Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well.   But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them.   If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction.   Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2307 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

My daughter had her car seized and taken away for 6 unpaid £35 parking tickets, all received outside her own front door whilst waiting for a residents parking permit.

 

The parking trolls knew she lived there but never once knocked on her door to give her the chance to move the car. She has lost her job and cannot afford to pay car park fees and has been trying to move her car around, not easy when you are a resident and there is nowhere to park if you are not a resident.

 

She was not given any warning that they were going to take the car and it cost us £2200 to get it back. The bailiff from Jacobs didnt even give her the chance to pay any money to stop him taking the car, he just took it. She then received a letter, the day AFTER they took the car, warning her that she had 10 days to make an arrangement to pay the outstanding amount.

 

This was dated the day before they seized the car and was for £1700. Strangely, the debt increased by £500 over night and she wasn't even given 24 hours notice. These people are shysters and operating on the say so of a shyster council. The bailiff even had the hard face to call my daughter a liar to myself as I was handing over the money to release the car!! She is not a liar, he did not hand her a notice, or post one through her door.

 

This is now proven by the fact she received it through the mail/post!! And he rang to tell me his office had not posted any letter out They have not acted within proper lawful procedure and I am sure this is happening more than we know about.

Edited by citizenB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your Daughter should visit her nearest Citizens Advice about this, but could do with finding out more information from the council and bailiffs.

 

From the council, you need more information on the parking tickets, what the councils processes are for the issuing of these and their processes in regard to enforcement. I would suggest a formal complaint.

 

From the bailiffs your daughter need details of their fees.

 

"From:

My Name

My Address

To:

Acme bailifflink3.gif Co

bailifflink3.gif House

Ref: Account No: 123456

Dear Sir

With reference to the above account, Can you please provide me with a breakdown of the charges.

This includes:

a - the time & date of any Bailiff action that incurred a Fee.

b - the reason for the fee.

c - the name(s) of the Bailiff(s) that attended on each occasion a Fee was charged.

d - the name(s) of the Court(s) the Bailiff(s) was/were certificated

e - the date of the Certification.

 

This is not a Subject access request(under the Data Protection Act S7 1998 so does not incur a fee of £10. You are obliged to provide this information.

I require this information within 14 days.

 

Yours faithfully

Ripped off customer"


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did your daughter receive the parking tickets ?

 

Did she appeal any of them ?

 

The council would have to send her a Notice to Owner, a Charge Certificate and finally an Order for Recovery for EACH PCN. Did she receive all of these statutory notices?

 

Once the bailiff is passed the warrant, there is sadly NO legal obligation on them to write to the debtor. There is only an obligation to write if he has charged £11.20 for a "letter fee".

 

I am very shocked at the amount that was requested in the letter from Jacobs of £1,700. Have you received a breakdown and if so...please post back with details?

 

It would seem that the bailiff may well of applied "multiple fees" for enforcing more than one Liability Order at the same time. This should NOT be permitted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for starters they are not £35 per ticket, that 35 quid is on the 50% discount so they would be 70, once they go thru tec they will be 105 quid. so thats about 630. then their are bailiff costs that are recoverable by the debtor, i know that once a bailiff gets a WOE for TMA they are about 280-350 quid each, wether or not the fees can be put on each one is questionable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is difficult to provide much further info without a response from Mariah to the questions that I raised in post number 4.

 

sgtbush...you are of course correct that the "starting point" of the PCN would have been just £35 but this is the amount payable at the early discount period. With CC London charges the position is even worse in that the amount payable to enter the Zone is £8 and if not paid within 24 hours rises to £60.

 

Sadly it is the case that bailiffs are making a fortune because motorists do not pay or appeal the PCN at the early stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...