Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Russia’s economy has been cut off from the global financial system - but it is still growing. Why?View the full article
    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. 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 10. 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. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • 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

Newlyns now rossendales for old liability order from Canterbury council


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3342 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

1: Don't use your rent money to pay these rats, You need somewhere to live. Your rent is more important than the bailiff.

2: Remove anything of value outside, Move your car a good 10 minutes away, Not ideal when you have kids but away from the rats who will just threaten to take it away

if its not worth enough to cover the amount.

3: Never let them in, no matter what they threaten, Bailiffs do lie and says things to scare you into getting what they want which is money off you

4: Letter of complaint to council regarding payment plan since bailiff co won't accept what you can afford and sounds like they may have ignored you for unjust enrichment for the company as you sent in what they requested which was ignored and allowed them to next stage fees when visiting you.

 

Chances are if bailiff can't levy on anything the account will be sent back to the council where you can make arrangements to pay or just pay them

what you can afford each week.

 

Priority Bills: Rent,CTax,Gas/Electric,Shopping, anything else is none priority and just £1 each

 

 

George

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please monitor this thread tomorrow as I may ask you to pass on some reference numbers to me by email.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should seek debt advice from one of the free advice agencies that the government promote on the forms used by the enforcement agencies. With all due respect to the forum members you need a thorough review of your finances rather than snapshot advice online. Go to your nearest CAB office and if they cannot help try Advice UK, National Debtline, Money Advice Service or Gov.uk. Contact details will be on some of the forms left and Google will help also.

Also more importantly if you are genuinely suicidal please contact the Samaritans as they are the best peoples to assist you. Do that now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel you pain. I am in similar position with parking fines. I have tried working with Rossendales but they refuse, despite me sending in documentation from Dr stating I have mental health needs. We have to keep fighting. I cry everyday and live in fear. its become the norm. the local authority nor rossendales will not help me.

 

 

I don't know where to turn

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rossendales have just emailed me saying that action will continue despite me pleading with the to stop. And from what I've seen on other posts it sounds like they are a nasty bunch. It's no good, I'm just going to have to find the money and pay them before the bailiff turns up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not been around for the past week so this is the first time I have seen this thread. Without knowing more information my first thought was that you should give serious consideration to applying for personal bankruptcy. THis would get rid of all the debts (including council tax) and allow you to start living again without all these old debts around your neck.

 

From what I see here the ONLY problem that you have with Rossendales is that they could take your car. How much is the car worth (roughly)?

 

The bailiff has charged the correct fees and the ONLY additional fee that he can charge now is a removal fee of £110. There is no provision that state that you have to allow a bailiff into your home so please do not worry on this point. Your household items would only ever be taken if you decided to invite the bailiff into your home.

 

The current position is that a payment proposal needs to be outlined to Rossendales today and given the level of your other debts it should be the case that the £235 enforcement fee should be reduced. You should NOT use the rent money to pay this debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely BA, but Rossers would willingly take the rent money and pursue the debtor to the B & B they end up in once evicted for non payment of rent. There must be a protection of rent income on an I & E that is absolute, if Rossers are asking for payments way beyond what can be afforded which seems to be their MO to ground the Enforcement Fee in as many cases as possible, they need a Formal Complaint to the council, and a note to MOJ.

 

Do NOT use the rent money to pay Rossers, do not let them into your home either.

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

As far as I am concerned, a criminal court fine is a 'priority' debt but with all other debts (council tax and road traffic debts) these are CIVIL debts and accordingly, should rank as important as rent, gas, electricity and food. As I say, this is my personal opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rent should have a higher priority than Council Tax, after all it is a tax on property value, and if the payer is rendered homeless as they cannot afford rent and council tax, something is wrong somewhere. Ah yes, council tax takes no account of if an income is sufficient to pay it, and Council Tax relief is now a joke.

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

Hi

 

I had to pay it in the end. I cannot allow my family to have a bailiff come in a take all we have. I will somehow get the money back in time for the rent due date. I have no choice. It will be hard but I'm trying to remain optimistic.

 

Despite my begging Rossendales and the council whose debt it was, nothing was done to stop this. The amount owed was £487 and then went to £650 when it went to Rossendales and this spiralled into £902 very quickly. It would have just kept building up. I will be making a complaint to both the council and to the body responsible for dealing with bailiffs. It won't do me any good now but I need to vent my anger somewhere.

 

This is disgusting as far as I'm concerned and the actions of the local councils are beyond belief in my opinion. Money grabbing *********

 

I know it looks like I ignored everyone's advice not to use my rent money but believe me I wouldn't have if I wasn't reasonably sure I could borrow any shortfall this month. Just puts me in a position of having to get the begging bowl out which isn't good as people get fed up with it. I'm sorry if anyone thinks I just disregarded advice, I just didn't have a choice.

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I will be making a complaint to both the council and to the body responsible for dealing with bailiffs. It won't do me any good now but I need to vent my anger somewhere.

 

 

Almost certainly your complaint needs to be made to the council regarding THEIR actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I've sent to the council.

 

"Hello

 

I wish to lodge an official complaint about your actions and that of your organisation's policies with regard to this type of debt. I know you will write back and say you did everything by the book but that doesn't excuse your actions and the fact you have outsourced debt collection to a firm who have no qualms about bullying people into paying what is owed.

 

I had no choice but to pay Rossendales before the bailiff came round again this morning to take what little we have. BUT, and you need to understand this, I had to pay them from our rent money. That means we may not be able to pay our rent later this month.

 

If you take a look at the consumer action group forum you will see a lot of information about Rossendales and their mode of operation. They are not a nice firm. And before you start sticking your noses in the air and making comments about people paying their bills, please remember that most of us are more than willing to pay the monies we owe but sometimes life kicks you in the backside and it's not always possible to pay on time.

