Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you. Such a good point. They did issue all 3 before I paid though. I only paid one because I didn’t have proof of parking that time, only for two others.    Unfortunately no proof of my appeal as it was just submitted through a form on their website and no copy was sent to me. I only have the reply. I believe I just put something like “we made the honest mistake of using the incorrect parking area on the app” and that’s it. Thanks again for your help. 
    • They are absolute chuckleheads. You paid but because you entered a different car park site also belonging to them they are pursuing you despite them knowing what you had done. It would be very obvious to everyone, including Alliance that your car could not have been in two places at the same time. Thank you for posting the PCN so quickly making it a pity that you appealed since there are so many things wrong with it that you as keeper are not liable to pay the charge. They rarely accept appeals since that would mean they lose money but they have virtually no chance of beating you in Court. Very unlikely that they will take you to Court given the circumstances. Just in case you didn't out yourself as the driver could you please post up your appeal.
    • Jasowter I hope that common sense prevails with Iceland and the whole matter can be successfully ended. I would perhaps not have used a spell checker just to prove the dyslexia 🙂 though it may have made it more difficult to read. I noticed that you haven't uploaded the original PCN .Might not be necessary if the nes from Iceland is good. Otherwise perhaps you could get your son to do it by following the upload instructions so that we can appeal again with the extra ammunition provided by the PCN. Most of them rarely manage to get the wording right which means that you as the keeper are not liable to pay the charge-only the driver is and they do not know the name and address of the driver. So that would put you both in the clear if the PCN is non compliant.
    • Thank you so much. Yes, I wish I had done my research and not paid. It's all for the same car park. Here is one of the original PCNs, they are all the same bar different dates. PCN-22.03.24-1.pdf PCN-22.03.24-2.pdf
    • Hi Clou, Welcome to the Forum and thank you for reading first before you posted. There seems to be many problems with Cornwall and getting a signal to use your a phone which could be why these parking companies don't use alternatives. It is a shame you paid the first one as you would probably have not had to pay that one either.  Was the car park at which you paid the same parking company as the one sending you these PCNs? On the subject of PCNs could you please post them up so we can see if they comply with the Act.
  • 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

Link and their old charging order...possibly long winded.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4338 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

Many years ago (about 2004) me and my now ex-husband got a loan for £7k to buy a new bathroom and kitchen for the house we then owned.

 

The loan was through Welcome Finance.

 

After a few payments we got in to difficulty,

 

Link Financial took over and very, very quickly got a charging order on the house.

 

I would, at a best estimate, say this was about April 2006.

 

In 2009 I left my (ex) husband and the house was sold in 2010.

The house didn't sell for enough so Link never received a penny.

 

Just yesterday they called me and asked me for my address.

They only told me they were called Link and that was about it.

Of course, I refused on the basis that I haven't a clue who they are and I wasn't giving my address to a stranger on the phone.

 

I don't understand charging orders that are no longer charging orders so I'm not sure of the statute barred rules on this.

 

They last received a payment 2005 or early 2006 and nothing since.

 

I have never spoken to Link and I can guarantee my ex hasn't either.

 

he declared himself bankrupt about 2 1/2 years ago so they won't be bugging him (well, they may be....Link don't seem to mind, do they?)

 

Does the fact they had an order sat on the house for 4 years mean the SB clock began after the house was sold or does it still start from the time of the last payment.

 

This was originally an unsecured loan.

 

Link cleverly turned in to a secured loan via a charging order.

 

However now I have no property what exactly is this loan now?

 

Confused. Any help would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Statute barred = no payment or acknowledgment in writting fo 6 clear years,

the best route forward now is to check your credit reference files, this will show

the status of the debt.

My guess is that this is statute barred or nearly so and Link are chancing their

arm.

