Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3953 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

A browse on Companies House shows CIVEA to have been struck off on 18th September 2012 for failing to provide accounts? does this mean the bailiff bonds they used to underwrite and the input to the MoJ is now carried out by a sole trader?

 

Anyone got thoughts on this?

 

WD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Civil enforcement association ltd (civea) registered april 2011

 

Directors :- colin naylor (director - dukes)

Michael shang (director - rossendales)

Paul caddy (private parking companies background)

Simon jacobs (director - jacobs)

None of the beliefs held by "Freemen on the land" have ever been supported by any judgments or verdicts in any criminal or civil court cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder how this affects their status, and whether they are actually allowed to operate as a Sole Trader being a "Trade Body" purporting to represent enforcement companies?

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonkeydonkey......you are CORRECT !!

 

This is really odd and I am very surprised indeed.

 

According to Companies House CIVEA Ltd was incorporated on 1st February 2011 and on that same date, Dr Steve Everson was appointed as a Director.

 

On 5th June 2012 an advertisement was placed in the London Gazette regarding CIVEA's failure to file accounts and accordingly, CIVEA was eventually struck off Companies House and dissolved on 18th September 2012.

 

I will make some more enquiries today as CIVEA also, as part of their "membership" package issue "Bailiff Bonds".

 

This is really odd.

 

Thank you WD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how long it will take for this information to be copied by other forums??

Not long before a certain site with a merry vapour trail at the helm, makes out it renders CIVEA unlawful.

Edited by brassnecked

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

CIVEA as a "body" does appear to still exist.

 

At the same address is also registered the following company:

 

Name & Registered Office:

 

CIVIL ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION LIMITED

513 BRADFORD ROAD

BATLEY

WEST YORKSHIRE

WF17 8LL

Company No. 07605050

 

Status : ACTIVE

 

Date of Incorporation : 14/04/2011

 

Accounting Reference Date: 31/01

Last Accounts Made Up To: 30/04/2012 (TOTAL EXEMPTION SMALL)

Next Accounts Due: 31/10/2013

Last Return Made Up To: 14/04/2013

Next Return Due: 12/05/2014

 

However, It appears that CIVEA is failing to comply with the Business Name Act 2006, in that it is not correctly displaying at all who CIVEA actually is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TomTubby, May I ask what clarification?

 

CIVEA LTD : Company No. 07512697

CIVEA LIMITED

513 BRADFORD ROAD

BATLEY

WEST YORKSHIRE

UNITED KINGDOM

WF17 8LL

 

is as WD stated now dissolved 18/09/2012

 

CIVIL ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION LIMITED

513 BRADFORD ROAD

BATLEY

WEST YORKSHIRE

WF17 8LL

Company No. 07605050

 

is still active

 

However and rather interesting is that civea.co.uk is registered to yet another company at the same address

 

Domain name:

civea.co.uk

 

Registrant:

The Association of Civil Enforcement Agencies Limited

 

Registrant type:

UK Limited Company, (Company number: 3210173)

 

Registrant's address:

Victoria Mills

513 Bradford Road

Batley

WF17 8LL

United Kingdom

 

and companies house show this

 

Status: Active - Proposal to Strike off

Date of Incorporation: 10/06/1996

 

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

 

ACEA was the original "body" for the bailiff industry before they combined with CIVEA.

Edited by sweep1
Ammended answer
Link to post
Share on other sites

I now see what they have done. Thank you Sweep.

 

CIVEA no longer register themselves at Companies House as CIVEA and INSTEAD are registered as CIVIL ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES LTD.

 

Well.....at least they know that people here on the forum don't miss a thing !!!!!

 

PS: I think it was this particular forum which last year noticed that Shergroup and some of the other companies which share the same Director were also the subject to advertisements in the London Gazette and were then dissolved. This was only rectified a few weeks later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thought I would add this one which is Jacobs bailiffs, No 07916116

 

Status: Active - Proposal to Strike off

Date of Incorporation: 19/01/2012

 

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

Company Type: Private Limited Company

Nature of Business (SIC):

None Supplied

Accounting Reference Date: 31/01

Last Accounts Made Up To: (NO ACCOUNTS FILED)

Next Accounts Due: 19/10/2013

Last Return Made Up To:

Next Return Due: 16/02/2013 OVERDUE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strike Jacobs off? The sooner the better and close tem down. I'm sure they are trying to emulate the late unlamented Drakes with their nastiness.

 

They will doubtless phoenix though and rise again.

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact since the 1960's Jacobs have traded as Sole Traders under the name of Jacobs Certificated Bailiffs as opposed to being a Limited Company and it would seem that last year,they decided to set up a Limited Company with the same name although this company does not appear to have traded and look like being dissolved.

 

Clearly the good folk here on the forum will make sure that each company "toes the line".....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...