Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • @FTMDavethanks for guiding me step by step. I have captured the photos night time as well if you see they are not visible even in day time how can anyone see in the night
    • just to clarify one matter everyone....   the statement that 'all road markings within any private land/carpark are mere tarmac graffiti is quite correct.   for dedicated use bays - there has to be a clearly visible sign(s) if one parks in those bays, which must be covered by the relevant council planning permission for poles+signs and elsewhere there must be a sign that details their usage conditions/contract.   dx
    • Don't worry, we're getting there bit by bit.   Tomorrow evening I'll try to deal with your questions.   The photos you've taken are superb - they show the signs as tiny and not illuminated.    
    • Good thinking! I only requested the telephone hearing (in the body of the email) and will send the further note tomorrow to cover all bases!
    • @FTMDave i am attaching the photographs of the Alama park please have a look. Checking your previous post where you corrected some line and suggest some but i could not understand. Is it possible if you edit and delete irrelevant lines.    I have edited little bit but not sure what to add and what to look for   Mr XXX, of xxx and I am the Defendant against whom this claim is made. 1.1. I was the registered keeper of the vehicle XXX. 1.2. The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge they are true to the best of my information and belief.   INSUFFICIENT & CONFUSING SIGNAGE  This is likely to be one of your aces so will need a lot of work once you get photos.  The fleecers have also shown a plan where they claim there are signs (their WS post 12, PDF page 15 which you need to confront).   2. I confirm that i was the registered Keeper of the vehicle which is in question in this case and the vehicle was parked in Alma leisure centre Chesterfield. The vehicle was parked there because the driver went to McDonald’s for eat in (the bank statement proof exhibit 1).   3. There were no clear signs at the entrance nor in the car park, it was night time and weather was not clear as well.   3.  Even if the driver had seen the signs, they would have been extremely confusing.  A car is normally allowed to be parked for five hours, yet after midnight this is changed to one hour.  This begs the question for how long a motorist entering at 10pm for example is allowed to stay.  Is it for five hours until 3am or until 1am?   3.1. The PCN/NTK states "period of parking 00:02:05".  It is common sense that a couple of minutes was needed to enter the complex, find McDonald's and find a parking space, before the period of parking began, so it was likely the car entered the car park before midnight allowing the driver to park the car there for five hours.   4.  Even if the driver had seen the signage - they did not - the mention of a £100 charge is literally the last word on the last line of a long board of text.   4. I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all and this is my Witness Statement in support of my defence as already filed.     UNFAIR TERM   4.  In an interview with the local newspaper (exhibit XXX) Ms Ellie Berkeley, HX PCN administration team leader, said: “The five-hour maximum stay prevents workers from close by abusing the land and parking there for free, without using the shops on site" which makes sense.   5.  This therefore begs the question of why this limit is cut by a massive 80% after midnight when the cinema and eateries are still open.  The driver indeed ate at McDonald's.   6.  Ms Berkeley continued: "Five hours is sufficient time to visit the cinema and also eat at a restaurant".  Certainly five hours are sufficient.  One hour is not.    7.  I would maintain this is an unfair term under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 part 2 section 62 (6) ""A notice is unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations to the detriment of the consumer".  Such a term has absolutely nothing to do with efficient management of a car park and everything to do with trying to catch diners or cinema-goers out and thus have an excuse to issue PCNs.   NO KEEPER LIABILITY   5. The Particulars of Claim do not clarify in what capacity they believe I am liable but state that the Defendant is “liable as the driver or keeper” of the vehicle. This appears to be “fishing” for liability.  Is this really in the PoCs? - you need to look and find out. Where to look on PCN letter?   The rest of your section is about the use of POFA at airports which is completely irrelevant.    Adapt LFI's suggestions re POFA and keeper liability -   First is the fact that they must have a parking period and it is quite clear that entering and leaving the car park does not constitute a parking period since some of the time the motorist is either driving around looking for a parking spot then leaving the spot and driving to the exit. All that takes time so that is one fail.   