Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • 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

Help required; Adrian Flux income declaration


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4043 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

I would hugely welcome any advice on the following as an urgent issue. While I appreciate it is a little bit of a read, I am truly helpless in the matter at current and would be very grateful for your insights.

 

I am insured through Marketstudy as a company, however Adrian Flux is the insurance broker. I have recently paid for insurance on a motorbike and additionally a car; these insurance costs have been paid in full annual amounts on separate policies. The car has been insured for three months of an annual policy, the motorbike policy starts in three weeks time but the amount has been paid in full.

 

Yesterday (02-Apr) I was contacted by an individual from Adrian Flux. I have at no point indicated to any insurance company (I have been with Adrian Flux for three years) that I perform recreationally within a local band, and I can honestly confirm to you all I do so on a strictly none-profit basis. Their representative explained to me they have identified I perform in a band whose records are sold digitally via iTunes; this, in their eyes, is classed as an undisclosed secondary occupation, and as result they must class both this and “ticket sales” as supplementary income. Furthermore, they have advised me there will be an additional £92.13 charge for the insurance of my motorbike,and they have now refused to insure my car on this principal alone. They have issued me with a “Road Traffic Act Cancellation Letter” which stipulates “This cancellation letter has been issued as we are not in receipt of;”, however it is simply blank from that point. It has been made clear, however, if I do not cancel my car policy within 7 days I will be uninsured, blacklisted as having been refused insurance and not financially remunerated in any form.

 

The effects of this for me are as follows; I must either pay an additional £92.13 to continue insurance on the motorbike, or pay a £30 cancellation fee (purely because I am within a 14 day grace period of taking the policy out). With regards to the car, I have no choice but to cancel the policy and will lose half of the value of the policy total (£265) and have to pay an additional £100 cancellation fee. This is apparently because half of any cancellation goes directly to the underwriter outside of the grace period. I have been quoted by two different company representatives I will be refunded £154.50/£237.33 as a result of mandatory policy closure on a £530 policy, whichhas been active for 3 months.

 

Firstly, I am outraged to say I have effectively been “checked up on” by my insurance company as I have no convictions, points or anything else to hide for that matter. My band is purely recreational and any money passing through the band is both pitiful in amount and directed to my guitarists Paypal account; however we have not even received any income at all as of yet, regardless of how negligible it would be. I can prove I have no secondary income as no money has entered my bank account outside of my salary figure as a heating engineer; my only income source. It is additionally worth noting I have only been part of this band for 11 weeks, a five track EP has been live 2 weeks and no monies generated.

 

I now have six days to act on the matter, and would greatly appreciate any advice that could be offered, as I am a naive individual when dealing with UK laws and entirely confused as to what action I can take. Is it worth contacting the financial ombudsman service? All I know, is I am both appalled as a loyal, honest and law-abiding customer, and suffering from what appears to be akin to a case of victimisation and exploitation.

 

Thank-you all kindly for your advice in advance,

 

Mike :smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all very harsh and unnecessary. Many people enjoy hobbies where they make a little money to cover some expenses. By the sounds of it, unless you become really successful, the amount of money you will make, may not even cover your expenses.

 

If I were you, I would suggest that you speak to the manager at the Adrian Flux branch you are dealing with and ask for their help. Perhaps you can put it in writing what the current score is with this hobby and they can ask the underwriters to review this urgently.

 

I can see that they may consider this a secondary job from a risk point of view, as the vehicles may be in use to take you to gigs, but perhaps they can rate the risk accordingly, if you give them details of how the vehicles will be used, if at all.

 

Speak to a manager at the brokers first and see what they say. If they do not appear helpful, then advise them you will be asking the FOS for their assistance. If you give the FOS, they will clarify the points about charges. I think as brokers they can make the charges, as these are presumably covered in the terms of business advised to you,

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for responding so quickly. I will put your advice to good use and tomorrow ask to speak to one of Adrian Flux's manager's, hopefully resolving the case. I will update the post with any feedback coming from the conversation. Thanks again Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

its not a business nothing to do with them.

 

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

its not a business nothing to do with them.

 

dx

 

Any secondary work that you do, does have to be advised to motor insurers. If the vehicles will never be used for commuting to playing these gigs or have anything to do with any secondary employment, then this will be noted. If you were going to play gigs travelling using an insured vehicle, it can be attractive to thiefs, particularly if there is expensive equipment on board. There is also the risk of the vehicles being in town centres/cities late at night.

 

Advice is to always declare and Insurers will decide whether it is a risk they need to factor in or not.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...