Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The Contract itself The airport is actually owned by the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan. There should be an authority from them for Bristol airport group  to sign on their behalf. Without it the contract is invalid. The contract has so many  clauses redacted that it is questionable as to its fairness with regard to the Defendants ability to receive a fair trial. In the case of WH Holding Ltd, West Ham United Football Club Ltd -v- E20 Stadium LLP [2018],  In reaching its decision, the Court gave a clear warning to parties involved in litigation: ‘given the difficulties and suspicions to which extensive redaction inevitably gives rise, parties who decide to adopt such an appropriate in disclosure must take enhanced care to ensure that such redactions are accurately made, and must be prepared to suffer costs consequences if they are not’. The contract is also invalid as the signatories are required to have their signatures co-signed by independent witnesses. There is obviously a question of the date of the signatures not being signed until 16 days after the start of the contract. There is a question too about the photographs. They are supposed to be contemporaneous not taken several months before when the signage may have been different or have moved or damaged since then. The Defendant respectfully asks the Court therefore to treat the contract as invalid or void. With no contract there can be no breach. Indeed even were the contract regarded as valid there would be no breach It is hard to understand why this case was brought to Court as there appears to be no reasonable cause to apply to the DVLA.............
    • Danny - point taken about the blue paragraphs.  Including them doesn't harm your case in any way.  It makes no odds.  It's just that over the years we've had judges often remarking on how concise & clear Caggers' WSs have been compared to the Encyclopaedia Britannica-length rubbish that the PPCs send, so I always have a slight preference to cut out anything necessary. Don't send off the WS straight away .. you have plenty of time ... and let's just say that LFI is the Contract King so give him a couple of days to look through it with a fine-tooth comb.
    • Do you have broadband at home? A permanent move to e.g. Sky Glass may not fit with your desire to keep your digibox,, but can you move the items you most want off the digibox? If so, Sky Glass might suit you. You might ask Sky to loan you a “puck” and provide access as an interim measure. another option might be using Sky Go, at least short term, to give you access to some of the Sky programming while awaiting the dish being sorted.
    • £85PCM to sky, what!! why are you paying so much, what did you watch on sky thats not on freeview?  
    • Between yourself and Dave you have produced a very good WS. However if you were to do a harder hitting WS it may be that VCS would be more likely to cancel prior to a hearing. The Contract . VCS [Jake Burgess?] are trying to conflate parking in a car park to driving along a road in order to defend the indefensible. It is well known that "NO Stopping " cannot form a contract as it is prohibitory. VCS know that well as they lose time and again in Court when claiming it is contractual. By mixing up parking with driving they hope to deflect from the fact trying to claim that No Stopping is contractual is tantamount to perjury. No wonder mr Burgess doesn't want to appear in Court. Conflation also disguises the fact that while parking in a car park for a period of time can be interpreted as the acceptance of the contract that is not the case while driving down a road. The Defendant was going to the airport so it is ludicrous to suggest that driving by a No Stopping  sign is tacitly accepting  the  contract -especially as no contract is even being offered. And even if a motorist did not wish to be bound by the so called contract what could they do? Forfeit their flight and still have to stop their car to turn around? Put like that the whole scenario posed by Mr Burgess that the Defendant accepted the contract by driving past the sign is absolutely absurd and indefensible. I certainly would not want to appear in Court defending that statement either. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I will do the contract itself later.
  • 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

Marlin claimform old £22k EGG credit card 'debt'***Claim Discontinued***


linz2011
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3637 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

Is this okay?

 

DEFENCE

 

I xxxx xxxx of xxxxxx am the Defendant in this action and make the following statement as my defence to the claim made by Marlin.

 

 

1. It is not accepted that the Defendant has an agreement with the Claimant. The Defendant has no knowledge of, or has in their possession any agreement pertaining to the account number given in the Particulars of Claim and so cannot admit or deny an agreement with EGG.

 

 

2. it is 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 with the Claimant; and

b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

3. As per Civil Procedurelink3.gif Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

Despite a request being made under the consumer creditlink3.gif Act 1974, for the agreement and the other documents referred to in the Statement of Particulars, and on payment of the statutory fee of £1.00; the Claimant is still in breach of the s78 request.

 

A further request made via CPR31.14, after the claim had been issued, has also failed to elicit a copy of the agreement and other documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim.

 

4. The Agreement cannot be enforced against the Defendant without an order of the court by the reason of the fact that both the Original Creditor and the Assignee remain in default as set out above and by reason of Section 78 of the Act.

 

5. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

 

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.

 

 

Signed

 

………..

 

Defendant

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just bringing their particulars forward.....cant check a defence until we know what they are suing you for:wink:

 

 

1.By an agreement between Egg Banking plc ("EGG") & the Defendant on or around 02/11/2001 ("the Agreement") EGG agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit card upon the terms & conditions set out therein.

 

2.In breach of the Agreement the Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due & the Agreement was terminated. The Agreement was assigned to the Claimant on 31/01/2013.

 

3.THE CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS 1. 13241.80 2. interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984, namely 8802.68 & continuing until Judgement or sooner payment at the rate of 2.90

 

What is the value of the claim

£22454.48

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Linz ill have to get back to you on this later as I have to go out now.....in the meantime others may post further advice/opinion.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy really appreciate that :-)

 

I have to have my defence back by Saturday and would really appreciate some feedback on the defence. Many thanks

 

Another question am I able to email the defence? Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes linz you are able to email to CCBC....apologies Im later than expected but will be on the forum in the morning if you are around.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Linz ...if you could just confirm are they claiming 13241.80 or 22044.48 ?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh thats some interest...its supposed to be shown within the particulars but not added to the amount until after judgment...the alleged debt of 13241.80 +court fee and sols fee should be the bottom figure.

 

8802.68 is at the discretion of the court.

 

OK back shortly

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just bringing the particulars forward for reference :-

 

Marlin Capital Europe Ltd

 

Date of issue

01/04/2014

 

1.By an agreement between Egg Banking plc ("EGG") & the Defendant on or around 02/11/2001 ("the Agreement") EGG agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit card upon the terms & conditions set out therein.

 

2. In breach of the Agreement the Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due & the Agreement was terminated.

 

3. The Agreement was assigned to the Claimant on 31/01/2013.

 

4.THE CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS 1. 13241.80 2. interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984, namely 8802.68 & continuing until Judgement or sooner payment at the rate of 2.90

 

What is the value of the claim

£22454.48

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it about 8 years since you defaulted Linz ? have you ever made made payment to this crew? roughly when was your last payment?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I worked it back from the interest they are trying to claim...when you say 5 or 6 years you know it makes the world of difference to your defence if its statute barred...any chance you can find exactly the date of last payment?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada Square Operations

PO Box 4903

Worthing

BN99 3AR

 

0800 358 2101 - Egg PPI/canada square operations

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had plenty of time to clarify this huge point Linz ...never pays to leave it to the last day....have you not got bank statements or egg statements at home?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did YBS take over EGG ?

 

0845 166 9204* (Mon-Fri 8am-8pm, Sat 9am-1pm)

 

or 0871 909 0503

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Egg credit cards were transferred to Barclaycard in November 2011. You can contact Barclaycard on 0844 811 9111 or at http://www.mybarclaycard.co.uk.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Linz I have to log off now for a few hours ...if you get any information and it is 6 clear years without payment plus 2/3 months then you submit the following:-

 

1 The Claimant's claim was issued on (date).

 

2 The Claimant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation acticon 1980. If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

 

3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £x or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

 

If not do not submit the defence you have posted its needs attention ...we have until midnight tomorrow to submit.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...