Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have received a PCN from Euro Car Parks for MFG - Esso Cobham - Gravesend. I was completely unaware that there was any such limit for parking and always considered this to be a service station. I stopped there to use the toilet, have a coffee and made a couple of work calls. I have read the previous topics on this location which suggest I can ignore this and ECP will not take legal action. The one possible complication is that the vehicle is leased by my employer so I do not want to involve them with the associated reminders and threatening letters. The PCN was first issued to the leasing company Arval who have notified ECP of the hiring company. I have attached a copy of the PCN Notice to Hirer with details removed as per instructions. What options do I have or should I just pay the PCN promptly at the reduced rate of £60? img20240424_23142631.pdf
    • What you have uploaded is a letter with daft empty threats from third-party paper tigers.  Just ignore it. What we need to see is the original invoice you received last October or November.
    • Thanks for posting the CPR contents. i do wish you hadn't blanked out the dates and times since at times they can be relevant . Can you please repost including times and dates. They say that they sent a copy of  the original  PCN that they sent to the Hirer  along with your hire agreement documents. Did you receive them and if so can you please upload the original PCN without erasing dates and times. If they did include  all the paperwork they said, then that PCN is pretty near compliant except for their error with the discount time. In the Act it isn't actually specified but to offer a discount for 14 days from the OFFENCE is a joke. the offence occurred probably a couple of months prior to you receiving your Notice to Hirer.  Also the words in parentheses n the Act have been missed off. Section 14 [5][c] (c)warn the hirer that if, after the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to hirer is given, the amount of unpaid parking charges referred to in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(f) or 9(2)(f) (as the case may be) has not been paid in full, the creditor will (if any applicable requirements are met) have the right to recover from the hirer so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Though it states "if any applicable ...." as opposed to "if all applicable......" in Section 8 or 9. Maybe the Site could explain what the difference between the two terms mean if there is a difference. Also on your claim form they keeper referring to you as the driver or the keeper.  You are the Hirer and only the Hirer is responsible for the charge EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T THE DRIVER. So they cannot pursue the driver and nowhere in the Hirer section of the Act is the hirer ever named as the keeper so NPC are pursuing the wrong person.  
  • 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

Legal action - Approved


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3905 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

Just had this from MMF with the same subject as the title of this thread.

 

Mr Goatan,your file has been approved for legal proceedings at your last known address. MMF rely on this SMS re legal costs. 01138876876 Ref: blah blah

 

Fully intend to ignore but i though others should be aware also this game to my e-mail adress not sms and was placed imediatly into the junk folder. BTW would this count as threataning legal action if they never follow through?

Currently Pursuing three credit card companies for PPI and charges.

 

Capital one: Sent the required SAR information late, currently working out my claim.

Egg: Sent the required SAR information on time, curently working out my claim.

Virgin/MBNA: Still waiting less than week left to copmly with SAR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Goatan, If they have no intention of moving forward with legal action, then yes, it is intimidation. You should forward anything of this nature to the OFT.

 

Sillyboy, if the debt is statute barred and you have advised them of this, then whilst the debt doesn't "disappear", then it cannot be collected through the courts. They can ask nicely if you will pay it back, but their own industry regulator even says that once advised, they should close the account.

 

 

 

Whilst the OFT accepts that the debt still exists, the OFT considers that it can be unfair to pursue the debt in the circumstances set out in their Debt Collection Guidance (section 2.13 and 2.14a and b), and it is the methods in which the debt is attempted to be collected that can cause concern to the OFT.

 

In essence, providing you work within legislation and guidance, collection of statute barred accounts is a legitimate activity. However, if your debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred, these accounts should be closed and your records updated appropriately. This will reduce the number of accounts that could be placed back out for collection or sale, which in turn could lead to complaint and create further issues for the industry in this area.

 

NOTE: The sections quoted from the OFT Debt Collection Guidance might be referenced differently in the new guidance.

 

 

Stat barred debt[1].pdf

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb 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.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

well i will give them till the end off the month to make good on this threat then a nice complaint to the OFT is in order.

Currently Pursuing three credit card companies for PPI and charges.

 

Capital one: Sent the required SAR information late, currently working out my claim.

Egg: Sent the required SAR information on time, curently working out my claim.

Virgin/MBNA: Still waiting less than week left to copmly with SAR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to complain NOW. Not give them a few weeks.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

well i will give them till the end off the month to make good on this threat then a nice complaint to the OFT is in order.

 

You need to tackle this NOW MMF is a dangerously unpredictable company!

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny they use the phrase 'last known address' to imply that you have moved and not let them know where you are - especially as they probably have checked your credit file and left a tell-tale footprint indicating that they know you current address..... very much intimidation.

 

If this is also for a payday loan then they have very little paperwork.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This 'last known address' nonsense seems to be an attempt to cover up a possible 'judgement by default' at a previous address, as warned this company is totally without business ethics.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been over 20 days since they sent that so i suppose that would be long enough to show they have no intention. With regards to previous adress thing i only have one other adress that i lived at for a few months with a friend but im back at the same adress i lived at before then and have been here for over 6 years.

 

With regards to a complaint to OFT do i simply need to forward the e-mail them?

Currently Pursuing three credit card companies for PPI and charges.

 

Capital one: Sent the required SAR information late, currently working out my claim.

Egg: Sent the required SAR information on time, curently working out my claim.

Virgin/MBNA: Still waiting less than week left to copmly with SAR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the same email even though the debt is now 7 years old and have told the its statute barred via writing, email and phone. Yet they seem to think that SB doesn't apply to this debt, idiots, complete and utter idiots.

 

Hi sillboywyn, responding to your PM.

 

I understand that MMF have made another rather crass statement regarding limitations not applying to PDL accounts, rubbish of course.

 

Private & Confidential

For the PERSONAL attention of

Mr Robert Sands

Compliance Director

MMF Ltd.,

 

Ref: use theirs:

 

Dear Mr Sands,

 

I refer you to recent contacts made by MMF Ltd regarding an alleged debt for £xxx.xx originating from an account with xxxxxxxxxxxx, please take careful note of the following statement as it seems that the 'operatives' of MMF Ltd are unable to grasp simple facts.

 

1. I DO NOT acknowledge any debt to MMF Ltd.

 

2. The alleged debt is STATUTE BARRED and I will NOT make payment now or in the future.

 

A rather rude and obviously badly trained operative of MMF Ltd has stated ''that this type of debt does not get statute barred'' one would really like to know where this gem originates as it is clearly absolute nonsense.

 

I will of course be reporting the conduct of MMF Ltd., to the OFT/FCA with a comment on the very obvious unfitness of MMF Ltd., to hold a consumer credit licence.

 

MMF Ltd., WILL now confirm that the alleged debt is statute barred and Will cease to process all data relating to me and remove it from its records.

 

I am sure Mr Sands that you and your staff have been reminded many time of the sections regarding the pursuit of statute barred debt laid down in the OFT Guidance on Debt Collection 2003/2006, up dated Nov. 2012 so I will not elaborate further but remind you that further contact from MMF Ltd., may amount to harassment.

 

I would expect a personal response to this communication Mr Sands.

 

This is my final response.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...