Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So I just found a couple abandoned traffic cones locally by some bins.   A bit squished but free!  So have placed them on the land.  Will wait to see if the cones get moved and signs ignored again this week before I consider rocks/ boulders.
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later the your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. So if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place and park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and then unload the children followed by reloading the children getting seat belts on etc before driving to the exit stopping for cars, pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
    • Hi  no nothing yet. Hope it stays that way 😬
  • 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

Cabot bought unenforceable debt


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4051 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

The section 78 request allows them to provide a reconstituted document so once they have done that they continue to demand payment, make threats and so on. My aim is to get rid of them.

 

As stated earlier may be a full and final offer to settle?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Why make a F&F if the debt is unenforceable as said in the original post? I can see your point paul, but if the debt is not able to be enforced, why waste the money when it can be spent on better things?

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why make a F&F if the debt is unenforceable as said in the original post? I can see your point paul, but if the debt is not able to be enforced, why waste the money when it can be spent on better things?

 

Just depends on ones curcumstances. The person may need a clean credit file for needed loan so, full and final with credit file scrubbed could be negotiated. Alternatively fingers crossed creditor doesn't issue proceedings and obtain judgment due to incompetent DJ.

 

Could allways bat it out until stat barred.

 

What are you actually seeking to achieve?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh i agree. But with cabot, it is very very unlikely they will agree to removing the entry on the file. They'ré not stupid either. They know that the debt is unenforceable, and after continued harassment, if the debtor offers a F&F, they will know they have a gullible cashcow on their hands. If the DJ is incompetent, they can always appeal the judgement quoting various regulations and cases.

 

Of all the posts on these forums and the other 2 big forums, there are not many instances at all of a DCA winning a claim against a debt where the paperwork needed to enforce it no longer exists. The ones that were won by the DCA, were either default judgements or the debtor had a woefully unprepared defence.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh i agree. But with cabot, it is very very unlikely they will agree to removing the entry on the file. They'ré not stupid either. They know that the debt is unenforceable, and after continued harassment, if the debtor offers a F&F, they will know they have a gullible cashcow on their hands. If the DJ is incompetent, they can always appeal the judgement quoting various regulations and cases.

 

Of all the posts on these forums and the other 2 big forums, there are not many instances at all of a DCA winning a claim against a debt where the paperwork needed to enforce it no longer exists. The ones that were won by the DCA, were either default judgements or the debtor had a woefully unprepared defence.

 

Believe me there has been several cases where the creditor has enforced without requisite. One particular case I remember was that the borrower was asked to cut the credit card up and dispose of but actual just sent it back to the creditor (AMEX). When the case went to court the Claimant used the signature on the card as evidence as the paperwork didnt contain any signature......TRUE!!!!!

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you expand on "poor knowledge"

 

I was in close contact with the leading solicitor in Carey (post Wacksmam) and had lunch on various occasions. It is telling that the solicitor is now bringing claims against borrowers as opposed to issuing against the creditor.

 

BTW I've been succesfull in the county court defending a credit card claim.......

 

So you were in contact with Emma Careys solicitor?

Maybe it is telling that he now works for claimants.

The law is quite clear about what is enforceable and what isn't. If the agreement doesn't contain the prescribed terms and is not a true copy of the agreement it is UE.

Of course these were the days where debtors tried to claim agreements were UE rather than defending.

There is no shame in admitting a ccj many of us have done it in the days before we knew better.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just depends on ones curcumstances. The person may need a clean credit file for needed loan so, full and final with credit file scrubbed could be negotiated. Alternatively fingers crossed creditor doesn't issue proceedings and obtain judgment due to incompetent DJ.

 

Could allways bat it out until stat barred.

 

What are you actually seeking to achieve?

 

I just wanted to try and get the Default removed. The idea being if they don't agree they wont get any money. If they do, I could offer them something.

 

Is it possible they could take this to court? As said they were sold the debt without any CCA (which doesn't exist because I asked barclaycard for 8 months and they were unable to produce it), and the Credit Card is from 1998.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very very rare that a default would be removed. As already advised, you can negotiate the removal, but the creditor doesnt have to take notice, unless the default was added in error.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you were in contact with Emma Careys solicitor?

Maybe it is telling that he now works for claimants.

The law is quite clear about what is enforceable and what isn't. If the agreement doesn't contain the prescribed terms and is not a true copy of the agreement it is UE.

Of course these were the days where debtors tried to claim agreements were UE rather than defending.

There is no shame in admitting a ccj many of us have done it in the days before we knew better.

 

No they were in contact with me. As for the CCJ RBSs agreement was enforceable it was what they did post judgment that was naughty. Anyway I met with RBS executives at the House of Commons to sort that little problem out in 2009.

 

There's plenty of ways to fight a claim.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very very rare that a default would be removed. As already advised, you can negotiate the removal, but the creditor doesnt have to take notice, unless the default was added in error.

 

I spoke with Barclays legal and they agreed to remove default data upon settlement.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't do anything until someone answers my question - post 56. If you admit the debt and don't settle, the clock might start the six years again from that date.

 

I don't think they will take you to Court simply because it appears they haven't got the paperwork. I don't think you have heard from them for two years. Is that right?

 

Unless you simply have to clean up your credit file (and they may not in any case remove the default) I would let sleeping dogs lie and hang on for the next two years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you get that in writing paul? barclays are well known for saying one thing and then claiming it was never said.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't do anything until someone answers my question - post 56. If you admit the debt and don't settle, the clock might start the six years again from that date. From what has been said on this thread the clock starts from the default first registered date.

 

I don't think they will take you to Court simply because it appears they haven't got the paperwork. I don't think you have heard from them for two years. Is that right? Yes 2 years

 

Unless you simply have to clean up your credit file (and they may not in any case remove the default) I would let sleeping dogs lie and hang on for the next two years.

 

Please see response above in red

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you get that in writing paul? barclays are well known for saying one thing and then claiming it was never said.

 

I had a long chat and was given assurance that the next time Barclaycard updated my credit file the adverse data would be deleted. I needed a clean credit file at the time.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the clock starts on the default registered date, but I'm almost certain there is something about the clock starting again if you deny the debt for years, and then admit it. It is something that has been mentioned on the forum many times.

 

An aknowledgment doesn't effect the default date it resets the clock pursuant sec 5 LA 1980 in other words the stat barring date would be 6 years from the last payment or aknowledgment.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if you approach them saying you want to make a f&f, are you thereby acknowledging the debt?

 

 

:thumb:

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...