The other fail is in their wording when they are trying to transfer the liability of the alleged debt from the driver to the keeper. They are supposed to include at Schedule 4 s9 [2][f] this "(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)". That in itself makes it non compliant but the fact that they haven't got a parking period means they haven't met the applicable conditions.   PROHIBITION  This deals with no stopping cases.  Yours in not no stopping so it is completely irrelevant.   LOCUS STANDI   You have quoted a different contract in a different place with a different PPC.  You need to read and try to find holes in the contract they produced (post 12, page 15 of the PDF for anyone looking in). What shall i add here   Adapt LFI's suggestions -   Looking at their contract, the names of the signatories and their positions in their respective  companies have been redacted. You do need strict proof of who actually signed. There is no specific authorisation from the Client to allow Court action in pursuit of non payers. In section 11 which is like an addendum it states" the Company shall provide parking control" but doesn't state if that includes legal pursuit as well and it does not appear to be signed.   ILLEGAL SIGNAGE   8. After checking, I have found out that there in NO planning permission granted for said signs, therefore making them illegal as lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under the Road Traffic Acts 1962 and 1991 and no contract can be performed where criminality is concerned.   LFI's suggestion -   They are supposed to comply with the Law and the IPC code of Conduct and they have done neither. The new Private Parking Code of Practice  draws attention to it as well  s14.1 [g]  "g) responsibility for obtaining relevant consents e.g. planning or advertising consents relating to signs."   ABUSE OF PROCESS  I've cut some bits out as the CoP hadn't been published when the fleecers went after you.  Are you sure the Unicorn Food Tax in the PoCs is £60? ( I couldn't understand this)   9. The Claimant seeks recovery of the original £100 parking charge plus an additional £60 described as “contractual costs and interest” or “debt collection costs”. No further justification or breakdown has been provided as required under Civil Procedure Rule 16.4.    9.1. As part of the provisions of the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019, on 07/02/2022 a new Code of Practice was published by the government, designed to prevent these “rogue” traders from "ripping people off" (the minister's words) with extra charges, which have been deemed unfair (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/privateparking-code-of-practice/private-parking-code-of-practice).    9.3. Section 9 of the new Code of Practice, regulates the matter of recovery costs: “The parking operator must not levy additional costs over and above the level of a parking charge or parking tariff as originally issued.”   9.2. Even before publication of the government’s Code of Practice, Parliament intended that private parking companies could not invent extra charges. PoFA Schedule 4, paragraph 4(5) states that “The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper is the amount specified in the notice to keeper” which in this case is £100.    9.4. Previous parking charge cases have found that the parking charge itself is at a level to include the costs of recovery ie: Parking Eye Ltd vs Beavis (2015) UKSC 67 which is the authority for recovery of the parking charge itself and no more, since that sum (£85) was held to already incorporate the costs of an automated private parking business model and the Supreme Court Judges held that a parking firm not in possession cannot plead any part of their case in damages. It is indisputable that an alleged “parking charge” penalty is a sum which the Supreme Court found is already inflated to more than comfortably cover all costs. The case provides a finding of fact by way of precedent, that the £85 (or up to a Trade Body ceiling of £100 depending on the parking firm) covers the costs of the letters. Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated ‘’Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones-Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates [...] in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared [...] the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.’’    9.5. In Claim numbers F0DP806M and F0DP201T, Britannia vs Crosby the courts went further in a landmark judgement in November 2019 which followed several parking charge claims being struck out in the area overseen by His Honour Judge Iain HamiltonDouglas Hughes GC, the Designated Civil Judge for Dorset, Hampshire, Isle of Wight & Wiltshire. District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ‘’It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in ParkingEye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''    9.6. The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.     Statement of Truth    Alma Leisure.pdf Alma leisure centre.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Not sure if Statue Barred


