Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • NewsBot
      cpttltd.com (Clone of FCA authorised firm)

      By NewsBot · Posted

      Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Man in the middle
      Letter from Police, intention to prosecute RTA - advice please on how to proceed

      By Man in the middle · Posted

      Seems OK, except that you must provide your details (as the driver). Include your name, address, DOB and driving licence number. This is to comply with s172 of the Road Traffic Act. Keep a copy and get a free Certificate of Posting from the Post Office.
    • Aleafstorm
      Further Steps Notice and Notice of Enforcemant regarding court case I was unaware of.

      By Aleafstorm · Posted

      Dear all, some information/advice required please.   I recently received a Further Steps Notice about a fine from 19/03/2018 which I knew nothing about. It was regarding a vehicle parked on the street without tax ( It was covered up and there because the only key to it had been stolen, I had been away from home  and I was having trouble getting a new key cut and coded to the vehicle )  I had not made a change of address to DVLA which would be why I knew nothing about the fine until receiving the final steps notice dated 29th April 2024 and giving me 10 working days to pay, although the notice did not arrive till May 9th 2024. I emailed the London Collection and Compliance Centre on May 13th 2024 asking for any information and they sent me a copy of the original fine. It is for  £390 back vehicle tax, £85 cost and £600 fine.  I now have received a Notice of Enforcement dated 7th June 2024 demanding payment ( total £1036)  or an arrangement by 6am 15th June ( tomorrow )  My question is is it tool late now to question the £600 fine part of the total amount to be paid ? That amount seems punitive.  Would making a statuary declaration regarding having no knowledge of the original court date apply ? And any other advice gratefully received. I am on Universal Credit and apparently they have already taken £177 via benefit reductions which I wasn’t aware of, but does make it seem strange that they were also unable to contact me.    Many thanks for any assistance 
    • NewsBot
      lyxorassetmanagement.com (Clone of Previously Authorised FCA Firm)

      By NewsBot · Posted

      Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Consumer Lover
      Scotland: Statute barred/Prescribed date vs 5 year default date anniversary

      By Consumer Lover · Posted

      You're right of course, just jarring when an actual man child is knocking on my door so close to the end. Anyway, I'll keep this thread updated if ever any exciting does actually happen. Thanks again.

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.
Latest activity

Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed

IS IT ME?

By IS IT ME?
in Mortgages and Secured Loans

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3759 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

bhall

bhall

Posted
Posted
Hi Dodgeball, Oh I'm clear and I understand your point of view, although, I don't agree with it. Just to make it clear for you, IsItMe's friend, IsItMe, Apple and all other the posters that have contributed to this thread, that have had the borrowers best interests at heart, have not lost sight of what is being discussed here...BP

 

They (is it me?'s friend, it would appear has never actually posted in this thread, unless they have never identified themselves as his friend and Is It me? only ever posts to agree with something apple has said or to demand answers to his questions) might have the borrowers best interests at heart but by misinterpreting the law - they are not helping anyone

 

I like to think that you also refer to me(being one of the other posters that have contributed to this thread) as having the borrowers best interests at heart, in my long running battle with Apple to post the truth about the law instead of interpretations and fanciful ideas as, has been shown today

 

Besides which, I feel DB has shown an indepth understanding of this thread and the topics that have been discussed

 

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

Peterbard

Peterbard

Posted
Posted

I have the best interest of borrowers at heart as I am sure does Ben and the other contributors to this thread.

 

It is not in the best interest of anyone to make argument in court that cannot succeed, it will just incur more costs and create further misery.

 

It is very nice to think that there is a magic pill that will make all our debts and problems go away, and forums like this a breading grounds for half baked ideas like this one.

Usually they are harmless however sometimes people take them seriously and act on them.

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
fletch70

fletch70

Posted
Posted

Sadly , and I am not pointing any fingers, not all posters do have the consumers best interest at heart. What they have is a desperate need to be right and to be respected

 

As the saying goes.......Truth will out:lol:

 

I for one eagerly await . At that point someone will have some serious egg on their face . From past experience I have a pretty good idea who it will be which will be ashame .

 

Dodge/Ben when it is all done and dusted I am sure you will be able to explain it to me in words of one syllable

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites
bigphil61

bigphil61

Posted
Posted
They (is it me?'s friend, it would appear has never actually posted in this thread, unless they have never identified themselves as his friend) might have the borrowers best interests at heart but by misinterpreting the law - they are not helping anyone

 

Besides which, I feel DB has shown an indepth understanding of this thread and the topics that have been discussed

 

Hi Ben, Interpretation is available to us all, and that fundimental right, as we should expect, will also be excerised by the Judges at the Property Chamber...BP

Many of life’s failures are experienced by people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

Link to post
Share on other sites
steampowered

steampowered

Posted
Posted

I agree we will have to wait for the chamber's decision. There has been 262 pages of discussion - its clear not everyone is going to agree.

 

 

Any word on when a decision is likely? Are the various cases being heard together?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
sequenci

sequenci

Posted
Posted
I agree we will have to wait for the chamber's decision. There has been 262 pages of discussion - its clear not everyone is going to agree.

 

 

Any word on when a decision is likely? Are the various cases being heard together?

 

We should know about the first cases on the 20th Jan. I would imagine that these decisions will then (potentially) be applied to the other cases that are in the pipeline.

