Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Danny - point taken about the blue paragraphs.  Including them doesn't harm your case in any way.  It makes no odds.  It's just that over the years we've had judges often remarking on how concise & clear Caggers' WSs have been compared to the Encyclopaedia Britannica-length rubbish that the PPCs send, so I always have a slight preference to cut out anything necessary. Don't send off the WS straight away .. you have plenty of time ... and let's just say that LFI is the Contract King so give him a couple of days to look through it with a fine-tooth comb.
    • Do you have broadband at home? A permanent move to e.g. Sky Glass may not fit with your desire to keep your digibox,, but can you move the items you most want off the digibox? If so, Sky Glass might suit you. You might ask Sky to loan you a “puck” and provide access as an interim measure. another option might be using Sky Go, at least short term, to give you access to some of the Sky programming while awaiting the dish being sorted.
    • £85PCM to sky, what!! why are you paying so much, what did you watch on sky thats not on freeview?  
    • Between yourself and Dave you have produced a very good WS. However if you were to do a harder hitting WS it may be that VCS would be more likely to cancel prior to a hearing. The Contract . VCS [Jake Burgess?] are trying to conflate parking in a car park to driving along a road in order to defend the indefensible. It is well known that "NO Stopping " cannot form a contract as it is prohibitory. VCS know that well as they lose time and again in Court when claiming it is contractual. By mixing up parking with driving they hope to deflect from the fact trying to claim that No Stopping is contractual is tantamount to perjury. No wonder mr Burgess doesn't want to appear in Court. Conflation also disguises the fact that while parking in a car park for a period of time can be interpreted as the acceptance of the contract that is not the case while driving down a road. The Defendant was going to the airport so it is ludicrous to suggest that driving by a No Stopping  sign is tacitly accepting  the  contract -especially as no contract is even being offered. And even if a motorist did not wish to be bound by the so called contract what could they do? Forfeit their flight and still have to stop their car to turn around? Put like that the whole scenario posed by Mr Burgess that the Defendant accepted the contract by driving past the sign is absolutely absurd and indefensible. I certainly would not want to appear in Court defending that statement either. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I will do the contract itself later.
    • Yes - ignore. Because of another MET victim today I looked at all our MET cases back to June 2014 ... yes, 10 years. They have never dared take a motorist to court and argue their case before a judge.  They have started the odd court case, but as a means of trying to intimidate the motorist into coughing up, when the motorist defended and refused to give in it was MET who bottled it and discontinued.
  • 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

bankruptcy threats as debt collection tool.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4441 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

  • 1 month later...

Yep it is and I'm going through it at the moment. Trying to negotiate with their solicitors before next tuesday to stop the bankrupcy hearing as I don't want to lose my house (and pets if I have to move as theye've all I have that means anything these days) over a few grand (which I can pay but not by tuesday).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi F/B..

IMHO I would rather take my chance in court, giving valid reasons why the Bankruptcy should not be allowed, explain the full reasons for the debt, whether or not they are the original creditors, or are they one of the uncouth DCA'S that have bought the debt for peanuts, and know that they can threaten and bully the defendant to get a fantastic return on the initial amount they paid, if the latter of thee above then is all the paperwork you have received "coatia", are you working at the moment or on government benefits, try offering a suitable payment each month, and suspend the bankruptcy on the terms agreed.

 

Me myself would not give them the satisfaction of lining their corrupt pockets anymore stand ur ground and dont backdown, they cannot refuse an offer of regular pmts agreed with the courts which is usually determined on what u can realistically afford at the timewhat was the debt originally for and is it covered by the CCA 1974 Act.

 

Is the debt increasing by way of criminal interest charges being applied by the DCA'S, dont let them win stand ur ground then if all else fails let them go ahead.

If u have more creditors demanding money secured by way of ur house they MAY not even get paid as they have to relinquish their rights over your property in order to gain the bankruptcy, as a SECURED Creditor, CANNOT gain the bankruptcy whilst still having security upon ur house

Link to post
Share on other sites

Beware though you will also end up having to pay their costs as well - I have to pay 1000 on top of a 7000 credit card debt because mine has gone to court. I am taking this seriously as I personally don't want to risk my chance at court and lose as I then lose my house and all my pets and subsequently what is my current life which is something I hold very highly - As a singleton I would be way down the pecking order for suitable rehousing - I do not want to lose all this for a 7000 (now 8000!) debt.

 

If you have a house and don't want to lose it or be homeless then take note and do something now (in my own defence my mother committed suicide at the time of the debt takeover so I wasn't in a position to stop it emotionally before it got to this stage but the law doesn't care about this all they want to know at this stage is do I have enough money to satisfy the debt to the creditor and making repayments after the event will not be an option many courts allow)

 

BTW the original debt was sold to 1stCredit who do what they say - in fact the whole process was about 4 months from original debt takeover to actual court proceedings - they have moved swiftly

 

I have offered to pay in installments but they want a huge portion of the amount for it to go away (ie, over 2/3 of it). I am not on benefits (am looking into tax credit and housing/coucnil tax benefit at the moment) but am self-employed with small income due to the recession (and I have fibromyalgia). I have been given a little time to do this now (already had 1 adjournment at my request and they requested another at last minute on friday) and hoping all the money is coming through on time.

 

I agree with you that by time everything is paid off they may not get much but my sanity can't afford to let it get that far!

Edited by FrankieBeee
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...