Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Afternoon all Looking for advice before I defend claim for car tax payment that the DVLA claim I owe £68 from an idemity claimback from my bank and unpaid tax  So brief outline. Purchased car Jan 30th ,garage paid the tax for me after I gave them my card details so first payment £68 out in Feb 24  followed by payment of £31 from March due to end Jan 24 Checked one of my vehicle apps and about 7-10 days later car showing as untaxed? No reason why but it looks like DVLA cancelled it ,this could be because I did not have the V5 and the gargae paid on my behalf but not sure did not receive a letter to say car was untaxed.  Fair enough I set up the tax again staight away in Feb 24  and first payment out Mar 31st , and each payment since has come out each month for £31 , this will end Feb/Mar 2025 so slightly longer than the original tax set up so all good. I then claimed the £68 back from my bank as an indemity refund as obviously I had paid but DVLA had cancelled therefore it was a payment for nothing?  Last week recieved a SJP form dated 29th May stating that DVLA were claiming for unpaid tax and a false indemity claimback which of course is the £68. It also stated that I had received two previous letters offering me the oppotunity to pay that £68 but as I had not responded it was now a court claim that I must admit guilt for or defend. My post is held for weeks at a time from Royal Mail ( keepsafe) due to me receiving hospital tretament at weeks at a time that said I did not receive any previous letters from DVLA. So I am happy to defend this and go to court but wondering what CAG members think? In summary I paid an initial amount of £68 and then a DD of £31 , tax cancelled so I set up a new DD at £31 a month all in the month of Feb 2024, I claimed the £68 back from my bank. DD has been coming out each month without issue and I have paperwork to show the breakdown for both DD setup's plus bank statements showing the payments coming out . The second DD set up has extended payments up to Feb/Mar 2025. DVLA claiming the £68 was ilegally claimed back despite the fact they cancelled the original DD for reasons unknown. Is this defendable ? I will post up documents including the original DD conformations 
    • That doesn't look like clacton ... Former Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage buys coastal home in Lydd-on-Sea WWW.KENTONLINE.CO.UK Former Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage bought a coastal home in the county, it has been reported.  
    • It's not a private road.  It's a small public street (with Resi houses) that leads into and from public road/ highway. The garages have land in front of the doors.  Then there's a yellow line. So there's a clear marker on what is private and what is public.  These people keep parking on the private land side
    • Do you also own land the garages on and the private road? Or is it shared freehold with right of access to all freeholders or why?  Dx  
    • I may try cheap plastic bollards (traffic cones) first just to see if they get moved.  I will look into the cost of fixed bollards.
  • 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

Hudu V Lloyds (Getting Money Back)


hudu
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5295 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

  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Tick yes and send to SCM.

 

Usually no other witnesses.

 

Just tick no regarding agreement of the directions.

 

That quick enough for you.

 

Yay! :cool: Quick enough indeed.

 

But can you just clarify point 2.

 

Secondly, Section C (Witnesses) - I have put my own name obviously, but it asks "witness to which facts'?.

 

Its the "Witness to which facts?" bit that is throwing me.

 

I'm tempted to write "All of them innit!" ;-)

 

What goes in there?

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heeeheee. :p

 

Ok...I'll go with that. Thanks for the quick response.

 

Been at this for hours (Hand Written) - time to go and relax and I'll take it to the court tomorrow.

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry on reflection, 'All facts and matters relevant to this claim.'

 

Probably a bit late, but you can use the PDF version in my post 46, it it easier to complete as you can cut and past and it looks better.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry on reflection, 'All facts and matters relevant to this claim.'

 

Probably a bit late, but you can use the PDF version in my post 46, it it easier to complete as you can cut and past and it looks better.

 

I went with "All facts to be contained in court bundle"

 

As i said, it's handwritten - as I have no printer :x

 

I used my poshest scrawl though. :p

 

Hope the above will suffice after all that? :confused:

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

AQ delivered to County Court today. :)

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awwwww...

 

Had a really nice letter from Lloyds today saying that they thank me for my letter of 20th december where i rejected their goodwill offer and that they know that their solicitors are now dealing with my county court claim.

 

It only took them a month to do that. How sweet.

 

I'll see them in court. Well...probably not...:rolleyes:

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awwwww...

 

Had a really nice letter from Lloyds today saying that they thank me for my letter of 20th december where i rejected their goodwill offer and that they know that their solicitors are now dealing with my county court claim.

 

It only took them a month to do that. How sweet.

 

I'll see them in court. Well...probably not...:rolleyes:

 

Doubt it. lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

A bump and a "Should I be calling the court by now..as I have heard nothing?"

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not unusual to wait this long for directions, however it will do no harm to call the court, they are usually quite helpful and friendly.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

*update*

 

Called the court yesterday. Lady told me that the AQ was with the district judge but he has about 3-4 weeks backlog and is very busy.

 

Couldn't tell me any more.

 

Patiently I wait. :-?:(

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...update...

 

no movement.

 

That is all. :(

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotherham Crown Court.

 

Glad there are others at the same stage...I lost all my contemporaries when they won ages ago! :lol:

 

Shouldn't be long now...but this has seemed the most frustrating time as everything is out of your hands.

 

Will take a read of your thread.

 

Good luck. :)

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

May 18th!!! Yay!

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks folks... Maybe I jumped the gun a little. :confused:

 

I've been home and actually read the letter now. I don't seem to have a court date after all.

 

Before District Judge ****** in the *****county court

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

The court is considering allocating this matter to the small claims track. The parties shall lodge any objection by 4pm on 18th May 2007.

 

Does anyone know how much longer for a court date after that time? And do Lloyds use such orders to further draw out the process?

 

A confused and slightly dejected hudu. :|

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This order is unusual, looks like the judge is playing is safe before allocation, as your claim in around the small - fast track threshold.

 

Nothing to do with Lloyds delaying tactics.

 

At a guess, it will probably be another month before you hear again with directions that will usually include a hearing date.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It did seem odd, as I was quite clear in my AQ that it was below the threshold before interest and asked that the judge would consider this.

 

You say the judge was probably 'playing safe' - what would be the reasoning behind that?

 

I'm confuzzled. :confused:

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He just wants to give the parties the opportunity to object, prior to allocating a borderline claim to the small claims track, this is speculation on my part though.

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

*UPDATE - such that it is*

 

I called the court and they said the court date could be anything up to 15 weeks away.

 

Why have I paid these people money? :mad:

13th Nov 2006 - Preliminary Letter delivered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - LBA - deliverered to branch

30th Nov 2006 - Standard 'we are looking into this letter'

15th Dec 2006 - SAR delivered to branch to demand six years statements (currently pursuing 5 years)

19th Dec 2006 -750 Pounds offered as settlement. Accepted as PART settlement 20th Dec 2006.

Filed with MCOL online - Notice of issue from 17th Jan 2007.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...