Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • oh don't you just love fleecers out to make a buck out of people they think are just mugs..
    • Useful link, BN.   The article mentions that the National Audit Office said that the DWP isn't learning anything from its mistakes.   HB
    • 1.     The Claimant claims £9,240.52 for monies due from the Defendant.   2.     This debt was pursuant to a regulated agreement(s) between the Defendant and The Student Loans Company Limited.  Each agreement had an individual account number as follows: 01xxxxxxxx, 00xxxxxxx, 97xxxxxxx, 96xxxxxxx.   3.     The Defendant failed to make payments as per the terms resulting in the agreement(s) being terminated.   Notice of such is served by a Default or Termination Notice subject to the terms of the agreement(s).   4.     The debt was assigned to the Claimant on 22/11/2013, with a notice provided to the Defendant.   A new master reference number xxxxxxxxxxxxx was also applied upon assignment.   5.     The Claimant has complied with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims   DEFENCE ……………...   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.  The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR 16.5(3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1.     Paragraph 1 2 is noted and denied accepted . I have had financial dealings with The Student Loans company in the past.  I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant who has not complied with my requests for further information.   2.     Paragraph 2 is noted and accepted.  I did take out 4 student loans with the Student Loans Company.   2.     Paragraph 3 is noted and denied.  The Defendant never agreed to make payments to the Claimant, terms of the original Student Loans Agreement have been adhered to and thus repayments of loans are not due.  The Claimant is put to strict proof that an agreement(s) to make payments was made and a breach of agreement(s) occurred.   Paragraph 3 is denied as The Defendant maintains that a default notices were never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof that default notices were issued to, and received by the Defendant    3. Paragraphs1 & 4 are denied.The annual income of the Defendant has never exceeded the published limits for deferral since graduating in XXXX. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly provided by the Claimant pursuant to the LoP Act 1925.   4.      On receipt of this claim I requested (Royal Mail signed for) on 14/02/2020 a CPR 31.14 from the Claimant's solicitor and a section 77 CCA from the Claimant, to which both have failed to respond to,  It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant;  the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of credit agreement/assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31.14, and remains in default of my section 77 CCA Request, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a)   Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement(s) (b)  Show how the Defendant is in breach of agreement(s) (c)   Show why the Claimant has terminated agreement(s) show the nature of breach and service of Default Notices and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer  Credit Act (d)  Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and (e)   Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.     5. On receipt of this claim I requested (Royal Mail signed for) on 14/02/2020 a CPR 31.14 from the Claimant's solicitor and a section 77 CCA from the Claimant,  for copies of the documents referred to within the Claimant’s particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date the Claimant has failed to comply to my section 77 requests and their solicitors, Drydens Limited, have refused my CPR 31.14 request.    6.     The Defendant has supplied the Claimant with a deferment letter and evidence every year that their income is below the threshold for repayments, by way of Royal Mail signed for and proof of postage has been kept. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.      7.     The Defendant has done everything required of them to qualify for deferment as per the original agreement(s) with The Student Loans company.  The Claimant has only once acknowledged a deferment letter on 16 September 2014 whereupon they granted their request to defer repayments for that year. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82 A of the consumer credit Act 1974.    8.The Defendant therefore fails to see how they are in breach of any agreement(s) and deny the Claimant's claim of £9,240.52 or any other sum, or relief of any kind. 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        ……………………………...   delete the red add the blue.    
    • Is this better?   In the Bristol Civic Justice Centre   Claimant name and address xxxxxxxx xxxxxx xx xxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxx   Defendants name and address Nissan Motor (GB) Limited, The Rivers Office Park, Denham Way, Maple Cross, Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire, WD3 9YS.   Brief details of claim Damages   Value £225   Particulars of claim 1. The Defendant is a Data Controller within the meaning of the Data Protection Act 2018 and is responsible for the processing of data of which the Claimant is a Subject.     2. This claim is in relation to three breaches of the Data Protection Act (2018) by the Defendant. (a) Failure to comply with the statutory time limit. (b) The Defendants data disclosure was incomplete. (c) The Defendant sent the data to an address which was not the address of the      Claimant data Subject.    3. The Defendant has failed to comply with the statutory time limit and is therefore in breach of the Data Protection Act (2018). (a) On 09 January 2020, the Claimant made a request for to the Defendant for a statutory data disclosure.  The statutory timeframe for compliance was 10 February 2020.    4. The Defendants data disclosure is incomplete.  (a) The Defendant has provided data disclosure on 25 February 2020.  However, the data disclosure that has been provided by the Defendant is incomplete.    5. The Defendant sent the disclosure to an address that was not the Claimant’s. (a) The Claimant provided the Defendant with the correct address to send the Subject Access Request to on 10 January 2020 and again on 19 February 2020.      6. The Claimant has made a complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) asking for a statutory assessment to be carried out.  The ICO has offered a preliminary view that the Defendant has breached their statutory duty in failing to comply with the statutory time limit.    7. By virtue of the Defendant’s failure to comply with the Subject Access Request the Claimant has suffered distress.
    • They must have had something to hide as they have been pulled up on these deaths before.   This seems a typical case   https://welfareweekly.com/family-of-jodey-whiting-seek-fresh-inquest-into-her-death-to-examine-role-played-by-dwp/
  • Our picks

