Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • 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 then 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. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  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.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3754 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

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/or_1?q=or+

 

English definition of “or”

 

or

 

used to connect different possibilities:

 

Is it Tuesday or Wednesday today?

You can pay now or when you come back to pick up the paint.

Are you listening to me or not?

The patent was granted in (either) 1962 or 1963 - I can't quite remember which.

It doesn't matter whether you win or lose - it's taking part that's important.

There were ten or twelve (= approximately that number of) people in the room.

He was only joking - or was he (= but it is possible that he was not)?

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/15-16/20/section/205

 

“legal mortgage” means a mortgage by demise or subdemise or a charge by way of legal mortgage

 

"or" - used to connect different possibilities

 

I hope this explains my previous comments about the significance of the use of the word "or"

 

As I said Apple, basic english

 

(I have added extra emphasis on "different" just to make the obvious point)

 

The above isn't that complicated is it ? - anyway film is about to start :-) Bank Job on ch4+1 great film

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I knmow it is a bit late to be starting an other topic, but putting aside the doomed deed thing for a minute.

 

If it were possible to have the deed declared void what about the credit agreement, it would not make that void would it ?

 

Would the lender not just take an action to enforce this and then seek a charging order once he had achieved a CCJ ?

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you, yourself have posted previously Apple - s.23(2) are the lenders powers

 

Hi Ben

 

It's a good thing that viewers are more than capable of making up their own minds...... you know you have taken the reference made out of context ; )

 

But Hey ho...that's the Ben we have all come to know folks ; )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

The above isn't that complicated is it ? - anyway film is about to start :-) Bank Job on ch4+1 great film

 

Only when you reference it Ben - nobody else mis-understood the connection - only you : )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is It Me? - complete and utter nonsense and I mean that with all due respect.

 

It is information that is in the public domain - Freedom of Information etc- there is even legislation about it, so good luck with that, you will have as much luck with that as you will about a void mortgage deed

 

I have told you about this being all in the public domain before - there will be no way for anyone to hide anything.

 

I don't know what the outcome is, but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see how flawed Apples fanciful ideas are (can't even grasp the meaning of the word or ), so the outcome has been a foregone conclusion for months. You are just going through the motions.

 

Hi Ben

 

You conveniently forget (pity you) that the application proceeded on the amended written submissions.....it was only the first application (un-amended) version that you rely to confuse the issues here.....hey ho...that's the Ben we have come to know ; )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

The above isn't that complicated is it ? - anyway film is about to start :-) Bank Job on ch4+1 great film

 

Oh no just switched it on , all those naked bodies, made me spit out my cocoa. i will watch my recordings of family guy I think :)

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Ben ,

But as apple has said I can to post freely as you well know,

But I will say this I have printed of the last pages of your posts and will be taking action with the property chamber about your so called informant.

As there was nothing to say about the hearing as NO judgement had been made as well you know so I would like to know how you know what the out come is before those who have made the applications, you have not only dropped yourself in it but also CAG now.

 

over 200,000 viewers and only 1 poster able to receive a response to an FOI .....ummmmm???

 

That does appear suspect.....see your point here Is It Me......there seems to be evidence of 'compromise' even before the decision has been made.....I thought it was only 'decisions'...not 'progress' that was in the 'public domain'......very strange conduct from the Chamber.....very strange????

 

And all of it available to Ben only.....ummmmm>>

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ben

 

It's a good thing that viewers are more than capable of making up their own minds...... you know you have taken the reference made out of context ; )

 

But Hey ho...that's the Ben we have all come to know folks ; )

 

Apple

 

Nope all the dozen or so references quoted to confirm this fact are all precisely in context :)

 

Really you do ot need the explanatory notes just read the legislation, it does what it says on the tin. :)

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

The above isn't that complicated is it ? - anyway film is about to start :-) Bank Job on ch4+1 great film

 

 

Crikey Ben - your almost as clever as me : )

 

Wonder what those 2 different scenarios might refer to??

 

Could 1 be to do with the "estate" and the other to the "charge"???

