Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4589 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

Can any one tell me

1/ what happens to the proceeds of an insurance policy owned by a debtor upon his/her demise or bankruptcy then death

2/ can a debtors policy be assigned to a spouse prior to death or bankruptcy then death to avoid any potential problems

 

please dont worry I am not poorly!!!

 

onlyme

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can any one tell me

1/ what happens to the proceeds of an insurance policy owned by a debtor upon his/her demise or bankruptcy then death

2/ can a debtors policy be assigned to a spouse prior to death or bankruptcy then death to avoid any potential problems

 

please dont worry I am not poorly!!!

 

onlyme

Link to post
Share on other sites

In general a life insurance policy would be come the property of the trustee in the bankruptcy, what happens to it after that depends on the details of the policy.

 

Transfering assets prior to a bankruptcy when you know you are insolvent could be recovered by the trustee and a further restriction pkaced on the bankrupt

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is not an endowment policy with any value but a simple whole life policy that coughs up if / when I croak it (not imminent)(I hope) It therfore has no current value

 

I am not as yet insolvent just fighting folks off and want to help my other half should I go sooner rather than later as she would not be capable of fighting my cause following my untimely demise so I was considering transferring it to her ownership rather than mine especially as she pays the premiums

 

onlyme

Link to post
Share on other sites

regardless of if it has a cash in value or not, it is still an asset as per the bankruptcy rules.

 

there are 2 tests for insolvency, one is if you have mre going out each month than comeing in, so for instance if you had no use of credit could you pay all your bills , food etc plus all of your legaly required payments to creditors, if not then you are insolvent.

 

the other test, is assets based, do you have more debts than you have assets, if so then you are insolvent.

 

if either of the above applies then you are insolvent and disposals of assets would be looked at if you subsequently went bankrupt

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was of the impression that

a whole life policy was not

subject to the BR rules?

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nor should they have

it is not a tangible amount

until the clogs are popped:madgrin:

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The policy like all other assets will vest in the bankruptcy, The trustee then has to decide what to do with it, it has been common practice to sell the interest in it back to bankrupt for £50 in recent years, other options are to just let it expire (ie the bankrupt ceases payment).

 

In your case toddle, did you declare the details in your SOA, did you buy the interest back from the OR, is the policy assigned to anyone else, for instance a mortgage company, are you still making payments

Link to post
Share on other sites

For info

 

31.5.40 Life assurance policies - bankruptcy

Modern life policies come in a variety of forms ranging from whole life or term policies (where the obligation on the insurer is to pay on death or death within a specified time) through endowment policies (where the obligation is to pay on death or survival for a specified time) to annuities and policies linked to investments in property. They are valuable items of property which can be used as security, sold or otherwise disposed of.

 

31.5.44 Realising life assurance with no surrender value (amended November 2007)

Where the policy does not have a surrender value, the official receiver should consider allowing the debtor to purchase the trustee's interest in the policy. The Insolvency Service has adopted a standard fee of £50 to cover the administrative costs of any assignment of the policy. The standard letter [LTBPOL] should be sent to the bankrupt which outlines the possible action he/she may take in respect of such a policy. It should be noted that if the policy is kept in force by the bankrupt (for example, by continuation of payment of premiums) and the bankrupt does not effect an assigment then any payment due from the policy will be an asset in the bankruptcy estate. The standard letter advises the bankrupt of this circumstance.

In any case where the official receiver has been unable to surrender or dispose of a policy prior to the condition for payment on the policy being fulfilled (including where the policy pays out on the disablement of the bankrupt) the official receiver as trustee will be entitled to receive the proceeds as and when they become payable, whether before or after discharge Re Cork v Rawlins [2001] 3 WLR 300.

 

FURTHER READING

 

http://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/freedomofinformation/technical/TechnicalManual/Ch25-36/Chapter31/part5/part4/part_4.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it was declared and no I didn't have to buy the interest back. It is not assigned to anyone and I am still paying towards. The only think I had to buy back was my pension policy for £50

Edited by toddle2u
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you may be confused, Most pensions are exempt from bankruptcy under the Welfare Reform Act and so dont need to be bought back, Life Assurance vests and so does and is commonly sold back if it does not have a surrender value for £50 as per the link above

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...