Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If Labour are elected I hope they go after everyone who made huge amounts of money out of this, by loading the company with debt. The sad thing is that some pension schemes, including the universities one, USS, will lose money along with customers.
    • What's the reason for not wanting a smart meter? Personally I'm saving a pile on a tariff only available with one. Today electricity is 17.17p/kWh. If the meter is truly past its certification date the supplier is obliged to replace it. If you refuse to allow this then eventually they'll get warrant and do so by force. Certified life varies between models and generations, some only 10 or 15 years, some older types as long as 40 years or maybe even more. Your meter should have its certified start date marked somewhere so if you doubt the supplier you can look up the certified life and cross check.
    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
    • Oil and gold prices have jumped, while shares have fallen.View the full article
    • Thank you for your reply, DX! I was not under the impression that paying it off would remove it from my file. My file is already trashed so it would make very little difference to any credit score. I am not certain if I can claim compensation for a damaged credit score though. Or for them reporting incorrect information for over 10 years? The original debt has been reported since 2013 as an EE debt even though they had sold it in 2014. It appears to be a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 13 and this all should have come to a head when I paid the £69 in September 2022, or so I thought. The £69 was in addition to the original outstanding balance and not sent to a DCA. Even if I had paid the full balance demanded by the DCA back in 2014 then the £69 would still have been outstanding with EE. If it turns out I have no claim then so be it. Sometimes there's not always a claim if there's blame. The CRA's will not give any reason for not removing it. They simply say it is not their information and refer me to EE. More to the point EE had my updated details since 2022 yet failed to contact me. I have been present on the electoral roll since 2012 so was traceable and I think EE have been negligent in reporting an account as in payment arrangement when in fact it had been sold to a DCA. In my mind what should have happened was the account should have been defaulted before it was closed and sold to the DCA who would then have made a new entry on my credit file with the correct details. However, a further £69 of charges were applied AFTER it was sent to the DCA and it was left open on EE systems. The account was then being reported twice. Once with EE as open with a payment arrangement for the £69 balance which has continued since 2013 and once with the DCA who reported it as defaulted in 2014 and it subsequently dropped off and was written off by the DCA, LOWELL in 2021. I am quite happy for EE to place a closed account on my credit file, marked as satisfied. However, it is clear to me that them reporting an open account with payment arrangement when the balance is £0 and the original debt has been written off is incorrect? Am I wrong?
  • 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

Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3702 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

This is again a nun ported case, the chamber sates it was asked by the 'appellant to send this out????

I know of no appellant asking for this to be done and as it is trying to stop the cases going though why would the appellant send it out??? Some thing is going on here me thinks

 

OH no it's only me???? Lol

 

Ummm IS IT ME who is this Applicant ?

 

pj

e-petition is live please sign it.. unlawful repossessions..!!!

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56915

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The letter from the chamber says - " I have been asked to send you the enclosed copy decision of HH Judge Blunsdon dated 20th March 2013. This has been sent to us by the Applicant in another case similar to your case..."

 

Has anyone else had this case through? Joseph Henry Fergus (by LPA Receivers P Jardine and GC Davis) and Calvin Matthews and Persons Unknown. - Lambeth County Court..

 

Is there any way this case can be posted if I get it scanned in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is -

1. who is the Applicant who asked this to be sent?

2. Why would an Applicant send a case through that still harps on about section 2 LPMPA 89?

3. Why are the Property Chamber doing the dirty work of the lenders?

 

I think I need to make a call to the Chamber tomorrow. All very confusing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter from the chamber says - " I have been asked to send you the enclosed copy decision of HH Judge Blunsdon dated 20th March 2013. This has been sent to us by the Applicant in another case similar to your case..."

 

Has anyone else had this case through? Joseph Henry Fergus (by LPA Receivers P Jardine and GC Davis) and Calvin Matthews and Persons Unknown. - Lambeth County Court..

 

Is there any way this case can be posted if I get it scanned in?

 

Has anyone remembered to PM Sequenci?

 

He was going to see if he/she could get a link to the case to help out.... that would save a lot of time?

 

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

I don't think so

 

Oh well... hopefully Sequenci will remember and get back to us on this......

 

I can imagine we need to look at it pretty swiftly.....

 

The clock is ticking.....

 

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

Will have a hunt once I've finished my working day. I *might* be able to find it :)

 

Sequenci.........any joy???

 

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

Maybe the chamber are allowing you to see what the lenders would rely on so you can see how you can fight it.

 

Surely it's good that you know what you're up against and enable you to prepare to fight it.

 

If you scan it you should be able to post it up.

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

Sequenci was going to post it up if he could find it as I can't find on the inter web lol

 

If it is a case sent to the Chamber by the Applicant.....then it is possibly a case that will help other Applicants......I can't see a lender asking the Chamber to send a case that would assist Applicants can 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

Maybe the chamber are allowing you to see what the lenders would rely on so you can see how you can fight it.

 

Surely it's good that you know what you're up against and enable you to prepare to fight it.

 

If you scan it you should be able to post it up.

 

That would be a first........why would the Chamber show all applicants a lenders "hand" before the trial???