Aaron's mum

Being taken to court - used someone else's oyster.

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2869 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

 

Firstly, i think this forum is brilliant and i am glad i have come across it.

 

My problem is that i have been summoned to Richmond court, being prosecuted for using someone else's oyster.

 

He is a friend and a bus driver so he got an oyster with his photo on it.

 

On the said day, i picked up the oyster and used it on the bus which was subsequently stopped by inspectors.

I presented the oyster and was asked to come off.

She took down my details and confiscated the card saying that i shouldn't be using it.

 

Later i received a letter asking me to explain myself.

I did my best and explained that i was not aware that i couldn't use someone else's card.

I begged for forgiveness as i know that taking me to court will completely destroy me.

My profession requires a clean enhanced CRB, i am a mum of 2 and this was the first time i had done anything like this before.

 

I have now just received a letter telling me i am being prosecuted and asking for my plea.

 

Please advise..

.i know i am guilty as the card did not belong to me but i just assumed it is ok to ue it.

Ignorance is no defence but is there anything i can do between now and the court date to avert this situation.

 

I am desperate as i need to avoid a criminal conviction but i am so worried don't know what to do.

 

What should i do?

 

Plead guilty..

.write another letter to tfl begging for forgiveness....

plead not guilty...etc

 

I really could use some advise please.

 

Many thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could try writing to TfL again, the main points of your letter should be as follows:

 

i) Offer an unreserved apology to the company and staff concerned,

 

ii) Stress that this was an out of character action for which you are genuinely sorry

 

iii) Explain that if you are prosecuted and convicted this will have a wholly disproportionate effect on your future employment because a clean enhanced CRB check is an essential pre-requisite of your job.

 

iv) Offer to pay any unpaid fare/s and all of the reasonable costs incurred by TfL in dealing with this matter, all of which you recognise arise as a result of your actions

 

v) Give a written untertaking not to travel without a valid ticket on any journey in future.

 

TfL are not obliged to accept your offer, but will give your letter consideration.

 

The costs applied for in any successful prosecution are normally somewhere between £120 - £150 so you might consider making an offer based on that knowledge. If they agree this will need to be paid in full immediately.

 

Good luck

Edited by Old-CodJA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much Old-CodJa for this advice. I am doing this today and having the letter posted recorded delivery.

 

However, my court date is in 2 weeks, do you think i will get a response before then and if not what do i do with the letter that is asking for my plea? I think it is best i wait and fingers crossed i get a positive response. This is killing me softly but i do appreciate your advice. God bless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it say on these Oyster cards that they can only be used by the purchaser or those it is issued to?

 

All a bit of a conn trick if you ask me, paying is paying no matter whose card you use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if it is a bus drivers the problem might arise from the fact they get free or discounted travel.

 

Oysters do not have photos normally and there is no reason why you cannot use someone else's as it all equates to the same revenue.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tickets/19798.aspx

Edited by GuidoT

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks G, I understand now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does it say on these Oyster cards that they can only be used by the purchaser or those it is issued to?

 

All a bit of a conn trick if you ask me, paying is paying no matter whose card you use.

 

 

It's only the Pay-as-you-go Oyster that can be freely used by anyone

 

Any Oyster that has a photo can only be used by the person depicted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds sensible, helps stop theft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a "Bus Operator" Oyster Card. It allows free travel on all TfL services, including buses, LU/LO and DLR/Tramlink. It's impossible to top up these cards.

 

The Oystercard itself clearly states that it's only valid with the photocard which bears the identical identity number. The photocard clearly states it's only for use with the named person and that anyone misusing it may be liable for prosecution.

