Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for that, Bazza. It sheds some more light on things but I’m still by no means sure of the OP’s father’s likelihood of successfully defending the charge. This in particular from the guidance stands out me: He does not meet all the s88 criteria. S88 is clear and unambiguous: It makes no provision for either the driver or a medical professional to make a judgement on his fitness to drive under s88. S92(4) and the June 2013 guidance you mention defines in what circumstances the SoS must issue a licence. It does no modify s88 in any way. However, delving further I have noticed that the DVLA provides a service where the driver can enter a relevant medical condition to obtain the correct documentation to apply for a licence: https://www.gov.uk/health-conditions-and-driving/find-condition-online I haven’t followed this through because I don’ have the answers that the OP’s father would give to the questions they will ask and in any case it requires the input of personal information and I don’t want to cause complications with my driving licence. It is possible, however, that the end result (apart from providing the necessary forms) is a “Yes/No” answer to whether the driver can continue to drive (courtesy of s88). With that in mind, I should think at  the very least the OP’s father should have completed that process but there is no mention that he has. The Sleep Apnoea Trust gives some useful guidance on driving and SA: https://sleep-apnoea-trust.org/driving-and-sleep-apnoea/detailed-guidance-to-uk-drivers-with-sleep-apnoea/ I know nothing about SA at all and found It interesting to learn that there are various “grades” of the condition. But the significant thing which struck me is that it is only the least trivial version that does not require a driver to report his condition to the DVLA. But more significant than that is that the SA Trust makes no mention of continuing to drive once the condition has been reported. The danger here is that the court will simply deconstruct s88 and reach the same conclusion that I have. I accept, having looked at the DVLA guidance, that there may be (as far as they are concerned) scope for s88 to apply contrary to the conditions stated in the legislation. Firstly, we don’ know whether there is and secondly we don’t know whether the OP’s father would qualify to take advantage of it. Of course he could argue that he need no have reported his condition. The SA trust certainly emphasises that the condition should not be reported until a formal detailed diagnosis is obtained. But the fact is he did report it. As soon as he does that, as far as I can see,  s88 is no longer available to him. Certainly as it stands I maintain my opinion that he was not allowed to continue driving under s88. The only way I would change this is to see the end result of the DVLA exercise I mentioned above. If that said he could continue driving he would have a defence to the charge. Without it I am not confident.  
    • Right, my friend has just called me. He has indeed had to cancel bookings in the past from his end. There is a specific number for Booking.com that he calls.   After that Booking.com jump into action and contact you re refund and/or alternative accommodation. I suppose it's all logical - the party cancelling the booking has to inform Booking.com. So the gite owner needs to contact Booking.com on the cancellation number.
    • they are not FINES. you totally ignore all the silly fake civil restorative letters. they are totally powerless just the same as any DCA on any old debt. might be an idea to go have a chat with your GP in confidence as you recognise whats going on. dx  
    • pinging @Man in the middle looks to me you are on the correct track, you shouldn't need a sols. Programmable Search Engine (google.com) clickme^^ thread title updated dx  
  • 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

statutory demand under section 268 1st credit finance


francis7168
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4257 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

i have been served today with the a statutory demand, by 1st credit,

trading as connaught collections, and given me 18 days to reply to the notice sent recorded delivery,

and demand for payment of £3800 ,

 

this is a credit card debt, which was placed in legal dispute with bank of scotland 2 years ago,

after i had the account audited by a claims management company,

 

it would seem the bank of scotland have sold the debt on yet again,

But this is first time i have been issued with this,

my problem is i can no longer get any contact from the claims management company

and i am in a real panic over this, and i really not sure what to do next,

i would be very grateful for some advice,

 

as some say the statutory demand is another form of a threat,

but i am taking this serious, as they advise me i have to apply to the courts,

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi there really need some help and advice,

recorded delivery today given me 18 days to reply to a statutory demand under section 268(1)(a) of the insolvency act 1986

debt for liquidated sum payable immediately,

 

this was issued by 1st credit finance ltd, trading as connaught collections,

 

its in relation to a credit card debt for £3800, t

 

he debt was with the bank of scotland,

 

and has been in legal dispute for some 18 months,

since i had the account audited by a claims management company regulated by minstry of justice,

its quite clear bank of scotland have sold the debt on,

 

my concern is i have not been able to get any contact from my claims management company,

and i have 18 days to respond to this,

 

i would love some advice on how to go forward with this,

Link to post
Share on other sites

what were the CMC doing ??

 

investagting PPI reclaim or one of these spoofers that told you the CCA was un-en?

