Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • J&P Credit Solutions are specialists on debt recovery. Either way they seem to be swapping between the JandP and IDR whatever their exact definitions are.
    • Primary and secondary teachers are supporting pupils with their own money, buying food and warm clothing. Eight in 10 primary teachers in England spending own money to help pupils | Education | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Increasing numbers of children hungry and lack adequate clothing, with two-thirds of secondary teachers also supporting pupils  
    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
  • 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

Reston's have a CO, now they want me to inc my installment order?!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2754 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 all,

 

Back at the end of last Nov Reston's were granted a charging order on my home. I had my installment order set by the dj at what the CCJ was - £1 pcm. I have just recv'd an I & E form from Restons asking for me to review the current arrangement & increase my monthly payments. They already have a ruddy CO for over £10k (well, Restriction :-)). I am just so annoyed! Can they persue me for more installment money through the courts? My finances are worse than in Nov due to rising petrol, food, etc. Any help is grately appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They could apply for a further redetermination but it would cost them. Ignore for now.

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

They could apply for a further redetermination but it would cost them. Ignore for now.

 

Andy

 

 

This.

 

I imagine it will as it will take you over 800 years to repay a £1 pcm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy.

 

Gany - I don't understand your post. Yes, it will take over 10,500 mnths but that's not the point. They were ALREADY granted a charging order & DJ agreed to my installments being set at £1.

 

Can anyone tell me if this is a rare thing for a creditor to do? I was under the assumption that charging orders just sit there while you make the installments set until the time comes to sell...

Edited by sparklyfairy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not rare but it is invariably the greedy ones that make them.Your comments are correct on COs

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy.

 

Gany - I don't understand your post. Yes, it will take over 10,500 mnths but that's not the point. They were ALREADY granted a charging order & DJ agreed to my installments being set at £1.

 

Can anyone tell me if this is a rare thing for a creditor to do? I was under the assumption that charging orders just sit there while you make the installments set until the time comes to sell...

 

 

Maths was never my strong point. :)

 

Yes in the vast majority of cases a CO will sit on the property whilst you make payments and no Order for Sale will be applied for by the Claimant.

 

However if the debt is very large and will, for example, take thousands of years to repay it is not uncommon for the Claimant to return to Court to request a variation in the set instalment rate.

 

Sorry if my earlier post was unclear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hiya Egg!

 

Yes, I plan on ignoring this & filing it safely away in my bin! I have read in a thread on Legal seagulls that they try this after a certain amount of time, the person who received it on LB confirmed to me they DIDN'T increase their payments & Reston's took no further action (their letter from Reston's was from 2007 btw)..from the sound of it our letters were almost identical - even offering me a "specially discounted settlement figure" - whatever! If they want an increase they'll have to apply for a redetermination. Hope this info helps anyone who gets something similar - I'll try to (remember to ) update this thread with any news on this front.

 

Oh, the letter is from Mr Woof - I've never spoken to him but I have read he is one of the nicer ones (?) but Miss Tipping has quite the reputation for being absolutely vile...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sparkly

 

At the end of the day it's a numbers game to them so they are going to try with everyone and they, most likely, do scare enough people into paying up more. But sit tight and you will see they go away.

 

And, yes Miss Tipping, has a certain reputation but they can only be as "vile" as you let them. If they are ignored it's difficult for them to be that way.

 

And Mr Woof? You gotta be joking :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont bin it Sparkly save safely, but still ignore.

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Hi all

 

We have had a letter today a threatogram in the form of you have 7 days to respond to our letter and fill out an income/ expense form for there client from Restons. They have a CCJ on my name and also have a charging order in place (restriction) on my home. Yes I do agree this must be a case to get more money from you.

However I will stick to the court order to pay what the district Judge has set. I will be 126 years old when the last payment is made if we live that long?.:razz:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

 

We have had a letter today a threatogram in the form of you have 7 days to respond to our letter and fill out an income/ expense form for there client from Restons. They have a CCJ on my name and also have a charging order in place (restriction) on my home. Yes I do agree this must be a case to get more money from you.

However I will stick to the court order to pay what the district Judge has set. I will be 126 years old when the last payment is made if we live that long?.:razz:

 

this thread is from 2011

 

you need to go start a new thread

of your own

 

you wont get seen here and its not your thread either

 

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

Ignore it.

 

For anybody in the same position you may well find Restons now sending these "threatograms" out as (on another site) we have now managed to locate Solicitors who are happy to follow the rules of a Form K Restriction upon the sale of property.

 

That action is to make clear to all parties that only notification, to the Restriction holder, is required when a sale takes place. Explaining that there is no requirement (within the terms of the Restrictions) to settle the any debt when the sale takes place.

 

Because of this, Restons (and other bottom feeders) are no longer getting paid as they used to be. Hence, they may be twitching a bit and starting to try and pull in repayments by other means before people actually cotton on in large numbers they can do this?

Edited by honeybee13
Removing suggestion of sending PM.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, let's say anyone wanting to know how to sell without making payment PM me?

 

eggboxy, you could just tell people what to do on the thread and without naming solicitors. Advice by PM isn't necessary, everything should be subject to public scrutiny for fairness to all.

 

HB

Edited by honeybee13
Duplication.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honeybee

 

Its been well documented on here (and other sites) for many years as to why there is no requirement to pay any proceeds of a sale to Form K Restriction holders upon sale. That's not the mystery?

 

The stumbling block has been convincing Conveyancer's/Solicitors to follow these instructions instructions upon sale. This is because so many Solicitors are unaware of the difference between a Charging order made on jointly owned and solely owned property.

 

But the difference now is that there are a couple of firms of Solicitors who have acted for sellers as they wish upon sale (one being Sparklyfairy who posted on this thread.) So the only way to explain how sellers are able to achieve this is to name the firms concerned willing to help.

 

Its not a matter of recommendation, more factual informing who they are? There has, also, been no problem relating this information (by PM) on other sits so I'm unsure what the problem here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the 3.5 rules could be construed as "recommendation" if you were unable to understand what I explained about there being no mystery to how a sale is achieved and what the missing link to achieving that sale is? Its informing who can act as you want not recommending?

 

Sadly, this point seems lost and quoting rules just seems to smack more of self protectionism than actually wanting to helping posters?

 

Not sure I understand why this stance prevails (given other sites have not intervened) but its not difficult to circumvent?

Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH what you are stating is pretty much common knowledge now

and the solicitors just need to be TOLD that's what the client wants

aftera ll the client is PAYING them to do their wishes.

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 I explained, the information is common knowledge and has been for several years. I also agree with your the "client is paying" stance.

 

But your comment misses the real world fact that Solicitors have been point blank refusing to act on their clients wishes in this area. They simply refuse and state the creditor "has" to be repaid?

 

Sparklyfairy (a contributor to this thread in 2011) is also a fellow contributor elsewhere; she (and dozens of other posters) have been searching for a Solicitor to act on their wishes since that time.

 

 

In September of this year a firm of Solicitors agreed to act as she wanted for her sale and she sold successfully.

 

All that is being offered to posters of CAG is the same opportunity to acquire the information of who Sparkly used? If the moderators of this thread feel that is a step too far then its your posters who lose out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...