Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sending you a big hug. I’m sorry your going through this. The letters they send sound aweful, and the waiting game for them to stop. But these guys seem so knowledgable and these letters should stop. Hang in there, and keep in touch. Don’t feel alone 
    • In my time I've never seen a payout/commission from a PPC to a landlord/MA. Normally the installation of all the cameras/payment of warden patrols etc is free but PPCs keep 100% of the ticket revenue. Not saying it doesn't happen mind. I've done some more digging on this: Remember, what your lease doesn't say is just as important as what it does say. If your lease doesn't mention a parking scheme/employment of a PPC/Paying PCNs etc you're under no legal obligation to play along to the PPC's or the MA's "Terms and conditions". I highly doubt your lease had a variation in place to bring in this permit system. Your lease will likely have a "quiet enjoyment" clause for your demised space and the common areas and having to fight a PPC/MA just to park would breach that. Your lease has supremacy of contract, but I do agree it's worth keeping cool and not parking there (and hence getting PCNs) for a couple months just so that the PPC doesn't get blinded by greed and go nuclear on you if you have 4 or 5 PCNs outstanding. At your next AGM, bring it up that the parking controls need to be removed and mention the legal reasons why. One reason is that under S37(5b) Landlord and Tenant Act 1987,  more than 75% of leaseholders and/or the landlord would have needed to agree, and less than 10% opposed, for the variation to take place. I highly doubt a ballot even happened before the PPC was bought in so OPS even being there is unlawful, breaching the terms of your lease. In this legal sense,  the communal vote of the "directors" of the freehold company would have counted for ONE vote of however many flats there are (leases/tenants) + 1 (landlord). It's going to be interesting to see where this goes.  
    • @Whyisitthisthank you very much for asking. I am still feeling anxious, especially when someone rings the doorbell, or when I receive a letter I feel a it paranoid. I stopped going to the shops unless I really have to. I shop online now. When I see security I feel paralised. 
    • My expectation was their WS would include the best paperwork, like at least true copies of originals, but these just look wrong somehow, perhaps the font and size of font... Not sending me the DN in CCA request but producing it for evidence I would argue could be a tactic used by them... - Page 11 with ticks - there is no reference to IP addresses - Home addresses are correct for dates in documents   Just looking up example Defendant WS's while awaiting your thoughts on this
    • Hello lovely, just posting to check in to see how you are feeling now? Hopefully your feeling better? 
  • 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

Yes Car Credit PPI REclaim *** Resolved***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3700 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 347
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

So on the N1 form I don't actually have to include the interest in the 'amount claimed' box? Just the amount for the PPI and the court fee? As long as I state that I'm claiming interest at 8% that can be worked out later. Is that right? If I don't include the interest it brings my court fee down to £120 rather than £245.

 

Ah, just realised that in writing that section, you have to state the date that the money became owed to you. Would that be the start date of the agreement? And finally (sorry) I definitely don't include the AMOUNT of interest that I'm claiming in the amount claimed box on the N1 form?

 

Correct..... no you don't.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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

Thank you. I've just been looking at how to work out the interest and I have done it correctly at 70p per day. It was just the start date that I was confused about. However, on looking at the spreadsheet the amount of days elapsed are different. I've just gone onto a website that shows the number of days that have elapsed since 13/05/02 (which was when the first payment was taken) and including today it says that it is 4097. Working that out at 70p per day comes to £2867.90 and not £2326.04 as shown on my spreadsheet.

 

I worked out the daily interest by taking the amount owing of £3199.52 x 8% then dividing that by 365 giving me 70p daily rate. The days differ wildly from my spreadsheet though and the interest is much less?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just checked here http://hmctscourtfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex050-eng.pdf and it says that the fee payable is for the amount being claimed INCLUDING interest so it will cost me £245 unfortunately. Should I just go by the calculations of 70p per day from the start of the agreement then and not the spreadsheet as the number of days don't match.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would claim net of interest but make sure its clearly worded within the P.O.C ....interest requested under sec69 at 8% is at the discretion of the court and allowed within the judgment. Of course if you are claiming contractual or compound interest then that must be worked out and shown within the claim figure...therefore you would have to pay the higher fee.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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

You claim from the inception...to the date of judgment.......they will argue its against statute of limitation (6 years) but dont they always:wink:

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Well I've had a few delays in sorting everything out but I think I'm ready now. Have 3 copies of N1 form, particulars of claim and the agreement ready to go. Have I forgotten anything? Quoted the misrepresentation act and antecedent negotiations under Section 56. Nervous now its all about to begin. Hate them for forcing me into having to go this far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that this website has long since closed down (anyone know the reason by the way?) but it makes very interesting reading on missold ppi and the deposit being taken from the insurances, etc. Well worth a read.

 

http://w11.zetaboards.com/saynotoyes/forum/17907/1/

 

Anybody know how to contact whistleblower now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

point to the thread please

 

never seen that site

 

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

Thought it might help anyone like me who is having problems with DAF. Answers a few questions about things I'm not sure on. It's the saynotoyes forum that is now closed. There is 10 whole pages on the Yes Car part of the site that make very interesting reading still.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you mention the deposit coming off the ins

 

which of those threads is it

I get several pages

 

post a link to it here

 

i'm gonna see if we can use that info there here for people to refer 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

thanks

 

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...

Well

we received an acknowledgement of service this morning stating that DAFS intend to defend all the claim.

 

The letter is from Ascent Legal.

 

Now I know that they are part of Irwin Mitchell,

 

but apparently they specialise in debt recovery.

 

Any reason why they would use them in this case?

 

The loan was all paid in full and never defaulted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Irwin Mitchell

 

blimey they still going

 

always were a bunch of nit wits.

 

nice find!

 

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Today we received the defence from Ascent Legal. It's quite detailed. I've attached it here. Can anyone have a read through and let me know what you think?

 

Again, they are stating that it is time barred, that they were entitled to take the deposit from the insurance and that we knew about it, and that the insurances were optional.

 

They enclosed a printout of the booklet that we supposedly received from them regarding the insurances, that says they are optional, but they didn't enclose this in my SAR and don't remember seeing any of that.

 

They also say that any evidence I enclose regarding the Whistleblower programme or any other such online document regarding their conduct, that it is hearsay evidence and should be struck out. If it's going to be our word against theirs and be decided on the balance of probabilities how can I prove it if I can't rely on that?

 

Help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

well they certainly cannot use the statute barring get out on a ppi reclaim

that's for sure

 

the rest i'm not legally minded for

 

but have not read it right through.

 

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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3700 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...