 

They sent out 'lamb'.....that was strange also.... got us all in a tizzy on here.....

 

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

If it is a case sent to the Chamber by the Applicant.....then it is possibly a case that will help other Applicants......I can't see a lender asking the Chamber to send a case that would assist Applicants can you?

 

Apple

 

Whoever it helps it has to be better to know in advance than let them spring any surprises on the day.

 

TimetogoRAM asked if it could be posted if he scans it, and it can by hitting Go Advanced on a new post and using the paper clip to attach the scan.

 

If it's a new case it may not be on the legal databases yet.

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

That would be a first........why would the Chamber show all applicants a lenders "hand" before the trial???

 

They sent out 'lamb'.....that was strange also.... got us all in a tizzy on here.....

 

Apple

 

In a court case it's standard practice for both sides to provide a bundle of documents that they intend to rely on in court to enable them to prepare their arguments. I attended a dwp tribunal a while back and received a bundle in advance. I don't see why this tribunal wouldn't ensure parties had the opportunity to prepare in advance too. Often documents submitted on the day are not allowed or an adjournment will be allowed to read and digest the new info. Let's not forget the tribunal should be fair to both parties.

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

Was it before or after the lame case as I can't find it any where , also why would the chamber send this out.?

It's not from an application as no one on here has asked about it erm some thing fishy here

 

I think TTGR said it was 'March 2013'.......'lamb' was July 2013..... we found 'lamb' ok.....if this case was 'before' 'lamb'.......it must be on the data base by now...surely...??

 

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

I think TTGR said it was 'March 2013'.......'lamb' was July 2013..... we found 'lamb' ok.....if this case was 'before' 'lamb'.......it must be on the data base by now...surely...??

 

Apple

 

No idea. Just a suggestion. If TimetogoRAM has a copy and can post it, it saves everyone hunting for it.

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

In a court case it's standard practice for both sides to provide a bundle of documents that they intend to rely on in court to enable them to prepare their arguments. I attended a dwp tribunal a while back and received a bundle in advance. I don't see why this tribunal wouldn't ensure parties had the opportunity to prepare in advance too. Often documents submitted on the day are not allowed or an adjournment will be allowed to read and digest the new info. Let's not forget the tribunal should be fair to both parties.

 

Yes, but it is never the 'court' that send details from the other sides case..it is normally the respondent as party to a trial that would be ordered to disclose any documentary evidence it intends to rely upon.......(the court don't do it for either party) .... yet....we are seeing it is the 'tribunal' (court) sending out particular cases...they are not sending a 'bundle'.....the other side are not sending the 'bundle'.....we are not seeing an 'actual' objection......it is strange behaviour......

 

Ah well.... we haven't yet seen the case...we may not get to discuss it anyway....and if we can't discuss it.... then there is no point it having been sent out in the first place....

 

Surely...if they are looking to prepare both sides.... why not send the complete 'bundle' then... why are they sending it in bits and bobs??

 

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

No idea. Just a suggestion. If TimetogoRAM has a copy and can post it, it saves everyone hunting for it.

 

I think we should let Sequenci have a quick look first.... then, if no joy then we may have no choice.....but... I'm not sure I like this case management approach from the Tribunal in sending out bits and bobs at all......it makes it all seem un-professional...almost 'knee jerk; and reactive.... rather than proactive if you will :sad:

 

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

here's the case from property chamber

 

HIS HONOUR JUDGE BLUNSDEN -V- MR JOSEPH HENRY FERGUS..

 

Well done PJ! I didn't have access to a scanner till later.. Saved me a job. Thanks for this.

 

The first line of this document underlined says it all really - County Court unapproved judgement

Edited by TimetogoRAM
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but it is never the 'court' that send details from the other sides case..it is normally the respondent as party to a trial that would be ordered to disclose any documentary evidence it intends to rely upon.......(the court don't do it for either party) .... yet....we are seeing it is the 'tribunal' (court) sending out particular cases...they are not sending a 'bundle'.....the other side are not sending the 'bundle'.....we are not seeing an 'actual' objection......it is strange behaviour......

 

Ah well.... we haven't yet seen the case...we may not get to discuss it anyway....and if we can't discuss it.... then there is no point it having been sent out in the first place....

 

Surely...if they are looking to prepare both sides.... why not send the complete 'bundle' then... why are they sending it in bits and bobs??

 

Apple

 

Really strange behaviour. It's almost as if the Chamber are trying to put a stop to this.

I know the lender are definitely using tactics to put a stop to it...

 

I have again been copied in to a third email to the Chamber, which is again requesting more time to submit objections to the application.

 

What makes me laugh is that they mention requesting more time because the application has been stayed pending the outcome of similar applications and due to "the tight deadline" - what tight deadline? They've had plenty of time to submit objections.

 

I am still yet to receive any notification from my lender that they have instructed a solicitor - contrary to rule 14 (2)

They also again mention saving costs - which they would like to add will be added to the borrowers mortgage account - contrary to rule 13 (1)©

Edited by TimetogoRAM
Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3702 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...