Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Agreed, let them default. Keep everything in writing, if they ring to discuss the accounts over the phone, simply say 'everything in writing please', and hang up. They'll soon get the message. Get all of your paperwork in order too, if you haven't got any, or are missing relevant documents, then you can SAR the original creditor, which is free and they have 30 days to supply the info. Keep a diary of events too. sit back and relax, YOU'RE in control, not them.
    • thought you said you had an sjpn? dx  
    • dont go near them bunch of scammers! ive removed ref. dx  
    • I used to post regularly in order to provide factual information (rather than advice) but got fed up with banging my head against a brick wall in so many cases when posters insisted black was white and I was writing rubbish. I have never posted anything which was untrue or indeed biased in any way.  I have never given 'advice' but have sought to correct erroneous statements which were unhelpful. The only username I have ever used is blf1uk. I have never gone under any other username and have no connection to 'bailiff advice'.  I am not a High Court Enforcement Officer but obtained my first 'bailiff' certificate in 1982. I'm not sure what records you have accessed but I was certainly not born in 1977 - at that time I was serving in the Armed Forces in Hereford, Germany (4th Division HQ) and my wife gave birth to our eldest.   Going back to the original point, the fact is that employees of an Approved Enforcement Agency contracted by the Ministry of Justice can and do execute warrants of arrest (with and without bail), warrants of detention and warrants of commitment. In many cases, the employee is also an enforcement agent [but not acting as one]. Here is a fact.  I recently submitted an FOI request to HMCTS and they advised me (for example) that in 2022/23 Jacobs (the AEA for Wales) was issued with 4,750 financial arrest warrants (without bail) and 473 'breach' warrants.  A breach warrant is a community penalty breach warrant (CPBW) whereby the defendant has breached the terms of either their release from prison or the terms of an order [such as community service].  While the defendant may pay the sum [fine] due to avoid arrest on a financial arrest warrant, a breach warrant always results in their transportation to either a police station [for holding] or directly to the magistrates' court to go before the bench as is the case on financial arrest warrants without bail when they don't pay.  Wales has the lowest number of arrest warrants issued of the seven regions with South East exceeding 50,000.  Overall, the figure for arrest warrants issued to the three AEAs exceeds 200,000.  Many of these were previously dealt with directly by HMCTS using their employed Civilian Enforcement Officers but they were subject to TUPE in 2019 and either left the service or transferred to the three AEAs. In England, a local authority may take committal proceedings against an individual who has not paid their council tax and the court will issue a committal summons.  If the person does not attend the committal hearing, the court will issue a warrant of arrest usually with bail but occasionally without bail (certainly without bail if when bailed on their own recognizance the defendant still fails to appear).   A warrant of arrest to bring the debtor before the court is issued under regulation 48(5) of The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992 and can be executed by "any person to whom it is directed or by any constable....." (Reg 48(6).  These, although much [much] lower in number compared to HMCTS, are also dealt with by the enforcement agencies contracted by the local authorities. Feel free to do your own research using FOI enquiries!  
  • 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

HSBC v Pipster - Court Tomorrow!! *****Discontinued*****


Pipster2797
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4440 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

No doubt they are as at least 1 guest has sat on this all day.

 

with regards to the account and the fact I never signed a CCA do they have the right to report info to CRA's and to place a default on the account? I can understand how they could if the account was unenforceable and someone had signed for this, however in this case its been proven that I never signed anything to give them authorisation to report information to CRA's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 359
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

A good point. Worth another letter!

 

Did the recon agreement state that signing gave permission to report to the CRAs? If so, and you did not sign – which you have stated clearly in court – they would, IMO, have no right to report data.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pipster - I just tried to send you a PM but it says I cant.

 

Can you PM me at all

 

Thanks

 

 

For some reason I cant PM. Thought at first it was because I hadn't deleted any messages but cant seem to at all now. I had PM's from last week.

 

Not sure what has happened but will try and speak to a member of the site team

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well after what has been a very successful day, I'm going to put my little boy to bed with a book and then have a good few beers before bed. Thanks Again to everyone. :whoo:

 

I'll keep this thread updated over the costs issue though and going to read newman's thread between tonight and tomorrow

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just doing a little reading on costs and DG

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?324679-DG-Solicitors-acting-unreasonably

 

My worry is that they will agree to costs and pay it off the balance. Even though I didnt sign an agreement and there isnt one in place. That link is saying I should of sent the costs to the court

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pipster if you have an i phone or HTC or other smart phone then if you have a speaker phone then put them on hands free and it works perfectly. there is always a sound recording app on these phones. I have done this in the past and it works fine. you can then use any free editing software to take out the gaps and the ummms and the time put on hold!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a great read and very well done. I bet they felt really smug with their statement but reading your masterpiece knocks the spots of theirs and made them look very silly indeed. Must be demoralising for their highly paid professional legal boffs to get trounced by a mere LiP :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't want to put too much on the forum but I have spoke to DG sols.

 

They wanted to haggle on my costs of £681.20. Offered me £196. Basically said get stuffed. I offered to reduce the amount down to £550 on the condition that she had an answer back for me by 3pm and this was resolved today, failing that the amount i wanted for costs would be £681.20. Just rang her back and she said she would be writing to me today or tomorrow. Simply put it to her that this wasn't the condition and that I would be putting my costs to the court now for £681.20.

 

So next step is putting my costs in to the court.

 

She tried to go over old ground during the call and said that I have to realise that there is a debt outstanding here. I just simply said "no there wasn't, nothing was ever signed for". At that point I stopped her dead in her tracks and said we are talking about costs and lets leave it at that!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...