 

The warnings are there so anyone abusing it obviously doesn't mind having a criminal record and a hefty fine instead of paying a few £s for a day's travel. I'm bewildered as to why any such person would be asking for help!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a "Bus Operator" Oyster Card. It allows free travel on all TfL services, including buses, LU/LO and DLR/Tramlink. It's impossible to top up these cards.

 

The Oystercard itself clearly states that it's only valid with the photocard which bears the identical identity number. The photocard clearly states it's only for use with the named person and that anyone misusing it may be liable for prosecution.

 

The warnings are there so anyone abusing it obviously doesn't mind having a criminal record and a hefty fine instead of paying a few £s for a day's travel. I'm bewildered as to why any such person would be asking for help!

 

The Urbanite, i appreciate and understand what you are saying. Like i have stated previously, i now realise that i should never have used this card as it did not belong to me. But you know, in life sometimes we do things without thinking or reading the small print.

 

The warnings are there but you know life is so hard sometimes, its not black and white. I don't know and will never know what possessed me but i am human and i made a mistake that i can't undo. I have never been in trouble with the law before and i have managed to lead a life that my children would be proud of. However, on this occassion, i don't know what came over me or what made me think it is OK, it is just one of those unexplainable things. I am just so disappointed and in disbelief that one mistake in life is going to cost me all that i have worked so hard for.

 

I put my hand up and agree that i deserve punishment, but the punishment is so severe because a criminal record would totally destroy my career and hence my children's future. Oh how i wish i could only turn the clock back.....and it's so hurtful that one gets such a hefty punishment for one first mistake yet there are thousands out there who offend and re-offend without having their lives turned upside down.

 

I think everyone deserves a second chance in life and i am sure no one goes through life without making mistakes...we learn from our mistakes and i have learnt from this, just that this lesson has spelt the end for me

Edited by Aaron's mum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaron's Mum has sought help here, can we please do so positively, that is without judging.


If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aaron's Mum has sought help here, can we please do so positively, that is without judging.

 

Thank you so much GuidoT, i appreciate the compassion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must've missed that one.

 

No, it's not crime of the century but it's theft all the same and it dealt with much in the same way that making off without paying is dealt with in shops, petrol stations at other places. TfL and other transport operators have deterrents in place in the form of Penalty Fares, but they're not effective enough to prevent people from trying it on. Perhaps getting people convicted is harsh but it's the only thing that seems to make people think twice about their actions these days.

 

There is a saving grace in that TfL may reconsider in the most extreme of circumstances, but IMO I see them as very much "harsh but fair."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You could try writing to TfL again, the main points of your letter should be as follows:

 

i) Offer an unreserved apology to the company and staff concerned,

 

ii) Stress that this was an out of character action for which you are genuinely sorry

 

iii) Explain that if you are prosecuted and convicted this will have a wholly disproportionate effect on your future employment because a clean enhanced CRB check is an essential pre-requisite of your job.

 

iv) Offer to pay any unpaid fare/s and all of the reasonable costs incurred by TfL in dealing with this matter, all of which you recognise arise as a result of your actions

 

v) Give a written untertaking not to travel without a valid ticket on any journey in future.

 

TfL are not obliged to accept your offer, but will give your letter consideration.

 

The costs applied for in any successful prosecution are normally somewhere between £120 - £150 so you might consider making an offer based on that knowledge. If they agree this will need to be paid in full immediately.

 

Good luck

 

Hello all,

 

Just to let you know that i followed your advice Old-CodJa and i have been successful. I wrote the letter explaining myself and stating how sorry i was and how a criminal record could spell the end of my career and hence my children's futures. I then recieved a call today and someone from TFL was asking for my email address which i provided.

 

They then emailed me saying TfL have agreed to settle out of court and asked me to pay a fine of £250. I am so grateful and even though this is alot of money, i think it is better than me having a criminal record and i would like to thank all of you guys have adviced me throughout this testing time. I have learnt my lesson and this wa a genuine mistake that will obviously never happen again. We do learn from our mistakes and i have learnt.

 

I love this forum and God bless all of you x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent, thanks for letting us know, really pleased for you.


If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done. Thanks for telling us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing that my posts are being removed mysteriously & without notification I've come to the conclusion that the site team feel I cannot contribute anything useful to this forum.

Therefore I shall not be posting again, I would like to leave thinking I may have helped in some small way a few people who have posted here looking for advice.

 

So long & all the best to the regular contributors.......you know who you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...