If the CO was in place when the house was sold then link would have been paiid.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CO has now reverted back from a secure loan to an unsecured loan. For them to get a CO they would have needed to have obtained a CCJ first... whose name was the CCJ in? Because if it was just in his his bankruptcy would have included it & it's too late now for them to chase you if you were jointly liable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just checked my credit file and under "Court Info" which shows CCJ's there isn't one showing for this...

.nor do Link show up.

Or a charging order.

 

Welcome are showing up though.

Got my dates wrong and it's from October 2007. So, it's no where near SB.

 

Just confused as to why nothing else is showing up for this?

 

The file is being updated every month though.

 

Hmmmm....I can't remember getting a CCJ but they definitely had a charging order.

I remember trying to re-mortgage and I couldn't get one because of it.

 

they haven't had a payment since January 2008 and I haven't spoke to them in all this time.

If, and when, they find out where I am living and send me a letter I will write to them and sort something out.

Glad to know it's classed as un-secure again though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Statute barred = no payment or acknowledgment in writting fo 6 clear years,

the best route forward now is to check your credit reference files, this will show

the status of the debt.

My guess is that this is statute barred or nearly so and Link are chancing their

arm.

If the CO was in place when the house was sold then link would have been paiid.

 

The CO was in place when the house was sold.

 

However, my other half returned the keys to the mortgage company who then sold the property at auction.

This was to save repossession I think.

 

the mortgage company massively undersold the house (it was worth £125,000. They sold it for £65,000).

 

I know they should not have done this but hey-ho.

 

So they got their money but nobody else did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh as it's Welcome the answer is Welcome exist only to collect outstanding book

debts and do not take new business and are working through loads of accounts in the hope

of collecting.

Do nothing until link put all in writting.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember getting a CCJ but they definitely had a charging order. I remember trying to re-mortgage and I couldn't get one because of it.
Could your husband have entered a voluntary charging order? In which case a CCJ wouldn't have been needed.

 

Were you both signatories to the loan?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh...just looked in "financial associates" and Link are showing up, in my ex's name, from 2004.

 

Maybe it is this one rather than Welcome....will have to wait and see.

 

It sounds more probable as we had the charging order before 2007.

 

I have confused myself!

 

My original post is more likely what Link are chasing.

 

Nothing on my credit file about this, just under my ex's name.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could your husband have entered a voluntary charging order? In which case a CCJ wouldn't have been needed.

 

Were you both signatories to the loan?

 

No, he wouldn't have done that and yes, we were both on the loan (his name first). This has got to be Link from 2004 rather than Welcome from 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have thought about doing that as I am sure there is PPI on the loan.

That'll just be taken off the loan amount owed so I haven't bothered....yet.

 

Like I said, I'm not too sure this is Welcome.

 

Welcome were added 2007.

 

Link were added (although in my ex's name) in 2004.

 

Not sure who it is but I am digging around.

 

It could well be GE Money and we had a loan from them as lots of work needed doing when we first moved in.

 

Should I SAR GE Money or just wait for Link to write to me.

 

Don't really want to play a guessing game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My advice is to do the SARs it's likely this will be

the only way given the time scale to get to know

what's what.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okey dokey. Will send them off on Friday. Does it not matter that I haven't got a reference number....? Do I just put my old address (the one they originally had)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes give as much historic info as you can.

 

Address the SARs to the Data Controller.

rd them so you can check delivery date the

40 days start on the day they receive the

request.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

i bet they will owe you/!!

 

link up to their usual spoofing antics i see

 

and stay off that phone too!

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

why not check www.trustonline.org.uk

 

to be sure too on that CO.?

 

not sure it it will help though?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There definitely was a charging order as it prevented us re-mortgaging at the time. It was Link too. I remember it clearly :) The CO doesn't exist anymore as I don't own a home :)

 

I don't ever speak to these people, but they called me, didn't recognise the number so answered. This is the first time I have spoken to them and won't be doing it again. They were all friendly and everything :D Almost begging me for details. I let them put me on hold then I hung up. They haven't called again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the CO is dead and buried, get those SARs sent asap.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...