Shazzam
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3336 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

Hello

 

I have received a letter from Aktiv Kapital regarding an old debt they have managed to drag up.

 

I requested an SAR and they sent me the signed contract and photocopies of all the last few statements to GE Captial Bank

where I have made no payment and they have charged me all sorts of legal costs.

 

The last date on this document is 12/09/02 and this is not a payment I made but charges I incurred.

 

This debt is no longer on my recent credit report and one I had forgotten about to be honest.

 

Does this mean I would be ok sending a statue barred letter to them?

 

Any advice would be grateful, thank you.

It's just a waiting game.....

:p;):lol: 8-)

Nat West Won = £4008 03/07 :D

Prelim Letter to Cap One - 25/01/08

Rejection Letter to Cap One - 03/02/08

LBA to Cap One - 11/02/08

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Welcome - 25/01/08

Received Statements - 08/02/08

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for such a quick reply.. letter already drafted ready to print. Shall send it today hopefully they will leave me alone then.

It's just a waiting game.....

:p;):lol: 8-)

Nat West Won = £4008 03/07 :D

Prelim Letter to Cap One - 25/01/08

Rejection Letter to Cap One - 03/02/08

LBA to Cap One - 11/02/08

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Welcome - 25/01/08

Received Statements - 08/02/08

Link to post
Share on other sites

AK have purchased 100'00's of SB'd debt in the hope of fleecing people

that know no better

 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Ok so I sent them the letter = statue barred

 

they sent me one back saying that I admitted the debt back in 2009 when it belonged to West Cott.

 

I do remember writing letters a while ago when I was trying to sort out my debts saying I would pay £1 until further notice.

 

But this was not with Aktiv this was with someone else which seems to be West Cott.

 

Unfortunately I have looked back on all my files and I can't find the original letters I sent.

I lost lots of information years ago when my computer had a v nasty virus.

 

As they are saying the last payment was 2009 it is not statue barred.

 

But it is not on my credit file.

 

I believe it was and that would've been why I sent the letter in the first place, however it no longer is.

 

I'm not sure what to do,

 

I don't want to pay any of it as I feel it is a past debt which I believe is statue barred,

and they are playing a very naughty game trying to get the money from me.

 

If the debt was originally with West Cott then what does it have to do with Aktiv?

 

Cheers for any advice from you very helpful people.:???:

It's just a waiting game.....

:p;):lol: 8-)

Nat West Won = £4008 03/07 :D

Prelim Letter to Cap One - 25/01/08

Rejection Letter to Cap One - 03/02/08

LBA to Cap One - 11/02/08

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Welcome - 25/01/08

Received Statements - 08/02/08

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the last payment was in 2002 it doesn't matter what you wrote in 2009, six years had already past so it would have been SB then.

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but I paid £1 in 2009 to West Cott.

It's just a waiting game.....

:p;):lol: 8-)

Nat West Won = £4008 03/07 :D

Prelim Letter to Cap One - 25/01/08

Rejection Letter to Cap One - 03/02/08

LBA to Cap One - 11/02/08

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Welcome - 25/01/08

Received Statements - 08/02/08

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter.

 

Once the limitation period of six years (five in Scotland) has passed then nothing can restart the clock again.

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the statement they sent me it says

 

Date, Payment - Westcot Credit Services, followed by an amount

 

So according to them payments have been made through 2006-31/03/2009. I am going to go and try find out where I paid this from but I think that bank account is now closed. It doesn't say I paid only Westcot Credit Services paid.

 

I orginally defaulted on 23/09/02 and then the next payment is 31/10/06. Again on the statement is says Westcot Credit Services. According to this I then defaulted again 31/03/2009. Neither of these lengths of time are 6 years, I think this is what they arguing about.

 

Big thank you.

Edited by Shazzam

It's just a waiting game.....

:p;):lol: 8-)

Nat West Won = £4008 03/07 :D

Prelim Letter to Cap One - 25/01/08

Rejection Letter to Cap One - 03/02/08

LBA to Cap One - 11/02/08

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Welcome - 25/01/08

Received Statements - 08/02/08

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what I'd do without the advice from you guys on here. :-)

It's just a waiting game.....

:p;):lol: 8-)

Nat West Won = £4008 03/07 :D

Prelim Letter to Cap One - 25/01/08

Rejection Letter to Cap One - 03/02/08

LBA to Cap One - 11/02/08

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Welcome - 25/01/08

Received Statements - 08/02/08

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok so probable scenario is its drfopped off your CRA file

as it was defaulted ages ago, and fell off after 6yrs from the default.

paid or not.

 

and it looks probable that its not SB'd

 

now we need to start on them.

 

you say you have all the GE statements and mention 'legal' charges

 

please elaborate or scan those up

 

 

scan the required letters/agreements/sheets - as a picture[jpg] file

don't forget you can use a mobile phone or a digital camera too!!

or

convert existing PC files to PDF [office has an installable print to PDF option]

.

'

BUT......