 

Rossendales take no notice of people suffering from depression, mental health, pure and simple poverty or anything else. When you have nothing and a bailiff then wants to take your furniture as well, what does that say about our society. This is a society that council's like yourself have helped create and someone in authority there should stop and consider this and whether it's now worth considering using another collection firm.

 

I am appalled also at the fact I wrote to you asking for your help to intervene and instruct Rossendales to make a reasonable payment arrangement with me but you just ignored my email marked 'urgent'.

 

So although I expect your response to be a simple cut and paste from your 'policy document' that doesn't excuse your role in all of this. Let's hope I can recover that rent money somehow!

 

I want this message flagged up to your Chief Executive as that person should be aware of what Rossendales are doing to people."

 

 

Doubt this will make any difference but it's what I needed to say to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eve,

 

You may wish to 'remind' the local authority of the following Guidance that was issued to all local authorities in mid 2013 by the Rt Hon Eric Pickles. Although new bailiff regulations have been introduced since that time this document continues to be valid. Section 4 is the part that you need to focus on.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/210478/Guidance_on_enforcement_of_CT_arrears.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BA

 

Having read that guidance I would say the LA has no idea how Rossendales operate. If it does then it's condoning bully boy tactics. I will cut and paste and send them another email for attention of the Chief Exec. Rossendales cannot carry on the way they have without answering to someone and maybe it should affect their contracts.

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sent another email to them. They clearly violated sections 4.5 and 4.8.... plus. They lied to me about not being able to take control of the debt again. I'm really furious with them and will pursue it. They owe me the difference between £487 and £902 because of their lies, in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eve,

 

Unfortunately, as good as that guidance is...it is being ignored by more and more local authorities.

 

Most worrying is that only a few months ago Eric Pickles gave an industry speech warning local authorities that they are failing to pursue debtors who fall into arrears and that they need to ensure that council tax arrears are paid at a far quicker rate than at present !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The old double standards then from Pickles BA Certainly a Formal Complaint marked as such should go in copied to Elected Leader, Local Member and MP after all the MP should be able to tell MOJ their shiny new system is being banjaxed by bully bailiffs already.

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

Eve,

 

Unfortunately, as good as that guidance is...it is being ignored by more and more local authorities.

 

 

That is what the Council will hide behind - it is only guidance and not law.

 

Again I must reiterate you to contact your local Councillor(s) and also you should have a good cross party selection of Candidates you can approach - an election is a good time to play them off against each other.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to contact the local authority. Contact your local mp. There are very good people on this forum that can help you too.

 

I'm so sorry Rossendales are doing this to you. It's just awful. Why are they allowed to get away with it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

....Most worrying is that only a few months ago Eric Pickles gave an industry speech warning local authorities that they are failing to pursue debtors who fall into arrears and that they need to ensure that council tax arrears are paid at a far quicker rate than at present !!!

 

This is the way Eric Pickles works. If he is personally aggrieved – like for example receiving a parking ticket – he will abuse his ministerial position to influence how laws are passed in parliament. If this man had the misfortune of personally being fleeced by a private bailiff for being late with his Council Tax you could put money on it that he would again abuse his ministerial position to influence laws that would outlaw these opportunists.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will kick up a fuss as i've nothing to lose now the bailiff fee has been paid. But I hate injustice and unfair treatment of people who aren't in a position to fight back. MPs, well, don't get me started on what I think of them. I doubt i'm alone in thinking they're all self-serving hypocrites. I will find out the names of the councillors on this council and write to them, and perhaps send a copy to Pickles. I want the council to think twice about this in future, but more than that I want Rossendales to be at risk of losing contracts and that can only happen if enough people complain about them. I know there are some good MPs but I'm sure they are hard to find.

 

My eyes have been well and truly opened over the last few years with dealing with debt and with renting our home. People are very vulnerable and it's only going to get worse as more and more people are forced to rent properties that are way overpriced rent-wise and with zero or low pay rises.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the way Eric Pickles works. If he is personally aggrieved – like for example receiving a parking ticket – he will abuse his ministerial position to influence how laws are passed in parliament. If this man had the misfortune of personally being fleeced by a private bailiff for being late with his Council Tax you could put money on it that he would again abuse his ministerial position to influence laws that would outlaw these opportunists.

 

You would expect Edwardo Milibando and the Labour Campaign would not miss out on the opportunity to capitalise on the obvious corruption demonstrated by the Tory Communities and Local Government Secretary of State for selfishly influencing laws that affect the whole Country with justification being because he was personally hit with a bill to pay because of a jobsworth parking attendant.

 

Perhaps the reason he would reserve judgement might be because he was mindful of the fact that a Labour MP who raised concerns in the House of Commons in 2007 about the questionable fairness of the apparent government sanctioned theft by private bailiffs was motivated because of his own personal interests. Those being because his daughter had been sca sca hamed by an opportunist bailiff who had added several £hundreds unlawfully to a parking ticket.

 

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2007-03-27d.1471.0

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How refreshing to once again read Austin Mitchell's superb speech which is commonly known as his 'witching hour' speech as it commenced at 1am in the morning !!! I remember his daughter's complaint about her Southwark parking ticket very well.

 

I would have thought that following my research about the local authority's contracts mentioned by Austin Mitchell in paragraphs 10 and 12 of his speech that improvements may have been made in that area but sadly complaints about LA contracts continues. My research about the samll number of bailiffs being certificated at that time has at least changed ( there are now approx 2,000 bailiffs).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Newlyns now rossendales for old liability order from Canterbury council
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...