Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I apologise if I was being unclear. Where it currently stands is that they will have it repair, placing scaffolding in our garden for 5 days. They have moved fast, but we will still have to postpone our contractors, meaning, we won't necessarily have the work done in time for the wedding and therefore will incur additional expenses for either a marquee or a wedding venue. They are vehemently against having any kind of liability in any regard but continue repeating that they are legally entitled to use our garden for their repairs (I believe this is true unless the work can be carried out using a cherry picker). The neighbour seems either indifferent or oblivious to the fact they can't reach all of the side of the roof from the space where they can place the scaffolding. They have asked their roofer of choice about using a cherry picker but the roofer has said it wasn't possible. It's not clear whether the roofer doesn't want to use a cherry picker or whether there is an issue with it. They have told us it is a problem that we are installing a gazebo as it will prevent them to access their roof from our garden in the future?!?  
    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
  • 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 
        • 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

LOwell Statutory Demand old Egg debt


Mabel30
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4037 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

You should show the judge just how angry and annoyed you are at having to deal with this, don't be bullied and try and understand what is being written in your 6.5, providing you get a reasonable judge and you are prepared to fight your corner, did you mean to say that they put the wrong court on the demand ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I have emailed BW Legal advising I plan to set aside SD, I included their ref in the email. They have emailed me back saying due to DPA Laws I have to call them to complete security. No response from my CCA yet.

 

Thanks.

E-mail those idiots back and tell them that they must havealready breached the DPA since you arecontacting them in respect of the SD they served on you!

Do not telephone these maggots, e-mail again (or fax – or postfor that matter) and tell them that you will not engage in any discussion asregards their SD other than in writing only.

Kind regards

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks I won't call them.

Just to keep you updated on this journey and for anyone else who's in a similar position and wants to know what to expect each step of the way.

Letter from court received advising received application to set aside SD, hearing date not given immediately, it's referred to district judge they will decide if application is dismissed or I will be sent date and time if the judge does not dismiss on first consideration.

 

Had a letter from Barclaycard regarding SAR I need to return letter to confirm which Barclays branch to collect documents with ID. I'll post this back recorded delivery tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi everyone, got court date. Letter from court says it is ordered that the debtor will file at court and send to the creditors solicitors a statement in answer by such a date. Not sure what this means can anyone help please? thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes date has been given.

It says it is ordered that.

1. The creditor will file at court and send to the debtor ( solicitors) a statement in reply by 3 pm on the 21 March.

2. The debtor will file at court and send to the creditors ( solicitor) a statement in answer by 3 pm 4th April.

 

Does this mean I need to do anything?

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

can anyone help with the above please? what's a statement in answer

 

ie your response (a statement) to their ordered statement prior

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes date has been given.

It says it is ordered that.

1. The creditor will file at court and send to the debtor ( solicitors) a statement in reply by 3 pm on the 21 March.

2. The debtor will file at court and send to the creditors ( solicitor) a statement in answer by 3 pm 4th April.

 

Does this mean I need to do anything?

thanks

 

Hello Mabel

 

When you receive the statement from the creditor (Ordered by the Court in para 1 of said Order) by 3pm on the 21 March 2013, you will then have the opportunity to file and serve your statement in response to the same by 3pm the 4th April 2013.

 

Sooooooooooo, wait until you receive the statement from the creditor/claimant - then post the same up here (minus personal info) and we shall help you to draft your answer thereto.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hello.

Had a letter from BW advising their client is prepared to accept application to SD. They include a consent order for my approval, execution and return as regards to app to set aside SD.

By consent it is ordered that.

1: SD dated .... Is hereby set aside.

2: no order to costs.

We hereby consent to an order in the above terms.

Top left says Tameside county court but I went to Manchester?

 

Not sure what all this means can anyone help? thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

looks as if they are conceding re the set aside without a hearing and want the consent order ie your consent that if they do agree to the set aside prior then you won't pursue your costs against them? so, maybe a good result if you don't mind not pursuing your costs. BUT, double check with 42man etc

Edited by Ford
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... your evidence has obviously struck a chord and put them on the back foot.

 

Have they put Tameside as the court again? You lost a whole day last time traipsing to Manchester because of their error, and that’s worth £90 in any judge’s eyes (and is itself an abuse of process).

 

Was this offer made on a without prejudice basis?

 

The choice is yours, but getting the set aside doesn’t mean, for example, that they won’t subsequently issue a county court claim. You could simply ignore this and proceed to court – I get the impression they won’t be able to comply with the court order in time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No the original court on the SD was Oldham, so bit confused as to why this latest document says Tameside. Oldham was the wrong court I went to Manchester. can anyone help with a response letter? surely if they have accepted my set aside and don't want me to pursue costs. There are costs to be had?? on the other hand if I don't accept it could go against me in court. what do you think 42 man? thanks for your help with my defence by the way it's worked by the looks of it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, they failed to stick to the court order, and did not send you a response statement as ordered by 21 March. Obviously you were in no position to respond yourself to something you never received.

 

My view is you would win in court, for the simple reason that they have failed to comply with an order of the court. They have not applied for more time, so it seems clear they cannot be bothered – proof for you to take to the OFT that they are abusing the insolvency laws for debt collection purposes.

 

And yes, I believe all your time @ £18 per hour, plus £90 for your day off, plus travel costs, is fairly due to you. Lowell have to take responsibility for their actions, and they are trying to get out of this without incurring costs.

 

As I asked earlier, was this offer made on a without prejudice basis?

 

I would be tempted to go back and say you will accept the SD being set aside on condition they pay your fairly due costs – especially given that the original SD had the wrong court named, and caused you not inconsiderable inconvenience.

 

You could then show the judge that you have made reasonable efforts to sort things out, but that Lowell’s behaviour has continued to be unfair, and an abuse of the insolvency laws. You should also draft your costs on the basis above, and if you attend court, submit them to the court and Lowell at least 24 hours beforehand.

 

Costs example:

Five hours dealing with SD, researching and preparing responses/set aside app @ £18 per hour = £90

Day off work to attend court – wrong court specified on SD, whole day @ £90

Travel for above £X

Total to date = £180 + £X

 

If you go to court, add another two hours for prep = £36, and another day off @ £90.

 

 

But let’s wait and see what 42man thinks. I like taking them on at their own game, but it’s you, not me, who’d have to go to court.

 

In the meantime, have you had a response to your SAR from Barclays yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all your advice. No response from my CCA letter. Barclays replied saying I have to collect documents from a branch with ID, had to send a letter back to them to confirm which branch but not hard anything since.

 

Without prejudice? Didn't say that on the letter just stated what I wrote. Does this make a difference? doing all this on my phone so it won't click on your link. Thank you!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if it’s not WP, it can’t be used by them regarding costs, and also you can show it to the judge, plus your response, if any. Great!

 

May be worth PMing 42man, to ask him to pop in when he’s free. He is the oracle!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...