 

Tap that magic hat again with your wand...and let me in on the 'slight of hand' ....oooops sorry Ben....I meant to say "the answer" : )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope all the dozen or so references quoted to confirm this fact are all precisely in context :)

 

Really you do ot need the explanatory notes just read the legislation, it does what it says on the tin. :)

 

Ben????

 

Hello Dodgeball......!!!

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ben

 

You conveniently forget (pity you) that the application proceeded on the amended written submissions.....it was only the first application (un-amended) version that you rely to confuse the issues here.....hey ho...that's the Ben we have come to know ; )

 

Apple

 

Could the real Ben respond to this please....happy to wait until he finishes watching his movie...

 

 

Cheers...Ta

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

over 200,000 viewers and only 1 poster able to receive a response to an FOI .....ummmmm???

 

That does appear suspect.....see your point here Is It Me......there seems to be evidence of 'compromise' even before the decision has been made.....I thought it was only 'decisions'...not 'progress' that was in the 'public domain'......very strange conduct from the Chamber.....very strange????

 

And all of it available to Ben only.....ummmmm>>

 

Apple

 

Views not viewers.

 

I haven't noticed anyone else mention doing a FOI request.

 

Perhaps you could try and see what you get.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I knmow it is a bit late to be starting an other topic, but putting aside the doomed deed thing for a minute.

 

If it were possible to have the deed declared void what about the credit agreement, it would not make that void would it ?

 

Would the lender not just take an action to enforce this and then seek a charging order once he had achieved a CCJ ?

 

Yup!

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I knmow it is a bit late to be starting an other topic, but putting aside the doomed deed thing for a minute.

 

If it were possible to have the deed declared void what about the credit agreement, it would not make that void would it ?

 

Would the lender not just take an action to enforce this and then seek a charging order once he had achieved a CCJ ?

 

 

Ah, hello Dodgeball.... here you are - phew... I was getting all confused what with all that head banging and movies and naked bodies and all - crikey almost had an heart attack ; )

 

In answer to your question..... we have yet to see an agreement....so how are they going to get a CCJ off the back of one of those???

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Views not viewers.

 

I haven't noticed anyone else mention doing a FOI request.

 

Perhaps you could try and see what you get.

 

Too busy here Caro...far too busy here...... Happy to consider all the evidence that Ben derives - if it is proven to be a compromise (hopefully it will not be - although he did mention the lamb case before the 28 days in which the Lamb case had to look to set aside the decision) - then the matter can become party to a complaint I'd of thought..... ; )

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Caro.... I just noticed my error - I should have said 'views' not 'viewers'.

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't... I have to take her shopping on Wednesday because of this and that is even worse than banging my head against the wall explaining basic things to Apple

 

Put your Mrs first or you will pay the price (especially when she finds out you have wasted precious 'wifey time' on a lost cause),......pay up Ben,) you know you are guilty (clearly in your wife's eyes) ....I don't blame her .... do the decent thing man......pay up : )

 

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy how I love being patronised!

 

Oh and why should it be of no issue to me or does the mighty applecart deem me unworthy or trying to expand my knowledge

 

... The Queen has not notified me of any intent to award an MBE yet.....unless you know more???

 

Apple

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Too busy here Caro...far too busy here...... Happy to consider all the evidence that Ben derives - if it is proven to be a compromise (hopefully it will not be - although he did mention the lamb case before the 28 days in which the Lamb case had to look to set aside the decision) - then the matter can become party to a complaint I'd of thought..... ; )

 

Apple

 

My ears were burning so I thought I would log in.

 

Apple do you actually read this thread ?

 

It doesn't appear you do, either that or (sorry to use the or word) you have a very bad memory. - I would hate to think that you intentionally twist things to mislead readers of this thread.

 

Let's use the above post as an example shall we...

