Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. 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 r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. 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 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. 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. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • 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

Striking workers to lose tax credits


MARTIN3030
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4370 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

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

it will never work, how would they know who is on strike for a day, would take ages to catch up,

 

its a threat to stop pople striking.

Doctors next week my mothers op cancelled,

They earn to much for working tax credits anyway hahaha

goverment

Link to post
Share on other sites

it will never work, how would they know who is on strike for a day, would take ages to catch up,

 

its a threat to stop pople striking.

Doctors next week my mothers op cancelled,

They earn to much for working tax credits anyway hahaha

goverment

if you are entitled to working tax credit the company will get a special code which is then sent on via computer and benefit will be suspended immediately..this govt really takes the biscuit..they wont be happy until we are all working for v/little to no pay.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Imo slowly but surely they're constructing a slave state.

 

"Britons never, never, never shall be slaves."

 

Yeah, right....

 

yep but when are the great british public going to wake up and smell the coffee?....i fear for the future for children and grandchildren....the constant attacks on the rights of workers, welfare state, nhs, teachers, even the bloody police for chr**ts sake...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest amianne

But surely the general subsidising of wages by way of benefits has to stop.

How many times have I heard that people will only work the minimum hours as they know that benefits will bring their income up to what it would have been had they worked 35 hours in the week.

 

Then walking off a job just because they don't like change, doing no work whilst on strike yet expecting to be subsidised again to cover the loss of those wages.

 

When will the British people wake up and smell the coffee that hard work, and long hours is the only way forward.

 

The benefit system has made the British people soft and lazy.

 

Why should workers be subsidised by the other taxpayers if they fancy a few days off striking. If they want to strike, fine I have no objections to that, but I for one object to them being paid money by the rest of us to do so. Maybe it will make people think more before withdrawing their labour. If they can afford to strike fine, let the unions pay their lost wages instead.

 

No wonder people around the world see Britain as the soft option - we have been for far too long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That seems a harsh judgement on strikers if I might say so....do you not think that sometimes they are justified in taking action? And what if they are working long hard hours already but working conditions are dangerous, for instance? How can groups make employers take notice?

 

And what about the GPs? What do you think about their strike?

Link to post
Share on other sites

When will the British people wake up and smell the coffee that hard work, and long hours is the only way forward.

 

How can they work these long hours when companies are bringing in staff and cutting other employees work?

Link to post
Share on other sites

britain soft...of course...lets remove the right then to a free education.healthcare, child benefit, working tax credit, housing benefit. etc, etc, that'll keep the proles like us in our place.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to say I agree with amianne, if you feel that a strike is the way forward fine but dont expect to be paid while you are on strike, either by your employer or WTC. If you dont work you dont get paid and if you dont want to strike and your union has voted for it leave the union.

IMO striking is a form of blackmail.

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely the general subsidising of wages by way of benefits has to stop.

How many times have I heard that people will only work the minimum hours as they know that benefits will bring their income up to what it would have been had they worked 35 hours in the week.

 

Better to work some hours then none I would say, at least by working they are paying income tax into the system.

Then walking off a job just because they don't like change, doing no work whilst on strike yet expecting to be subsidised again to cover the loss of those wages.

 

When will the British people wake up and smell the coffee that hard work, and long hours is the only way forward.

Long hours maybe put pay a decent wage and we wouldnt have to claim WTC would we

 

The benefit system has made the British people soft and lazy.

Are all people on JSA, ESA and I.S lazy, I THINK NOT

 

Why should workers be subsidised by the other taxpayers if they fancy a few days off striking. If they want to strike, fine I have no objections to that, but I for one object to them being paid money by the rest of us to do so. Maybe it will make people think more before withdrawing their labour. If they can afford to strike fine, let the unions pay their lost wages instead

 

Everyone on any benefit are subsidised, where do you draw the line then

 

No wonder people around the world see Britain as the soft option - we have been for far too long.

 

So get rid off all benefits or just WTC and CTC then

Maybe docking one day from your working tax credits maybe if you strike, but suspending it.

