Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ?  Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account 4546384809766042. The defendant faild 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 as not been compiled with. The dbt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as 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 issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?  Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking 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.  It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment?  May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
    • Just an update for all. I received about a letter every other week, increasing in threat levels. Then I hadn't had one for a about two weeks, then Saturday received a carbon copy of the very first letter they sent me in February. Made me laugh, rinse and repeat. 
    • So, your response was not received by the SCP as you did not send it with a valid stamp. Therefore, from my two option in post #14, the first option is the only one available to you, but you do not have the option of asking to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level as the reason the SCP did not receive your response was down to you. Here's a reminder of what to do: Respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box state that you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. This is a tried and tested method to deal with your problem and is almost always successful. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor.. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary. If you are required to attend, your case will be taken out of the SJ procedure and you will be given a date for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court. If that is the way they do it in the area involved you will have to attend, see the prosecutor and offer your "deal" in person. 
    • what device are you using? copy all the questions then come here to this thread and paste them. then answer each question click on red give answers here. when done  hit submit reply bottom right.  
    • No because it's locked. You need to copy the relevant part of the questionnaire and paste it into this thread. That way you can overwrite. HB
  • 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

To pay or not to pay a PCN- the scary advice I got


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4204 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

OK dx100uk.....thanks for that.....deep breath.....I am going to sleep on this...(today being a very bad day all round) and ( i hope) wake up tomorrow feeling more angry than scared! Thanks to everyone for all the much needed advice and support. I will keep this forum posted of what happens next since i am sure that many are reading this even if they are not posting comments etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I know i once had a county court claim in the small claims division awarded against somebody who didn't pay rent in a house I was letting whilst abroad,

 

Yes! Exactly correct if you are owed money for goods/services. Like Michael Brown said in his post, your friend must work for a legit company who provides goods/services, and is talking about that. He is confused over your parking charge as he thinks it is a real penalty which you have to pay, which it is not.

 

Court proceedings are fine for real debts, and should be taken seriously - but your parking charge in not, never has been, and never will be a debt. Therefore the people begging for your money are in no position whatsoever to sue you for it.

 

There is no debt - just a request for you to donate to their coffers. DON'T.

 

Expect a chain of scary letters. Like your friend, they will use words like bailiffs, court, CCJ - all a ruse to frighten you. Do not waver - ignore them completely and they will give up - and post back here if you are wavering. Remember, if they did try and sue you for their completely made up charge, you can always pay them at that stage. (It's won't happen of course.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Other advice has been to write to them along the lines of: as it is not a penalty I deny any debt is owed. however i enclose a Postal Order for £12 being the cost of postage, DVLA registered keeper details retrieval and £8 (that being the cost of parking for longer than 2 hours) to cover the losses to the landowner, and this represents my full and final settlement. If you believe you are entitled to more you should take your claim to court where I will defend.

 

This would mean their losses are zero and i have been reasonable. Furthermore i have learnt that an overstay at the car park would be trepass and the landowner would need to sue for trespass, not Parking Eye who only manage the car park, and they could in any case only sue for damages caused.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion you are taking this and their rip-off sсam far too seriously.

 

People like you are what makes them rich.

 

Any chance of sending me some money too?

 

If you do, I promise not to take you to Court either. Thats fair, is it not?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, if you want to donate £20 to the cause go ahead. You don't owe them anything, you don't have to pay their DVLA fee or postage costs, and they can't make you pay. But if you're feeling kindly towards them and are in a generous mood, then give your wages away.

 

While you're in the process of freely donating to these bullying parasites, perhaps you could spare a thought for the sick, hungry and homeless too...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha..ha....yes I possibly might if you had sent me a letter to my home address informing me I had contravened some regulation which had been posted an i had ignored.

 

Like the majority of people i am taking it seriously. At least i have not just paid it but have joined these forums to get advice and the above suggested letter was one piece of advice on another forum. To my eyes it seems fair because i did not pay the £8 parking charge in the first place (as i was not aware there was one)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Other advice has been to write to them along the lines of: as it is not a penalty I deny any debt is owed. however i enclose a Postal Order for £12 being the cost of postage, DVLA registered keeper details retrieval and £8 (that being the cost of parking for longer than 2 hours) to cover the losses to the landowner, and this represents my full and final settlement. If you believe you are entitled to more you should take your claim to court where I will defend.

.

I agree with Tony P that you are taking this far too seriously, and personally I would happily ignore them completely.

 

However, equally I recognise that you are going to feel more comfortable taking the action you propose. It won't harm your position (just your wallet) and at the end of the day it has to be your decision

Link to post
Share on other sites

Other advice has been to write to them along the lines of: as it is not a penalty I deny any debt is owed. however i enclose a Postal Order for £12 being the cost of postage, DVLA registered keeper details retrieval and £8 (that being the cost of parking for longer than 2 hours) to cover the losses to the landowner, and this represents my full and final settlement. If you believe you are entitled to more you should take your claim to court where I will defend.

 

This would mean their losses are zero and i have been reasonable. Furthermore i have learnt that an overstay at the car park would be trepass and the landowner would need to sue for trespass, not Parking Eye who only manage the car park, and they could in any case only sue for damages caused.

