Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello I hope someone can give me some advice here, as I am at a bit of a loss on how to proceed. This relates to alleged offences under the RTA. Yesterday I received a notification from the local police of intention to prosecute for the following offences: 1 driving without due care and attention 2 failing to stop at a road traffic accident 3 failing to report a road traffic accident At this stage they have only asked me to say whether I was the driver at the time or not and provided a blank sheet of paper to give information about the incident. Going by the location (just round the corner from where I live) I can only imagine this relating to one recent incident, which wasn't actually an accident but more of a road rage event. I was driving past someone unloading or working next to his lorry which had stopped in the road. I wasn't going fast or anything, while I went by lorry man turned around and punched and kicked my car whilst going past him. I stopped and got out and wanted to know what he thought he was doing punching and kicking my car. He then hurled some verbal abuse at me, swearing and he was quite aggressive. I still didn't know what his problem was and said I would report him to his company for threatening behaviour and vandalism for punching my car. I got my phone and tried to take a photo of his lorry and number plate but at that moment he came right at me, still shouting and swearing, so I was worried he may hit me next, as he already punched my car. I thought if the guy hits me I will come off second best, so I decided to retreat. I quickly got back into my car and left. When I checked my phone later the photo I tried to take was blurred and useless, so I thought it was pointless to report the incident to the police, as the guy would not be traceable. Over that I forgot about it until I got the letter yesterday in the post. This is the only thing I believe this can relate to, but I have no idea based on what the three above allegations come from There was no road traffic accident, more of a road rage incident. So I am at a loss what to do. I have 28 days to respond. Should I just say yes I was the driver and was there and see what happens next, or should I already make a written statement on the attached piece of paper they sent me and send that with it ? Is there anyone here who would have a rough idea what to do next ? I tried my legal advice line through my Union, but they have sent me from pillar to post, now say it needs to go to a different department again and that would be chargeable as the RTA comes under Criminal Law. So any advice would be appreciated Many Thanks
    • So a quick update got bounced around two different departments and managed to speak to a DVLA bod , explained the situation and they could see the overlap and that DD payments had been made from Feb , also no formal remiders prior , they gave me a number for the legal dept who I am calling this morning to see what they can do in terms of the SJP notice , still have time to submit this online.  Will update after my chat this morning 
    • Also, I am trying to understand how invoicing a large sum in a 6m period becomes tax fraud?   Is it because if he had invoiced over the £85k threshold he should have been obligated to charge vat?  Which would have meant hmrc would have benefited from the vat amount? So by not charging it Hmrc have lost out on £s revenue?  Is that what makes it tax fraud? So as a self-employed contractor, let's say he invoiced one Co for 200k.  Should he have charged vat on the full 200k (£40k)? Or just on the sum above the threshold (£23k)?  And that by not charging vat, he has knowingly withheld tax £s from Hmrc? And is the payer complicit ?
  • Our picks

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

stanford and green levied on all the cars parked in my close subject to checks


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3956 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

hi all ,

 

yesterday, 14/08/13, Stanford and Green stuck a letter through my door , i live in a close , they have basically levied on everyones car that was parked in the close at the time , mine included, but have written subject to DVLA checks at the bottom ...... can they actually do this? levy with out proof let alone cars that dont belong to me ...

 

any info much appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi all ,

 

yesterday, 14/08/13, Stanford and Green stuck a letter through my door , i live in a close , they have basically levied on everyones car that was parked in the close at the time , mine included, but have written subject to DVLA checks at the bottom ...... can they actually do this? levy with out proof let alone cars that dont belong to me ...

 

any info much appreciated

 

No bloody way can they do this !! This is referred to by the DVLA as a "fishing expedition" and I can ASSURE you that DVLA will not allow this company to do this.

 

How many cars have been "levied upon"?

 

What sort of debt are they enforcing?

 

If council tax, do you know the amount of the Liability Order?

 

I have a "discussion" ongoing at this very moment in time on another thread regarding "Third Party Claims" and you post is clear proof of the serious problems that can arise next year when the government propose that if a levy is made upon a car that does not belong to the debtor that the (innocent) THIRD PARTY will be required to pay into court an amount equal to the value of the car together with the BAILIFF FEES accrued.

 

I hope that nobody minds but I am going to send you a PM for a copy of the document (with personal info removed).

Link to post
Share on other sites

in all , including mine 7. its for council tax i have found the court summons which states , council tax £387.11, summons costs; court £3.00 , council £52 total due £442.11. the letter from stanford and Green states ; arrears due to authority £472.11 ( there is a discrepancy to start with), fees £42.50, levy fees £39.38, attendance charges £125 total £678.99.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TT, you might not be able to pm lacypillows because they do not have sufficient privileges yet, if you want to message it to me, I will pass it on for you.

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

In almost all posts that I respond to I always ask the poster to obtain confirmation from the COUNCIL of the amount of the Liability Order and you post is PROOF that bailiffs companies do indeed mislead or LIE to the debtor as to the correct amount and this is sadly "industry practice" with so many bailiff companies fraudulently attempting to charge the debtor for two initial visits. The statutory fee scale allow a bailiff to charge a fee of £24.50 for "attending to levy" (where no levy was made) and a further 2nd visit can be charged at £18.00. UNLESS a levy is made, no further fees can be applied. In your case there appears to be a serious discrepancy of £30.

 

Worryingly, another "industry practice" fee is the "attendance fee" of £125.

 

The statutory fees scale only allows for an "attending to remove" fee to be applied to an account and such fee can ONLY be applied where the bailiff has PREVIOUSLY levied upon goods.

 

If the above is not serious enough, there is a also the additional matter of EXCESSIVE seizure. The bailiff has "seized" 7 vehicles for a debt of just £442.

 

The goods news is that with council tax debts, the LOCAL AUTHORITY are wholly responsible for the levy ( all 7 of them) and the fees charged by their AGENTS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the council are stating £472.11 even though i have it in black and white from themselves on the summons its £442.11, its like banging your head on the wall!

so where do i stand with the fees/levys/ charges, car being hauled off etc, do i have any rights and im sure my neighbours know nothing of their cars being seized dvla checks or not

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the council know that their agents have levied upon 7 cars?

 

Are you sure that the letter from the council is not to advise you that they are LOOKING to get a Laibility Order and does it say that we have obtained one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i doubt very much the council know about the 7 cars, the letter from the council was a summons to appear in court , 09/07/2012, for non payment of council tax for the year 2012/2013 so im guessing a liability order was obtained , i have just emailed them again asking for a break down of amount actually owing fees and costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any update ?

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...