Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • 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 then 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. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  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.
  • 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

Cap1 & CCA return


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4978 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 17.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

No 2

 

AGREEMENT.jpg

 

KEY FINANCIAL INFO.

 

AMOUNT OF CREDIT £11831.00

 

No OF MONTHLY INSTALMENTS

84 PAYMENTS OF £177.00.

 

TOTAL PAYABLE £14868.00

 

APR 6.9%.

 

OTHER FINANCIAL INFO.

TOTAL CHARGE FOR CREDIT (INTEREST) £3037.00

(see clause 2.3 of t and c's)

 

THE INTEREST RATE 6.73% pa

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason legal bods never give a straight answer is that there is never one to be given.

 

Or would you prefer they told you what you wanted to hear, regardless?

 

Sorry if that comes across as brutal but no two cases are the same and no two judges are the same either.

 

No, that's fine and to an extent I would agree with you. But such cases as Joan of Arc's seem to me, in my simplistic view, to be much of a muchness and pretty simple in essence; Lender provides illegible document + random T&C's, debtor claims documentation illegible, breaks Copies of Docs regs therefore inadmissible. Lender challenged to produce original, they say can't, we composted it but here's a random employee who will attest that it must have been so even though he hasn't a clue really.

 

In such a case any brief with any experience of these matters must be able to say a) this is probably a winnable case and b) there are only 1, 2, 3... arguments (insert correct number) that the lender can use. Therefore, say two hours preparation time and three hours in court, call it a grand + 50% for contingencies. There you go mr debtor, fixed fee of £1500 and I'll take the case on for you.

 

??

 

Pete

I will not make any deals with you. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. Number 6

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that's fine and to an extent I would agree with you. But such cases as Joan of Arc's seem to me, in my simplistic view, to be much of a muchness and pretty simple in essence; Lender provides illegible document + random T&C's, debtor claims documentation illegible, breaks Copies of Docs regs therefore inadmissible. Lender challenged to produce original, they say can't, we composted it but here's a random employee who will attest that it must have been so even though he hasn't a clue really.

 

In such a case any brief with any experience of these matters must be able to say a) this is probably a winnable case and b) there are only 1, 2, 3... arguments (insert correct number) that the lender can use. Therefore, say two hours preparation time and three hours in court, call it a grand + 50% for contingencies. There you go mr debtor, fixed fee of £1500 and I'll take the case on for you.

 

??

 

Pete

That is probably fair comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Personally

I would never now persue any claim for unenforceabilty on an agreement unless the prescribed terms were on the agreement and where incorrct so that you could prove them to be so with a pocket calulator.

 

All this other stuf i know about probably better than most on here and in my view if your main argument isn't the one above then you are scating on very thin ice.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

KEY FINANCIAL INFO.

 

AMOUNT OF CREDIT £11831.00

 

No OF MONTHLY INSTALMENTS

84 PAYMENTS OF £177.00.

 

TOTAL PAYABLE £14868.00

 

APR 6.9%.

 

OTHER FINANCIAL INFO.

TOTAL CHARGE FOR CREDIT (INTEREST) £3037.00

(see clause 2.3 of t and c's)

 

THE INTEREST RATE 6.73% pa

 

HI

 

spot on i am affraid

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOAN AMOUNT £25000

TOTAL AMOUNT PAYABLE £35874

MONTHLY PAYMENT £298.95

 

APR IS 7.9%

 

Well spotted that man the interest rate should be 7.6%

 

APR is 7.943%

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

No interest rate is not a prescribed term on a fixed sum agreementpre 2005, if it is dated after august 2005 then it is required to be on the agreement and would breech section 60 if it where incorrect.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Then it would breach section 60.

The judge would decide on the amount of prdudice caused by the error as to wherther to enforce or alter the agreement.

The interst is not widle regarded as being predudicial to the linder ,most lenders go off the apr when making a purchasing decision.

If it were a large errer it may be worth a punt but as i said earlier i wouldn't.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI yes this is simmilar to the one i mentioned earlier on here.

 

I certainly feel for joan.i know exactly how she must be feeling. I have been there to often.

 

This is why we must make sure that our cases are watertight before we go to court every loss makes it harder for the next person.

 

Peter

 

 

Yes you have mentioned about cases being watertight and how easy you said for peeps to be shot down in flames.

 

I myself would not take on the BOS in court without a Barrister me thinks for sure. It would be worth the cost due to the size of the claim, it would def be Fast Track.

 

 

Milly XXX

CAPITAL ONE (O/H!): Won £1864.63 including contractual :D

GE MONEY: WON £266.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you have mentioned about cases being watertight and how easy you said for peeps to be shot down in flames.

 

I myself would not take on the BOS in court without a Barrister me thinks for sure. It would be worth the cost due to the size of the claim, it would def be Fast Track.

 

 

Milly XXX

 

Hi

 

Please don't go paying any up front fees to anyone get advice first.

Independant advice.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Peter.

 

I wasnt aware that any de-minimis can be applied to a prescribed term - you are either the right side of the regs or not - that right? - after all - the judge has no discretion under 127(3) when a prescribed term has been breached.

Link to post
Share on other sites

diminimms isnt that a song from the seventies.

 

peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree about the advice thing - but there are firms of lawyers and Chambers that will do cases on a CFA

 

I know of many that say they do and i am sure that their are some that actually do i am just saying be careful

 

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Signatures

All agreements are to be signed by both customer and trader, or their representatives, and the date of signature entered. The customer’s signature and its date must be inside a box. This box can be of any size and appear anywhere in the agreement, but the wording inside it must be easily legible and must follow that for the appropriate type of agreement as set out in Appendix 2. The signature of the trader and its date must be outside the customer’s signature box. Similarly the signature of any witness, and its date, must also be outside the customer’s signature box.

 

 

Many thanks Peter, it is crystal now for old agreements and the sig!

 

Milly XX

 

 

 

 

 

Best regards

Peter

CAPITAL ONE (O/H!): Won £1864.63 including contractual :D

GE MONEY: WON £266.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

hI seiosly no the interst is not a prescribed term on a fixed sum credit agrement scedule 1 section 9 of the 1983/1553 statutory instrument look it up.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly its true though, thats why the banks dont often back away from a LIP but they do back down a lot quicker when you have Bradley say or steven neville or steven turner etc in your corner

 

 

Absolutely agree and will not be taking on BOS on my own. I can see how easy it is to lose and I can see when you are up against a creditors barrister as I have read on here how traumatic it can be. :(

 

Milly XX

CAPITAL ONE (O/H!): Won £1864.63 including contractual :D

GE MONEY: WON £266.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you have mentioned about cases being watertight and how easy you said for peeps to be shot down in flames.

 

I myself would not take on the BOS in court without a Barrister me thinks for sure. It would be worth the cost due to the size of the claim, it would def be Fast Track.

 

 

Milly XXX

Very wise move.

I certainly wouldn't have a hope in hell in a court room. (I've never been to court, what about wearing some seductive clothing and winking at the judge, only joking he'd probably think I'd come off my local street corner and had an eye affliction)

I have seen Peter warn people off in different threads and it seems alot of folk just carry on regardless if they have a breech in the agreement they think they are gonna win.

some read stuff on here and plough ahead and end up in the s..t,

In Joans case I think they researched very well and presented their case very well too. I appreciate the fact that the latter of Joans thread gives a very good warning and I too feel sorry for her. She gave it a very good shot.

kind regards Q.x.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4978 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...