 

I appreciate that you want to do what you feel is law abiding and my relative had just these sort of doubts.

To convince them to ignore it I offered to pay whatever a court awarded in the highly unlikely event it went that far. And in the end it didn't.

 

Like the others have said you're taking this far much to heart and at the moment they're succeeding with their attempts to pressure you.

File the letters away and forget about it. Trust us, they'll go away soon enough and you'll look back and wonder what you were so worried about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha...ha....very amusing, and the answer is of course no! Asking for £12 on a forum is hardly equates to the PCN now does it? It is also not helpful or constructive advice like many of the comments on here are. At the end of the day it is my decision and in some ways comments like yours are also 'bullying' because they are belittling what I have written as a possible option. That option was suggested to me in good faith on a similar forum. I wanted to get a consensus of viewpoints.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha...ha....very amusing, and the answer is of course no! Asking for £12 on a forum is hardly equates to the PCN now does it? It is also not helpful or constructive advice like many of the comments on here are. At the end of the day it is my decision and in some ways comments like yours are also 'bullying' because they are belittling what I have written as a possible option. That option was suggested to me in good faith on a similar forum. I wanted to get a consensus of viewpoints.

 

No offence was meant and I am certainly not a bully.

You are right. The decision is yours.

You must do whatever you think is best.

 

My advice would be to ignore them. But that's all it is. Advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact is, you weren't given a PCN, just a request for a donation. So it IS the same as being asked for £12 on a forum.

 

They have no more power to make you pay some demand they made up than anyone does. This isn't just clever talk - it is a truth, and hopefully sheds some light on the nature of this "charge". You must get your head around the fact that there is not, and never has been, any debt or obligation to pay or deal with these people whatsoever.

 

And if you think Freaky's jokey request for £12 was bullying, wait until you get the letters from this parking company and see how they talk to you! They will be the ones genuinely bullying you - and you want to give them some of your money out of some sense of obligation? Come on!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must disagree with some of the posts, unfortunately there are numerous cases where parking companies have taken people to court and won, the high court ruling Arthur v Anker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_%26_Another_v_Anker_%26_Another) would seem to imply that within reasons, parking charges can be recoverable. Although this was a clamping case, the sanme principals apply.

 

Although in Vine v Watlham Forest, a high court overturned the decision of a county court saying that the charge in that case was not recoverable, the main reason being as the judge did state the person did not see the sign therefore could not have enteted into a contract, so any fine/charge was not recoverable. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vine_v_London_Borough_of_Waltham_Forest)

 

Of course the law in this area is very grey, (and clamping will be outlawed soon anyway), and there are many reasons why a charge may not be recoverable, of course it is quite likelye that any company will not pursue people throuigh court anyway.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I should disagree with the statement "numerous". This from a posting on another forum:-

 

 

"In the lead up to the Protection of Freedoms Act (2012), the Government carried out an impact assessment. During this, the BPA claimed that, of the 1.8 million private parking tickets issued annually, some 36,000 ended up as County Court Claims. They therefore persuaded the honourable members that the introduction of Schedule 4, Clause 56, would have the impact of reducing the number of court cases.

 

I've now had an answer back from the Ministry of Justice, following an FoI request, and these are their figures for 01/01/2011 - 31/12/2011:

 

Number of Money Claims issued by AOS scheme members = 845

 

Number of those which proceeded to a hearing in front of a Judge = 49

 

Number of above resulting in award to Claimant = 24

 

(These figures may be a slight undercount due to issues with typographical errors by individual Court staff, but are broadly correct, allowing for the fact that some may not relate to parking issues)

 

So: We can accurately calculate percentages as follows:-

 

Chances of a PPC ticket resulting in a Court Claim = 845/1.8m = 0.047%

 

Chances of actually going to Court = 49/1.8m = 0.0027%

 

Chances of losing in Court = 0.0013%"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont believe that there have only been 49 cases before a judge, its not clear what does the 36,000 figure refers to ?

 

But it does through up another statistic that nearly half of claims bought by parking companies are succesful, this figure appear about right to me.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 36,000 figure was an estimate by the BPA in their submission to Parliament, but when somebody actually made some proper research ( via the FOI request) then that figure turns out just to be 845.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont believe that there have only been 49 cases before a judge, its not clear what does the 36,000 figure refers to ?

 

But it does through up another statistic that nearly half of claims bought by parking companies are succesful, this figure appear about right to me.

 

Andy

 

 

But look at the very tiny percentage of cases that actually get to court and the even small percentage that are successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im certainly not defending parking companies juts pointing out that if/when they do pursue action in court they have been resonably succesful. Im not going to comment on the statistics further as they dont realy make sense to me and I doubt their accuracy.

 

The CAG forum is full of similar threads where contributors tell posters advice normally along the lines of just ignore which usually works out well but sometimes does result in court action where the poster loses and is some what annoyed by the advice given.

 

By advice would be not to ignore correspondence but answer witha firm denial but be prepared for any possible court action (however unlikely).

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CAG forum is full of similar threads where contributors tell posters advice normally along the lines of just ignore which usually works out well but sometimes does result in court action where the poster loses and is some what annoyed by the advice given.

 

I can't recall a single one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...