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.  
  • 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

Westcot/Carter/Arrows (old Egg card) CCJ payments- Help please


Nicola19
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3708 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

Often when debts are 'passed around' the murky depths of the debt purchase/collection industry there is the absolute minimum of data provide as the debts are sold in bulk portfolio lots.

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

Ah ok,

 

i am just worried now as i have stopped paying (purely as i am not sure who i should/should have been paying) that they will take further action.

 

I will send the letter to Shoosmiths today then saying i am questioning the account and that i await there response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah ok, i am just worried now as i have stopped paying (purely as i am not sure who i should/should have been paying) that they will take further action. I will send the letter to Shoosmiths today then saying i am questioning the account and that i await there response.

 

You need to adhere to the Court order and NOTHING else. So you pay whoever is stated on the Court order, it's as simple as that.

 

On a different note, what was the CCJ for and can you try to recoup any charges/PPI that may have been included in the Judgement?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The judgement was for an Egg card that i got behind with,

they were asking for payments i couldn't afford after being off work ill,

as far as i am aware there was no ppi on the account,

 

i wasn't aware of sites like this at the time so

 

when i received the papers from the court i didn't know that i could challenge it at that point (2009),

only since finding these forums have i learnt that it is highly likely i can contest all the charges/late/over limit fees

this is why i requested the information from Arrow Global as this is where the debt stemmed from originally when Egg passed it to them.

 

It went to court July 2009 and

 

i agreed to pay Bryan Carter £20 month,

 

i have since had letters from Wescot, Arrow Global and now Shoosmiths.

 

I had no problem keeping to my arrangement with BC,

but for some reason they have now shipped it on to another DCA,

 

i am not happy to start paying Shoosmiths as it seems to me anyone can just write a letter saying i need to pay,

i don't really want to ring Shoosmiths as i know from past experience

that when you call DCA they normally bully and intimidate you,

which i am not prepared to go through, but

 

i suppose it is the only way i am going to find out who actually owns this debt.

 

Having read back through the advice i received a couple of months ago,

i noticed i also need to send a SAR to Egg themselves with the £10 fee in order to get all the relevant information

(which i guess would include all the charges etc).

 

I have thought of sending a token payment to Arrow Global as they were the initial company?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't paid anything since Bryan Carter passed it to Westcot/Arrow

this was July as i hadn't had a letter of confirmation from WescotArrow to say they were taking the debt over, then

 

i got a letter out of the blue saying i needed to start paying them,

 

this is when i took advice on here.

 

I was paying £20 a month to BC Solicitors a

 

nd the debt has reduced from £2400 to around £1900 now.

 

does the wetcloths letter agree with the balance above?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just dug into this a bit more, my credit file shows the following info thought it may be relevant or help:

 

Payments up to date May 2008 balance £2299

Account defaulted September 2008 balance £2514

Judgement July 2009 £2691 (£177 i assume is the courts fees etc)

Payment set up with Bryan Carter Solicitors £20 month

 

13 Feb 2009 Original Debt £2,514.07

24 Jun 2009 Claim Fee £75.00

24 Jun 2009 Claim Cost £80.00

20 Jul 2009 Judgment Cost £22.00

 

Barclaycard £ 0 30/11/2011 Satisfied

 

Bryan Carter returned the debt on 5.7.13 with a balance of £1891.07

 

 

Don't know if this helps at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will have to check all the letters when i get home (currently at work):|

 

From what i can remember yes i think it did. Just checked the Shoosmiths letter and it is for the same balance £1891.07 so its definitely been passed to them by the looks of it. Can't understand how it can be passed about so much, it's no wonder i haven't a clue who i should be paying!!! :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just an update really,

 

i've since had a response from Shoosmiths with what they call a reconstituated copy of the original Egg credit agreement,

 

i sent a stern reply back saying i didn't ask for the credit agreement,

 

i requested a full statement of the account.

 

I sent my response on the 17th February, not had any response as yet.

 

I expect what i am asking for is the SAR

 

which in a previous post was confirmed i should be asking for this from Egg themselves,

 

so i need to make this my next priority.

 

Annoyed really as if it had been left with BC i would have been a further £140 less on this debt now

and that bit closer to clearing it!! :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes I would sar EGG

 

at the Canadian square address.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...