ENSURE: remove all pers info inc. barcodes etc using paint program

but leave all figures and dates. {DO NOT USE A BIRO OR PEN]

.

goto one of the many free online pdf converter websites

it would be better to upload a multipage pdf if

you have many images too rather than many single pdfs

.

or if you have PDF as an installed printer drive use that

or use word and save as pdf

.

open a new msg box here

hit go advanced below the msg box

hit manage attachments below that box

hit the add files button on the top right

hit select files, navigate to your file on your pc

hit upload files

.

.

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

I had a catalogue debt with Littlewoods of £200 before I moved to this address in 2005.

 

Last year some random company started sending letters.

 

I stood my ground & didn't reply to them as I genuinely don't remember the debt.

 

Although I can't rule it out.

 

Until they rang one day over a year ago & I made the mistake of answering.

 

He kept trying to get me to 'make a payment today'

 

But I was under stress at the time & laughed at the guy & said I have been here 7 yrs now, take me to court.

 

Not heard anything since. Yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hello again,

 

@dk100uk

I am so sorry I didn't get round to completing your request.

 

I actually went off traveling to India for several months and only just got back.

 

I have managed to wade my way through a mountain of mail to find more letters from Aktiv :shock: lol!

 

However one dated 18/11/12 states '

We would like to confirm to you that we are still waiting for information to be supplied to ourselves from the original creditor.

This information is required by ourselves to resolve the query.

Your account with us continues to remain on hold, whilst we await this information.'

 

Then there is a letter from Tempus Solutions dated 05/02/2013 offering me a massive discount and only paying £122.26 and they pay £489.02!!!

This company is part of Aktiv Kapital.

This letter's reference is the same as the one they declare to be 'on hold.'

 

I then check my mail at my parents address (which was my base address for a while)

and find a letter from Nexis Credit Uk.

 

I looked them up and they are a new company from Jan 2012,

but according to Company checker it is run by one member.

 

This company states,

'Your account with our client Aktiv Kapital has been passed to our firm for collection and the balance shown above is now due.

I must inform that payment in full of this outstanding balance is required within 10 days in order to prevent further debt recovery action,

which may include a visit to your property.

 

This debt appears to have different reference number to the above mentioned letters.

 

I don't like the thought of someone turning up at my parents address and being all threatening to them as they are very old,

and with a bit of harrassment would get out a cheque book and pay whatever the bully was asking.

 

I was thinking of phoning them initially to take this address off their records,

but not willing to acknowledge this debt.

Or shall I just send them a copy of the 'doorstep visitor' letter and an address where they can contact me.

 

To be honest this letter was dated 21/03/13 and 10 days are now up.

I hope they (I mean he - the only member of this company) doesn't decide to visit.

 

Please could you advise me accordingly.

 

Thank you once again for all your help.

It's just a waiting game.....

:p;):lol: 8-)

Nat West Won = £4008 03/07 :D

Prelim Letter to Cap One - 25/01/08

Rejection Letter to Cap One - 03/02/08

LBA to Cap One - 11/02/08

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Welcome - 25/01/08

Received Statements - 08/02/08

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol! I like that answer. Feel like sending them that message in huge letters, these letters are so annoying. I know I ran from debts many years ago but surely they are dead and buried by now.

 

Thank you for your advice.

It's just a waiting game.....

:p;):lol: 8-)

Nat West Won = £4008 03/07 :D

Prelim Letter to Cap One - 25/01/08

Rejection Letter to Cap One - 03/02/08

LBA to Cap One - 11/02/08

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Welcome - 25/01/08

Received Statements - 08/02/08

Link to post
Share on other sites

god tempus and nexus

not heard those names in a while

they are both bottom feeders

 

and do nothing.

 

one man dirty raincoat lot.

 

they ARE NOT BAILIFFS

 

they have NO LEGAL POWERS

and even IF [very rare] chance they do doorstep

 

they would not be able to discuss the debt with your parents anyhow

 

its all part of the intimidation these companies use to fleece people.

 

tell you parents to tell them to bugger off their land.

 

discounted debt...as guessed moons ago, trying to fleece you

 

ignore!!

 

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

Thank all so much. This site has helped me so much and allowed me to help others.

Get off my land!! it is :-D shall tell my parents too.

It's just a waiting game.....

:p;):lol: 8-)

Nat West Won = £4008 03/07 :D

Prelim Letter to Cap One - 25/01/08

Rejection Letter to Cap One - 03/02/08

LBA to Cap One - 11/02/08

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Welcome - 25/01/08

Received Statements - 08/02/08

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...