 

Well that's my understanding anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
bhall

bhall

Posted
Posted

The Property Chamber say a written decision will most likely be issued after 20 Feb 2014 - Is It Me? says that the case has been stayed for 28 days for the lender to provide some unidentified documentation - so we will have to wait and see - however, I do agree with the notion that is best to just wait now until the Property Chambers written decision is issued - to finally conclude matters one way or the other.

 

It is only going to be another 9 or so days, so I think I will wait until then

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites
fletch70

fletch70

Posted
Posted

I am sure it will be posted as soon as poss. I just hope we get the same interpretation on the outcome.

I imagine if it is a consumer win it will be appealed, not sure what will happen if its a consumer loss

 

I have seen three interpretations to the frost case

1) The judge was a drunken fool (not my opinion)

2) That is the end of no agreement means no enforcement

3) the witnesses were so unreliable the judge didn't really have an option

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites
bhall

bhall

Posted
Posted

 

I for one eagerly await . At that point someone will have some serious egg on their face . From past experience I have a pretty good idea who it will be which will be ashame .

 

I have soap and water on stand by, just in case it is me :-)

 

(hope this is not classed as beer garden talk)

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites
bhall

bhall

Posted
Posted
I am sure it will be posted as soon as poss. I just hope we get the same interpretation on the outcome.

 

I am hoping that it will be posted without any interpretation - allowing everyone to read it for themselves and form their own views before interpretations start. (I can but hope)

 

may be just a few relevant extracts will be posted to highlight some of the aspects of the decision made

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites
bhall

bhall

Posted
Posted
The Property Chamber say a written decision will most likely be issued after 20 Feb 2014 - Is It Me? says that the case has been stayed for 28 days for the lender to provide some unidentified documentation - so we will have to wait and see - however, I do agree with the notion that is best to just wait now until the Property Chambers written decision is issued - to finally conclude matters one way or the other.

 

It is only going to be another 9 or so days, so I think I will wait until then

 

Just called and spoken with the Property Chamber and they say the decision for the case references they previously gave me, is still expected after 20 Feb - It will then take a few days to appear on their website - So hopefully by the end of the month / early next month - we will know what the Property Chamber has to say on this issue, once and for all.

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites
Peterbard

Peterbard

Posted
Posted
Hi Ben, Interpretation is available to us all, and that fundimental right, as we should expect, will also be excerised by the Judges at the Property Chamber...BP

 

I think that when we do it, it is interpretation when judges do it , it is the Law :)

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
Ell-enn

Ell-enn

Posted
Posted

If the consumer wins - what do they expect the outcome to do for them - are they expecting the money they borrowed to buy their home to be written off ?

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
bhall

bhall

Posted
Posted
If the consumer wins - what do they expect the outcome to do for them - are they expecting the money they borrowed to buy their home to be written off ?

 

From some of the posts that would appear to be the case, there are some posts also about any payments already made also being refunded etc

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ell-enn

Ell-enn

Posted
Posted
I'm not sure that they will - that's a different entity altogether.

 

 

So what is it that they expect a win to do for them ?

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Peterbard

Peterbard

Posted
Posted

As a matter of interst

If this were an agreement regulated under the Consumer credit act(which it isn't) section 106 has a feature where the sums borrowed on an invalid security have to be returned.

 

However before anyone gets to excited this does not apply to registered charges ala LOPA, these are exempted form the provision via section 117.

 

I would have to do more research but I have a feeling that the contractual element of the registered charge would still be in effect even if the deed was proven to be void. The lender would just have to recover it in the same way as he would a conventional charge (without a transfer of property rights).

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
Ell-enn

Ell-enn

Posted
Posted

Perhaps Applecart could explain - I'm really interested to know

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
fletch70

fletch70

Posted
Posted

I thought originally it was to keep them in their home . If they can not pay the mortgage that must be unsustainable so the only option would be for them to have the whole loan declared void effectively gifting them the house. That is why I can not see it happening or if it does it will be appealed all the way

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites
sequenci

sequenci

Posted
Posted
I thought originally it was to keep them in their home . If they can not pay the mortgage that must be unsustainable so the only option would be for them to have the whole loan declared void effectively gifting them the house. That is why I can not see it happening or if it does it will be appealed all the way

 

Why would it make the loan aspect void?

Link to post
Share on other sites
bhall

bhall

Posted
Posted
I thought originally it was to keep them in their home . If they can not pay the mortgage that must be unsustainable so the only option would be for them to have the whole loan declared void effectively gifting them the house. That is why I can not see it happening or if it does it will be appealed all the way

 

It gets confusing when you read back the thread

 

Who said he would lose his home just so you know and can tell you bosses there are funds in place to pay the lender off if need be but the lender has to prove they are the ones that own the mortgage and after 4 court orders have FAILED to do so

It's funny that after all this time when asked to stop posting you would not but kept on trying to put people off but you could not so NOW you are leaving well done

See you at the property chamber Ben

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites
fletch70

fletch70

Posted
Posted

Only in that it seems pointless in going through all this to keep your home when you then face say a SD and lose your home anyway. I wasn't giving any sort of opinion just common sense.

 

I don't know but I also imagine there will be costs involved as well so it seems to me it might well be a lose lose situation.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3759 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.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...