt. I have not had any letter yet which i thought is odd?  Couple of questions 1. Does my family member speaking to lowell restart statute barred clock? 2. Do you think overdales aren't writing to me because they will back door CCJ to old address even though Lowells have contacted me at current address never at previous? ( have no proof though stupidly binned all letters  ) Should I write to them and confirm my address just incase? Does this restart statute barred clock? 3. what do you think best course of action is?   Any help/advice is appreciated I am aware they may ramp up the process now due to 7th December being the 6 year mark.   Many Thanks in advance! The threads on here have been super helpful to read.  
  • 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

beginning of fight against possession order


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5815 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

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

and one other question, shall l take the letter l sent about securitisation and their reply to it? I still think thats the reason they will no longer consider the £30.00 we had been paying

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok everything ready for tommorrow. thanks to all who have helped especially Ell-en ( l've tipped your scales bless you) hearing at 10.15 so l will post as soon as l get back. Fingers crossed that we get a judge with some brains!

Link to post
Share on other sites

and one other question, shall l take the letter l sent about securitisation and their reply to it? I still think thats the reason they will no longer consider the £30.00 we had been paying

 

To be honest, the judge will only be able to consider the arrears facts. The lender is asking for money which they are contractually due and you are offering a payment plan to clear the arrears. If you feel you must bring up the issue of securitisation, then please leave it until after the judge has made his order for suspension of possession and your home is safe.

 

Judges have been known to be irritated by defendants bringing issues into the hearing which they (the judges) deem irrelevant to the repossession claim.

 

Until you know a lot more about the subject I think you should leave it for another time.

 

Kind Regards

 

Ell-enn

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Ell

 

I only suggest mentioning only it if they claim before the Judge to have tried to come to an accommodation for you to pay the arrears without success.

 

As it's they who will have opened the door you can then ask them how? as you now know the mortgage has been securitized thereby causing their hands to be tied & unable to offer any relief because of what you suspect are the terms of the SIV contract a copy of which they have refused to let you have effectively denying you the right to see under what T's & C's your mortgage is now conducted

Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll have a hard job proving they tried to help - Elliesnan is taking to court copies of letters from them refusing her offers of payment.

 

Ell

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in that case the securitization argument is supported I only suggest using it in court as an aside together with the corre to defeat to shoot them down if they try to come across in court as sympathetic hand wringing lenders

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, the repossession order was suspended! The judge was wonderful, she was so obviously on our side she did not think that 7 years was an unreasonable amount of time to pay off the arrears. Any way when we gave our names to the usher the solicitor introduced himself and asked if we could have a quiet word. I felt that it was a good sign and it was ,he said that he would ask for the order to be suspended if we would agree to looking at a little extra towards the arrears after 6 months. We were quite happy with that. when he read that to the judge she said to write to them in say 5 months time and tell them if we could increase it and to equally tell them if we couldn't. She said not to agree to anything that may cause us to default. She was a truly amazing lady, in fact when we came out we both agreed that we had actually rather enjoyed it! lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done. This really is great news.:lol:

 

I really can't think of anything more worrying than the prospect of losing ones home & now it's over.............. if you drink........... I recommend you go & tie one on:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great news, well done for being so brave. Glad you got the result you deserve.

 

Kind Regards

 

Ell-enn

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't shoot me down but I think the Solicitor representing the claimant may have no small part to play in the result

 

They probably read the file (which doesn't always happen) & though "what the hell's going on here eviction for few grand when the defendants made repeated offers to pay I'm not going to be a party to this nonsense so will offer a solution to the court"

 

I realize for many it's perhaps stretching it a bit but remember it's what happened isn't it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly Ell-en l cant click your scales cause it says l must " spread round more reputation " so for the record

ELL-EN ROCKS and Joncris his words were Platform have asked me to ask you so what do you think that was about?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that after having read the papers HE advised platform that they could be on a hiding to now't because of Norgan.

 

Also I the last thing they would want to have discussed is the small matter of securitization & it's limiting of the ability to amend contracts

 

Also frankly it was a disgrace that they where prepared to seek eviction over piffling a sum on a property with loads of equity & they knew it

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes we have been discussing what may have tipped the scales. l assume they would have seen our defence re the Norgan judgement and the fact that we may have bought up the securitization question but of course we will never know

Link to post
Share on other sites

But you have the experience of being in court and presenting your case Elliesnan - you would be able to pass that on and re-assure people it is not as intimidating as they first think.

 

Ell

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there eliesnan

 

I havent posted on this thread but I have been watching with interest.

*********CONGRATULATIONS******

You must be over the moon. I was in court also this year and like Ell-en said everything that you have been through is helpful to people on here. Words of support and engouragement are just as important as advice.

 

Have a fantastic evening, sleep well and enjoy living

 

Olives xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

So pleased for you xx

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...