Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes, it has been cleaned now - it had to be, he came out of hospital at the end of December, and Friend has secured the services of a local cleaning company to come in once a week.  
    • Following the issue of a Liability Order the Council must obtain a warrant of control to try to collect the debt. If they fail their only option is to return the matter to court and you will be asked to attend.   At that hearing the court must be satisfied that:   • A liability order was imposed in relation to the debt. • You have failed to pay; and • The council tried to collect the sum using a warrant of control, and failed.   They must then go on to conduct a "means enquiry" into your financial circumstances. The principle aim of that is firstly to establish whether you had demonstrated either a wilful refusal to pay (i.e. you had sufficient funds but simply refused to pay) or "culpable neglect" (i.e. you had the funds but chose to spend them on something else). Only if they find one of those two can commitment to prison (either immediate or postponed) be considered. Also, only if they find one of those two can they order payments to meet the debt. The usual combination is an order to make payments coupled with a postponed commitment. But, the payment rate must be realistic in terms of your financial circumstances and it should normally mean that the debt is paid within three years. If a realistic payment rate will not see the debt paid in that period then the court should consider remitting (i.e. writing off) some or all of the debt. Similarly, if they find neither wilful refusal to pay nor culpable neglect (and by default find that you simply did not have the ability to pay) they should also consider remitting some or all of the debt.   You should note that at these commitment proceedings, as the matters you face could result in custody, you are entitled to have the services of the duty solicitor. In your circumstances I would say the chances of you being committed to prison are slightly less than zero. From your very brief description of your finances you simply have no spare money (though a means enquiry will delve more deeply into your affairs, especially the debts for which the DWP are making deductions from your benefits). There is no point in delaying any of this. The sooner it gets sorted the better as your circumstances seem unlikely to change any time soon. One thing you must bear in mind is that these proceedings will only deal with the debt covered by the Liability Order. If you have any Council Tax arrears that have accrued since then they will have to be dealt with separately. I'm also assuming you live in England. Since April 2019 commitment to prison has not been an option in Wales.    
    • good issued the default after you turned 50 when any payment is not longer required on the loans and they should be written off.   it's fast becoming clear that they solely refused your SLC forms as a mode of deferring to create this whole falsehood.   the case your refer to about the new forms is detailed in this form in many SLC erudio threads.   if you could go get a USB converter lead to make your old HDD drives readable from amazon or somewhere , cheap as chips and <£5.
    • Has the property been cleaned now? Is it the in the same state as before?
    • Please follow the link and read what we have to say about people who pay by bank transfer
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Wife used Season ticket card on SWT trains **RESOLVED BEFORE COURT**


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2491 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hello there.

 

Have a re-read of Old-CodJA's advice further up the thread. He has 30+ years' experience of prosecutions in the rail industry. I notice that he has recommended seeing a criminal lawyer, which doesn't happen all that often on this forum.

 

Having seen various threads over the years, if OC says to consult a criminal lawyer, that is what I would do personally. You may find that the initial interview is enough.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

An update on this.

The case is now closed.

 

we both attended interviews, did as was suggested here and were honest about the situation.

 

This was followed up with the letter that has been suggested in so many threads previously. My season ticket was returned within a few days.

 

Within a few days my wife also called up the Prosecutions Department and long and short we were offered an out of court settlement.

for the record, they would have intended to prosecute with the Section 5 Intent to Avoid a Fare charge,

which is what incurs the criminal record, so we are very glad we have been able to resolve this.

 

Won't pretend that it was not a stressful period for both of us, and my wife was very remorseful of what occurred,

but the only advice (which has been reiterated many times here) we can give is to be truthful and not too worry TOO much.

 

Follow the advice on the forum and specifically if you get invited to interviews (not a lot of advice here around this), simply be straightforward and honest.

PACE interviews are a standard process and there to protect the person being interviewed as well as allowing the prosecution team to clarify events and evidence.

It's not the Sweeney. Stick to the facts.

 

Many thanks to most of the advice that's been received, especially Old-codJA.

 

Hopefully this is helpful advice to others in this position.

 

I've seen a few other similar postings recently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

great great news

 

i'll mark the thread too

 

well done everyone

 

and thanks for coming back to tell us!!

 

well done!!

 

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
  • 10 months later...
An update on this.

The case is now closed.

 

we both attended interviews, did as was suggested here and were honest about the situation.

 

This was followed up with the letter that has been suggested in so many threads previously. My season ticket was returned within a few days.

 

Within a few days my wife also called up the Prosecutions Department and long and short we were offered an out of court settlement.

for the record, they would have intended to prosecute with the Section 5 Intent to Avoid a Fare charge,

which is what incurs the criminal record, so we are very glad we have been able to resolve this.

 

Won't pretend that it was not a stressful period for both of us, and my wife was very remorseful of what occurred,

but the only advice (which has been reiterated many times here) we can give is to be truthful and not too worry TOO much.

 

Follow the advice on the forum and specifically if you get invited to interviews (not a lot of advice here around this), simply be straightforward and honest.

PACE interviews are a standard process and there to protect the person being interviewed as well as allowing the prosecution team to clarify events and evidence.

It's not the Sweeney. Stick to the facts.

 

Many thanks to most of the advice that's been received, especially Old-codJA.

 

Hopefully this is helpful advice to others in this position.

 

I've seen a few other similar postings recently.

 

 

 

Hi. Thank you for posting your update on this. I'm reading a lot of these cases as I'm in the same predicament, and beside myself with worry. I'll follow your advice. Would you mind me asking how much your out-of-court settlement was for? thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...