Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So I just found a couple abandoned traffic cones locally by some bins.   A bit squished but free!  So have placed them on the land.  Will wait to see if the cones get moved and signs ignored again this week before I consider rocks/ boulders.
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later the your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. So if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place and park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and then unload the children followed by reloading the children getting seat belts on etc before driving to the exit stopping for cars, pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
    • Hi  no nothing yet. Hope it stays that way 😬
  • 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

HPH2/? Claimform - Old 2009 Santander Overdraft 'debt' ***Settled by ADR ***


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2945 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

who says you'll get a CCJ?

 

get that link filled in please

 

and paste the results and the questions here.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi there

 

Name of the Claimant ? - Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Limited

Date of issue – 23 April 2015

 

Date of defence - by 4pm – 25 May 2015

 

What is the claim for –

The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.

 

The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.

The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.

The Claimant claims:

 

  1. The sum of 2470.56
  2. Interest pursuant to s69 of the County Court Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58
  3. Daily interest at the rate of .54
  4. Costs

 

What is the value of the claim? 2663.14

Is the claim for a current account (Overdraft) or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? Overdraft

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? before 2007

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. Hoist portfolio 2 Limited

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? NO

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ?

I have received a Transaction Summaries – doesn’t mention ‘Notice of Default Sums”

 

Why did you cease payments?

I lost my job and was unemployed for nearly 12 months

and because I didn’t have enough to cover the overdraft they demanded that I repay the overdraft.

I was already with the CCCS and they said offer then £1 per month

because what they had already had already include in the plan was were my priority debts.

As a gesture of goodwill I told I offered Santander £5 per month, they said No.

I asked if they could turn it into a loan where I could just keep paying it off and they still said no.

They said they would not accept anything other than the full balance. I wasn’t sure what to do so I stopped paying.

They next correspondence I had about it was a default notice, and a few months later I was contacted by 1st Credit.

 

What was the date of your last payment? I’m not sure could be around 2009

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

nd make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan?

 

Yes, I attempted to as I mentioned above, I wanted them help me to pay it off. I had no job at the time and I was offering what I could afford.

 

I have also included the first letter that I got from Howard Cohen on 4 April.

Edited by Ladylovessalsa
Needed to take bar code out..
Link to post
Share on other sites

ok time to get up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.

create a user

note the long number

 

 

then log-n

and using the details required from the claimform

 

 

ack [AOS] the claim

 

 

defend all

leave juris unticked

exit mcol

 

 

comeback when that's is done.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok lets slow down

 

 

i'll do the document so forget that.

 

 

now on to the claimform.

 

 

go here and register as an individual

 

 

note the long number given.

 

 

then comeback here

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

good

now using the registration you've just made

log in to MCOL

 

 

then, looking at the claimform

 

 

use the details required , select AOS [ack the claim]

 

 

select defend all

 

 

leave juris unticked

 

 

then exit MCOL

 

 

comeback then here.

 

 

you should get an ack that you've done AOS a short time after

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

current account CPR 31:14 from the legal section of the green top library tab.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

current account CPR 31:14 from the legal section of the green top library tab.

 

dx

 

Hello Dx

 

I have found the letter in the library and customised it.

 

 

Having read it a few times, there is a bit I don't understand. In the letter,

 

 

where it asks for copies of the documentation to be produced it says the following:

"Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure and the production of a verified

and legible copy of each of the following documents mentioned in your Particulars of Claim:"

But it doesn't mentioned any documents in the particulars of the claim?

Should I leave it as it is?

I will post the text I have used so that you can see if I have done everything you have told me to do..

Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

I am in exactly the same scenario as you.They must be issuing these like confetti !

May I ask what you amended in the CPR 31.14 letter ?

 

 

depends on your POC

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As DX suggested, I've had an enlightening afternoon reading the information under the link he posted earlier.

It's all very frightening and very, very worth reading if you have no idea what going to happen.

 

Just speaking allowed and thinking about next steps..

 

 

I sent off the CPR 31.14 today.

 

 

So in 7 days, if they haven't responded,

 

 

I will deny all claims, formulate and submit my defence.

 

 

If they do response I will formulate my defence based on what they produce in terms of documentation,

look to deny all claims and question the authenticity of the documentation

and whether they have the right to sue as they were not party to the agreement.

 

DX - have I got the right end of the stick?

 

1Penny - There is someone in the same position as us, who is further ahead in the litigation minefield,HPH2/Cohen claimform - old Abbey OD from 1992

read that post in the link from the beginning, it's quite terrifying but if it does nothing else it highlights the importance of acting early and quickly in this situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you don't don't file anything until just before your time to file

4pm Monday 25th may

 

 

and then you post whatever you are going to file here first!

 

 

let it run

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

haven't got a crystal ball sorry

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just the section about the documents.. it's all quite clear in the template.. The template is in the library, I copy and pasted in the a word docuūment and then made the changes... What you need to change is quite self explanatory.

Thanks

 

They don't mention much in the way of docs in their POC.

I have sent my CP R31.14 request.

Seems that we are both on similar timescales.

Regards

 

Penny

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like we are.. have you come across any other posts anywhere from anyone who have managed to stop Hoist/Cohen from registering a judgement against them? At least then we could see what is likely to happen...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...