I have just gone back into work, get a bit of working tax not much,

dont begrudge it me. The benefit system was there when I needed it I am neither selfish or lazy.

and if I went on strike then yes take one days working tax off me but not completely

No employer pays anyone to strike.

Edited by benidorm60
Link to post
Share on other sites

.

 

When will the British people wake up and smell the coffee that hard work, and long hours is the only way forward.

The benefit system has made the British people soft and lazy.

/QUOTE]

 

So those in work, should work long hard hours,

and those entitled to benefit are soft and lazy,

contrast here for sure, dont agree at all :(

 

and if a worker strikes then of course you shouldnt get paid,

it says working tax credit is paid for the first ten days of strike action

when is the last time we heard of a ten day strike anywhere

most are one day at the most, so the savings that are quoted I dont think so.

Edited by MIKEY DABODEE
Link to post
Share on other sites

One day or ten days shouldnt be paid, its your choice to strike. I dont disagree with people getting benefits if they are entitiled to them, but WTC should not be paid to strikers.

I remember where I worked once that the union called a strike and suggested that those who were not in the union and didnt want to strike donate their days wages ? I do sometimes wonder what planet these union officials are on.

And yes I did work and no I didnt donate my wages.

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it will never work, how would they know who is on strike for a day, would take ages to catch up,

 

its a threat to stop pople striking.

Doctors next week my mothers op cancelled,

They earn to much for working tax credits anyway hahaha

goverment

 

It'll be easier to administer than you think, that is if they don't go with the status quo and perform a u-turn on this policy. All they have to do is tweak PAYE such that, if an employee goes on strike, an indicator is attached to their (the employee's) tax records.

 

Not that I agree with this policy -- I'm personally 50/50 on this. In the days of old, if one went on strike, one wouldn't be remunerated. But on the other hand, the majority of people going on strike are likely to be low-paid public sector workers.

 

At least this is a one term government; short term pain an' all that. Hopefully.

Edited by nyfle
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that some posters seem to have forgotten that their rights as employees were only gained by strikes during the 19th century, Were they wrong? Do you not benefit from their choice to take this action?

 

IMHO I feel that this government is definitely draconian and going back to the days of the workhouse, but without any resources as they wouldn't fund them...........

 

As for employers finding it hard..... there are those who have it extremely easy have JSA claimants working for them on work experience schemes for nothing but the benefit they already receive........ back to the slave trade......

 

Whilst I do not agree with all strikes that happen I do not condemn those who choose to participate in them or those who decide to abstain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When will people realise tax credits (which cost more than any other benefit) are not subsidies to the workers. They are subsidies for employers that allow them to pay low wages. The taxpayer is not paying the worker they are paying the employer to pay low wages.

 

The minimum wage should be a living wage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

we in wales are already advocating the 'living wage' but the employers are of course screaming...it is in the consultation stage at the moment...imagine that employers will be lobbying hard not to get this introduced

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest amianne

One thing that has always made me wonder is why is it that strikes only occur when there is a union involved?

 

Not all employees are members of a union. How do those employees manage to settle disputes? I have never been in a union, never worked anywhere that there was a union. But we never had to withdraw our labour to 'force' employers to the table.

 

It is called consultation. Every year there was a annual report carried out on each employee. The basis of continuing employment was to ensure that you were a good employee. As for payrises, these were discussed individually with each employee. Those that went away unhappy, left the company to find better prospects elsewhere.

 

If the unions want to force people to give up work on their say so, then the unions should be responsible to pay their lost wages AND be left open for the employer to sue them for the disruption to the business.

 

Unions are a thing of the past, they have lost most of their teeth, thank goodness! Do we really want to go back to the days of the strikes of the 70's & 80's?

 

I strongly object that any of the money that I pay in tax & NIC should be paid to those who decide to walk out!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When will people realise tax credits (which cost more than any other benefit) are not subsidies to the workers. They are subsidies for employers that allow them to pay low wages. The taxpayer is not paying the worker they are paying the employer to pay low wages.

 

 

This is a crucial point.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...