 

"Happy to consider all the evidence that Ben derives - if it is proven to be a compromise (hopefully it will not be - although he did mention the lamb case before the 28 days in which the Lamb case had to look to set aside the decision) - then the matter can become party to a complaint I'd of thought..... ; )"

 

Now what was it Ben actually said - Let's take a look shall we

 

9th January 2014

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?391318-Repossession-questioned-by-deeds-not-being-signed&p=4440066&viewfull=1#post4440066

 

To summarise 10 applications have been submitted, out of them one has been struck out (reading posts in this thread that would most likely be Lamb), out of the remaining 9 applications 2 are due to be heard on the 20th.

 

Ben

 

Please note - "(reading posts in this thread that would most likely be Lamb)"

 

I said that because -

 

7th November 2013

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?391318-Repossession-questioned-by-deeds-not-being-signed&p=4391767&viewfull=1#post4391767

 

Dear Apple, I have had another letter for the PC today. Referring me to The Mortgage Business Plc v Mrs Tilly Lamb which was appealed as it was a repo kris lamb and her lay person sought what we are doing the PC have struck this out as the Appeal sys no merit of success on LPA 1925 & LPMPA 1989 and her case was land registration act 2002 section2 (1) and section 27(1)

They have sent a copy to my solicitor saying. They are striking this out as it's been dealt with at county court and has no merit of success :-(

 

 

Please note -

 

"Mrs Tilly Lamb which was appealed as it was a repo kris lamb and her lay person sought what we are doing the PC have struck this out as the Appeal sys no merit of success"

 

Least we also not forget

 

7 November 2013

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?391318-Repossession-questioned-by-deeds-not-being-signed&p=4391859&viewfull=1#post4391859

 

Received a letter toady from the Property chamber letter telling me that they have struck out an application. They have sent this also to my lenders solicitors attached is the whole transcript of the above case.

 

Lamb in question was heard at my local county court for originally possession hearing and she had an order against them given. They appealed case To another DJ same court who said no appeal on your grounds, ground being ad stated above that the mortgage deed was indeed a contract and had never been executed properly so in the terms of contract and not executed it have never then formed a mortgage as both signatures of lender and. Borrow weren't on the deed. Lamb appealed again and was heard only for her Appel to be said they found that the DJ originally was correct even though he had not had the section 27 presented originally , some success may of happened if he had but on reflection no and her appeaL lost. again as not enough merit and would be unsuccessful.

I think she had then applied to the property chamber her reference number is newer than mine by 2 and they have struck it out as the DJ has. already litigated on this case.

Have you seen the Lamb transcript?

 

Please note -

 

"Received a letter toady from the Property chamber letter telling me that they have struck out an application."

 

"I think she had then applied to the property chamber her reference number is newer than mine by 2 and they have struck it out as the DJ has. already litigated on this case."

 

I know you never let any real facts get in the way of you telling a good story. However, I have told you about interpreting my posts before. You can't interpret the law and it would appear that you can't interpret the my posts either.

 

You need to stop twisting facts to make yourself look good, it does not work. You just look a little silly now

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw apple. In case you're wondering, Ben and dodgeball are 2 different people.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Put your Mrs first or you will pay the price (especially when she finds out you have wasted precious 'wifey time' on a lost cause),......pay up Ben,) you know you are guilty (clearly in your wife's eyes) ....I don't blame her .... do the decent thing man......pay up : )

 

 

Apple

 

I would not call trying to teach you basic english and very basic property law, a lost cause Apple. I am sure one day you will understand it - it isn't that difficult you just have to ignore your desire to interpret - try it and see

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ben

 

It's a good thing that viewers are more than capable of making up their own minds...... you know you have taken the reference made out of context ; )

 

But Hey ho...that's the Ben we have all come to know folks ; )

 

Apple

 

Out of context ?

 

You either said it or you didn't

 

Just because it does not fit in with your fanciful ideas now, does not change the fact that you said it

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ben

 

You conveniently forget (pity you) that the application proceeded on the amended written submissions.....it was only the first application (un-amended) version that you rely to confuse the issues here.....hey ho...that's the Ben we have come to know ; )

 

Apple

 

I have not forgotten about it. I think you have forgotten what you wrote about a mortgage by demise....

 

I did try to warn you at the time but your ego prevented you from listening. Just remember at the time, I tried to correct you and you thought you knew best

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3754 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...