 

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

hi there,

i have had this account for some 15 years or more,

i had the accounts looked into for ppi as well as over charging,

 

the cmc found that i had been over charged from interest rates to, late payment charges etc etc, and over a long period of time,

 

so the dispute started with asking for copies of orginal agreement etc,

and to be honest i have had 18 months or so of non stop harrasment from the bank of scotland,

Link to post
Share on other sites

well dump the CMC as you can do what they do for free!!

 

anyhow.

 

you'll need to set aside the SD.

 

ideally and under current laws the SD must be attempted to be served IN PERSON to you?

 

had any doorsteppers?

 

not par chance got all the statements going back to its birth have you?

 

i've alerted you thread

 

me thinks this is a case of an SD beig used as a debt collection tool which is not on

 

however you'll still need to set it aside.

 

i've moved your thread to the legal forum

 

plenty of SD threads here to read or type in set aside SD

 

in our search top right.

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

hi many thanks for the info,

 

and yes i had all the statements and original agreements, going back to the start,

 

these were given to the cmc, and reason for the dispute, the stat notice was send recorded delivery via courier,

i have had some door knockers but they were warned off ages ago,

as i never made or agreed to an appointment,

as they got the standard warning letters to this fact,

i agree with you

 

i will have to get this set aside,

and i assume at the court they list,

i was just not sure what to say,

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok francis the troopswill pick this up in the morning

 

you say you 'had' all the statements...still got them?

 

they could be useful for reclaiming and a counter claim i think

 

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

hi,

in regard to the statements,

 

the cmc company has all the paperwork, and i am chasing the company to find out whats going on,

 

i assume i have 18 working days to submit the set aside with the court,

would you advise seeking a solictor to word the set aside

 

my other concern is that is states i need to reply to this within 18 days,

and also reads like i have to advise 1st finance to what i am doing,

 

is there a legal requirement that i have to advise 1st finance ,

or just the court, as far as i am concerned i am still dealing with bank of scotland and not 1st finance,

as i have not even been advised by bank of scotland of selling the debt,

Link to post
Share on other sites

i have downloaded yours forms to have this set aside, your site is superb, i am just really not sure what to say in terms of defence,

 

ok francis

 

the w/end will be a bit quiet

 

but if you hit an issue

just click the report triangle below your msg

 

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

We could do with some help from you.

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

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

1st Credit were well known for issuing stat demand and got a warning back in 2009 for the way in which they did it....more recently at the slightest hint of a dispute (which you clearly have and hopefully have documented) they normally step away and withdraw the demand. Although I detest this practice, if you contact them (and I would only suggest you ringing them if you can record the calls) I would state that this has been the subject of a dispute since XXXX which has NOT been resolved. IF you apply to set aside the demand in this situation then they will withdraw, to save you some time, you can either call the person named on the demand (but record the call) or drop them an email stating this.

 

Dear Sir / Madam

 

I have on (date) been served with a statutory demand.

 

It is my intention to set this aside at my local court, What I find most disconcerting is that it seems the original creditor have NOT made you aware of a major dispute that was highlighted back on (date).

 

If I do not hear from you within 7 days of the date of this (letter/email) I will have no hesitation in producing both this correspondence and details of the dispute when the issue of costs arises.

 

I trust this makes my position completely clear and I await your reply which should be dealt with in the most timely of manners.

 

Yours faithfully

 

(don't hand sign if writing by post and do send recorded)

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi there many thanks for the help, i think i will e-mail your letter in, and take your advice, my major concern is that the cmc who have been acting on my behalf have all the details and records in relation to this, i have now made contact with the minstry of justice as i can no longer seem to get

any contact from this cmc company, can i also check with you with the wording below,

 

It is my intention to set this aside at my local court, What I find most disconcerting is that it seems the original creditor have NOT made you aware of a major dispute that was highlighted back on (date).

 

is the date above the date that 1st credit took over my account from bank of scotland, as stated on the stat demand, or the date i started the disbute with bank of scotland,

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi i have the form, and going to start filling in tonight, first time for me, i am sending the letter you posted on here me them via recorded

delivery, thank for the court list very helpful, i will come back re the form if i run into trouble, thank you so much for the advice and help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Francis,

 

I emailed the letter above from 42 Man, last Monday and got this letter through the post from Connaughts:

 

"I write further to your XX October 2012 electronic Mail in realtion to the above matter.

 

The contents have been noted, and we confirm that we formally withdraw the XX September 2012, and would advise that we are not aware of any dispute in the mattter.

 

I would be grateful if you could forward me details of your dispute so in turn I may make enquiries of the origional creditor.

 

We confirm that no further action will be taken against you by us until the matter has been resolved.".... and the bad grammar is not mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...