Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. 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 (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed 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. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. 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. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Rumour or What? Are Baliffs Operating In Tesco or Other Supermarket Car Parks


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4677 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, has anybody heard anything to the effect that Tesco is letting bailiffs onto their car parks to confiscate any cars of anyone in default of a cc judgement.

 

I picked this up on facebook (ok, ok not the best but no smoke without fire) as far as I can make out this has recently been happening in London area but no idea if its going on everywhere Tesco.

 

I asked a couple of questions to see if it was other things such as maybe criminal things rather than civil defaulters cars but it seems any defaulter of a civil cc judgement whose car is spotted by bailiffs in a supermarket car park is towed or clamped, I only saw Tesco mentioned but it could be all of them for all I know.

 

Personal thoughts are that IF its true it might also be illegal unless Tesco put notices up the cc bailiffs were active in their car parks as surely that would be entrapment, I know warrants are for 2 things, the defaulters name & their property, they have no warrants to go on other private property such as a private supermarket car par park

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I must not have written that very well (private baliffs & CCJ's). When I said private baliffs I mean baliffs with a warrant from CIVIL court, I know there are criminal court baliffs who have different powers, so I did mean baliffs with CCJ's, it seems a bit odd that Tesco or others would give permission to baliffs to check & confiscate their customers cars, I mean a lot of people are in debt this past couple of years.

 

I defaulted on a credit card around 15 months ago, they did get a CCJ but I have been paying it off steadily now for over a year, but to go shoping at the time and find baliffs had towed my car from a private shop car park with the shops consent seems to be stretching the law and customer relations a bit to me UNLESS Tesco had notices up stateing the situation, it just sounds like joint entrapment by collusion, wish I had found out more now its been bugging me all day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only Bailiff that can enforce a CCJ is the County Court Bailiff himself and I doubt very much he would do this as he gets paid a salary regardless of what he does or doesn't do. CCJ's can be transferred up through the High Court if they are for more than £600 inc costs but I still can't see this happening. I would put this down to rumour mongers.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at that reply I think I don't understand the baliff thing properly. This is what I though, all these private firms which are hired in by companies who are owed money I thought had trained people & when I CCJ was issued it was given to one of their emplyees who then became a court authorised baliff for the specific cases they dealt with, are they actually emplyed by the courts themselves? Im lost on the fine details really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No a debt collector is a debt collector, and cannot become a bailiff unless certificated by a magistrates court. If a debt collector passed himself off as a bailiff he would be in the doo doo.

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 OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im more confused now, when I had my default problems I got a letter from a baliff company saying they had a warrant from court, county court, & wanted the money or they could confiscate my goods or chattels, are those debt collectors? I thought because it was a certifiied baliff company the people they sent round were baliffs with a court warrant, am I wrong on that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailiffs have the use of anpr vans with the respect of parking fines, expect them to go around public car parks searching for cars. Tesco, or any other supermarket are private property. Bailiffs can only go onto these car parks with permission, it is quite possible tesco have given permission to the council for this purpose, maybe thats why bailiffs are searching tescos car park?

None of the beliefs held by "Freemen on the land" have ever been supported by any judgments or verdicts in any criminal or civil court cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im more confused now, when I had my default problems I got a letter from a baliff company saying they had a warrant from court, county court, & wanted the money or they could confiscate my goods or chattels, are those debt collectors? I thought because it was a certifiied baliff company the people they sent round were baliffs with a court warrant, am I wrong on that?

 

In that circumstances they would be bailiffs as they cannot send a debt collector to levy distress

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 OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you get a CCJ you get a variety of options with it. If you offered a payment proposal you may be able to pay by instalments otherwise you may have what is called a Forthwith Judgment where the monies are due immediately. In either case if you fail to pay then the Claimant may decide to take further action, this can take several forms but for now we'll go with 2 of these.

 

Warrant of Execution

The Claimant goes back to Court pays £100 and asks the County Court Bailiff to attend to collect the monies owed, levy distress on the goods of the debtor or remove those goods for sale at public auction. The County Court Bailiff is an employee of the Courts Service and is paid regardless of results. He is a more amenable animal than the common or garden Bailiff.

 

Writ of Fieri Facias (Fi Fa)

This is where the debt is for more than £600 and the Claimant applies to transfer the debt through the High Court for enforcement. These are dealt with by private companies and the sums charged are more akin to numbers in the phone directory.

 

If in the past you have had a run in with someone over your debts for say something on HP it usually goes to Debt Collectors first who will usually write & tell you they may obtain a CCJ, they may seek to have their goods back, they may get a Bailiff to call.. Remember the words that are written - might, may, possibly etc. There are some companies that operate as Debt Collectors & Bailiffs and when they write the emphasis on the headed paper may promote Bailiff first - Phillips spring to mind as being guilty of this.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailiffs have the use of anpr vans with the respect of parking fines, expect them to go around public car parks searching for cars. Tesco, or any other supermarket are private property. Bailiffs can only go onto these car parks with permission, it is quite possible tesco have given permission to the council for this purpose, maybe thats why bailiffs are searching tescos car park?

