Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Statute Barred Question


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4218 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

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Whilst having no bearing on the SB status so long as there was a clear 6 year gap in paying or acknowledging the debt in writing;-

 

You can only be defaulted on an account once, this default falls off your credit record after 6 years. If they re-registered the default they could be in breach of the ICO default guidelines and a complaint should be raised with the ICO.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you’ve paid nothing to any dca I wonder if it’s worth sending a sar to the original lender to get confirmation of last payment date. If it defaulted in 2001 then last payment could have been up to 6 months before they bothered to register the default at the cra’s. If it turns out there’s been a clear 6 year gap to the date of your link letter then they are stuffed. All they can do is ask nicely or beg for the money until you tell em to FO. Probably end up getting a huge discount offer through the post once they realise the score.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as i can see, there have been no payments made while Link have had the debt, and i would have thought if there had been payments made Link would use that, and not the fact that i sent a letter to say the debt cannot be statute barred, but thats only my way of thinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi everybody. ive had a reply from Link saying all the imformation they have sent, is all the imformation they had on me. They suggest sending Sar to Northern Rock for detail of the last payment made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A quedtion. This account must be at least 13 years old, probably longer. Supposing after all the upheaval NR have been through, and being bought out by Vrgin, NR no longer had any record of the account, where would i stand with Link, or doesn't that sort of thing happen?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what we don't know, and hoping it comes to light when NR get Sar letter. The original loan was for £5000, i payed nearly £6000 which would have taken around 3 and a half years, and Link say i defaulted in 2001, and figures show that too, but there is another default notice in August 2005. I can't pretend i understand half of what Link sent me regarding Sar request, i don't understand half of it. If it was defaulted in 2001 then i'm pretty sure nothing would have been payed after then, NR was the botton card that brought the pack down, and there is nothing showing i payed anything after 2001, just there is no exact date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds more and More strange, Have no payments been made since 2001 to any company dealing with this debt?????

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

There are no payments showing to Link, and before them was a company called Abbey, but as far as i can remember, they weren't around long before Link came along. between 2003 and 2006 i lost everything, house, family, the works really, it wouldn't have been feasible to have paid anybody anything the mess i was in

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok nothing ventured nothing gained let me read through all this again, then I''ll draft a letter for you.

 

Ok,

 

The Letter that follows is to be sent recorded delivery to the Compliance Manager at Link.

 

Ref:xxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

I refer to the debt for £xxxxxx which you allege is owed by me, please take note I do not acknowledge

any debt to Link or any company you may claim to represent.

 

I have researched my credit history and taken advice on this matter and have concluded that this alleged

debt is statute barred and I will therefore not now or in the future make any payment or offer of payment.

 

I am fully aware of the OFT Guidance on Debt Collection 2003/2011 and the sections regarding the pursuit of statute barred debt.

 

I now require you to cease processing or storing all data relating to me.

 

Should you wish to dispute this matter please be aware that the burden of irrefutable proof that this matter is not statute barred lays with Link, I do not have to provide proof of this statement.

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

There is one thing that kind of worries me. Before i posted on here i did some homework on Link financial, not a nice company by any stretch of the imagination, so why haven't i seen the nasty side to them. no threatening letters, phone calls stopped, it just doesn't seem like them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the debt is stat barred I think, SEND THE LETTER DRAFTED!!!!!!!!!!!:madgrin:

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

  • 1 month later...

Hi everybody, hope you'll forgive me for not keeping in touch the past couple of months or so, my computer decided to pack up on me, so had to save a bit of money to replace it In the time ive been away its been reasonably quiet, only one letter from link. It seemed like bog standard letter, "ignoring this letter will not make this debt go away", and please phone as soon as possible to discuss payment options etc. It finished by saying if i don't make an offer to repay this account they will check my credit rating held by the credit agencies to ascertain how they can best ensure this debt is repaid.

I replied by saying i am not ignoring a debt i believe is statute barred, and is no longer collectable, and i have no intention of phoning anybody to do with link financial. I had also enclosed a letter to them that there own data controller sent me suggesting i sarred North

ern Rock for any imformation i still might need, i.e. date of final payment.I told them i would be in toch with them as soon as i had heard from Northen Rock.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My brother sarred Northen Rock on 22/08/12, and it was delivered the following day, i haven't had anything from them, and there 40 days runs out in 2 days. My question has to be, what happens if Northen Rock don't reply, as seems highly likely. How can Link decide when the debt became statute barred if the don't know the date of the final payment?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi welcome back,

 

Why not phone NR and get the details of the last payment?

Have you checked your credit reference files, this will show

the default date on the account so the statute barred date can

be some months prior to that date.

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

If NR don't reply to the SAR it gets reported to the ICO.

As suggested phone NR for the date of last payment or

check credit files which may actually show the date of last

payment (often shown as data last delinquent).

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

hiya Brig, nice to be back. Sometime back i sent Link a prove it letter, they didn't reply, BUT... i got caught out once and answered one of there calls. One of there very nice gorillas ended up shouting down the phone that "they dont need a prove it letter because i defaulted in 2001", and thats also what it says in the imformation Link sent when i sarred them. there is no date as to when the debt started,but i can narrow it down to be no later than 1995. The ammount payed was nearly £6000, that equated to 30 months payments. so at worst the final payment would be before 2000. Links data is mainly double dutch to me, but if they were so sure they had a cast iron case, why, in 2 years haven't they threatenned me with court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok send this letter it can do a lot of good an absolutely no harm.

 

To the Compliance Mnager

Link Financial.

 

Ref: as on their letter.

 

I refer to your letter dated xx xx xxxx in which you press for me to make payment in regard to a debt for £xxxxxx which you allege is owed by me, please note I do NOT acknowledge any debt to Link or any company you may claim to represent.

 

FORMAL DECLARATION.

 

I have researche this alleged debt and have concluded that any such matter is STATUTE BARRED and I will not now or at any time in the future make any payment or offer of payment.

I have notified you previously of the status of the allged debt which you have ignored, your continued pursuit of this matter now amounts to harassment.

I refer you to the OFT Guidance on Debt Collection 2003 amended October 2011 section 2.14 (B ) para. 4;

Continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying because the debt is statute barred, this could amount to harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Adminitration of Justice Act 1970

I now demand that your company ceases to store or process any data relating to me.

No further correspondence will be entered into any any further communcation by any method by Link will be reported to the regulatory bodies and a complaint of harassment WILL be made with out further reference to link.

Send it recorded and track delivery.

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

Well no turning back now, Link will get the letter before 1pm tomorrow, then the fun will start, cant see Link giving up over 12 thousand very easily. What happens regarding Northern Rock? if we dont have date of last payment, where do we go?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...