 

If i am right supermarket carparks are deemed as public places,as the public have access to them,that is why the police can issue tickets to people in their cars mucking about at night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailiffs have the use of anpr vans with the respect of parking fines, expect them to go around public car parks searching for cars. Tesco, or any other supermarket are private property. Bailiffs can only go onto these car parks with permission, it is quite possible tesco have given permission to the council for this purpose, maybe thats why bailiffs are searching tescos car park?

 

Of course there is nothing to stop them driving around the car park on the pretext of buying lunch and looking for somewhere to park. They then just happen to collate a list of cars with outstanding tickets and await their owner turning up and following them. Don't forget a lot of the car parks are not owned by Tesco or the like - in how many of these do you have to buy a Council parking ticket!

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Joeblogs that makes things clearer except you seem to specify only parking fines. I though what they meant last night was any general civil CCJ debt warrant of execution, I mean they can take any goods including cars so would't they have anpr vans (are those the tones which tow cars away? I dont know what "anpr" vans are) anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They then just happen to collate a list of cars with outstanding tickets and await their owner turning up and following them.

 

No what the story is is that they are going into tesco & probably others I suppose & just clamping or putting them on the back of those lorries as well as towing them off

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Joeblogs that makes things clearer except you seem to specify only parking fines. I though what they meant last night was any general civil CCJ debt warrant of execution, I mean they can take any goods including cars so would't they have anpr vans (are those the tones which tow cars away? I dont know what "anpr" vans are) anyway?

 

Anpr is automated number plate recognision. Its similar to the ones in police cars, only bailiffs wont get up on screen whether the cars taxed/insured. In fact the only info bailiffs are entitled to relates to whether the vehicle the fine relates to is still registered to the person who was the registered keeper at the date of the offense. (slightly off topic here but bailiffs are not entitled to contact the dvla for anything other than that yes or no answer for penalty charge notices for data protection reasons, so if you read a thread that says a bailiff has to check the vehicle is registered to a debtor before taking for council tax debts, that is not the case because the dvla will not release that sort of info)

None of the beliefs held by "Freemen on the land" have ever been supported by any judgments or verdicts in any criminal or civil court cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes those things are helpfull JB, they seem to conflict with what was being assumed last night which was a "so & so saw this happeing" & passed the info on by just ordinary chat, who also passed it on, that sort of thing but as I said theres no smoke without fire so theres some sort of truth it it somewhere & probably a lot of guesswork as well, what I was surprised about is that Tesco would allow them in I mean theres a lot of people in debt & for Tesco or any others suddenly & without putting notices up becoming a 'honey trap' for baliffs against its customers that just does not make sense.

 

but bailiffs are not entitled to contact the dvla for anything other than that yes or no answer for penalty charge notices for data protection reasons

 

I remeber there was a lot of media controvesy a few years ago (5-10) about DVLA giviing out personal information about drivers (probably meant licence holders) registered with them, dont think it was to do with baliffs or anything like that I seem to remember it was about giving out info to commercial firms involved in selling stuff to motorists, I think, that could be wrong but they were accused of giving out private info.

Link to post
Share on other sites

JB - so if you read a thread that says a bailiff has to check the vehicle is registered to a debtor before taking for council tax debts, that is not the case because the dvla will not release that sort of info)

 

Yes it did seem to mean that, what I understood was that they must have come into a Tesco car park & checked out the cars number & it came back as the owner owed money under a CCJ for something or other, I assumed a debt for anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is common for bailiffs to have the use of an ANPR equipped vehicle to enforce unpaid parking tickets.

 

How they work is pretty simple in that the bailiff is given a memory stick with details of warrants and the information will provide the name and address of the debtor, details of the PCN and the VRM (Vehicle registration mark).

 

The memory stick will be put into the onboard computer and the bailiff simply drives around the streets of London and when the ANPR vehicle passes a car with the same registration number as that on a warrant, an alarm will sound on the computer.

 

Bailiff routinely find it very lucrative indeed to merely drive around large shopping centres such as Blue Water, Brent X etc and large supermarkets to identify vehicles. Many supermarkets etc will allow the bailiff onto their private land as they are unaware that they can refuse. HOWEVER, only a few days ago I heard of a one large shopping centre who REFUSED to allow the ANPR vehicle onto the PRIVATE LAND.

 

It may be that Tesco are unaware of their rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see what they say in reply to an email then.

 

PT

 

Have you emailed them? I was thinking of doing that but I seem muddled as to what I understood as my next post below might show.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - Now, from what I have read in many posts I am now understanding that they are really specificaly looking or/computer held CAR ONLY parking fines & NOT other CCJ desbts (child maintance-credit debt-whatever) because they cannot simply scan a car number plate & get the name of someone with a CCJ against them for credit card debt or some other debt.

 

I had thought they simply had lists of names & addresses & scanned car number plates to see if any CCJ respondents came up as owners of any particuler car...so now I understand this just a car fine thing, is that correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...