Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. 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 as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. 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 issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 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.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Mot


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6422 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

Hey just curious on a general question, I know a lot has changed recently with the new MOT'S etc.

 

In the past I always believed that if you take your MOT a month early you get 13 months etc. Has this been abolished.

 

My MOT was due to expire on 29th November and I took it today which is 26 days early. Now it passed straight away :) but new one is only valid untill 3rd November. I only noticed when I got home. I really dont wanna complain or cause any trouble as he passed it, more curious than anything.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think anyone on here has the answer I dont...but sign up to one of the many motoring forums and ask there..A lot of qualified macanics and mot testers on so they should be able to help8-)

This is MY oppinion for what it worth

BARCLAYS BANK LBA 23/10/05 £2,626.67:)MCOL ISSUED 11/11/05

LOMBARD DIRECT LBA + Default removal 25/10/06 £290.50 :grin: Received settlement but they won,t remove default

BARCLAYCARD LFB 10/9/06 £320.00 :cool:

AKTIV KAPITAL LBA DEFAULT REMOVAL letter sent 22/9/06 + 23/10/06 and as yet have had no reply (sent letter to all 3 CRA re-there none compliance):confused:

 

"divant worry aboot what ya owe let them woory that want,s it off ya"

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes ur are allowed 4 weeks

the mot center has made a mistake

go back and ask them for another

i am a ex mot inspector here in ni

s.a.r handed to manager-2-8-06

aknowledgement letter recieved 4-8-06

letter from dpm 10-8-06

Data Protection Act - Non-Compliance 10 days left 29-8-06

statements recieved 31/8/06

prelim letter 1/9/06

letter recieved from cru 9/9/06

lba-sent 15-9-06

small claims started 17-9-06

agreed to settle

with condition removed that i cant make another claim

waiting for funds

part 2

small claims for £893 filed 14/10/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is correct that the car can be tested up to a month early and an mot issued for up to 13 months (it is 1 calender month) but you must present your old certificate at the time the car is presented for test. If this has been done it is the testers mistake which is down to him to rectify if not the tester is not compelled to issue an amended certificate but most will if you ask in a civilized manner

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In the past I always believed that if you take your MOT a month early you get 13 months etc. Has this been abolished.

 

My MOT was due to expire on 29th November and I took it today which is 26 days early. Now it passed straight away :) but new one is only valid untill 3rd November. I only noticed when I got home. I really dont wanna complain or cause any trouble as he passed it, more curious than anything.

 

 

You can book an MOT up to 28 days in advance of its due date. In fact it is not widely known that the expiry date on your new MOT is 12 months from the expiry of your old one. This means you could have an MOT that last 13 months.

 

you also need to take you old MOT with you at the same time

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can book an MOT up to 28 days in advance of its due date. In fact it is not widely known that the expiry date on your new MOT is 12 months from the expiry of your old one. This means you could have an MOT that last 13 months.

 

you also need to take you old MOT with you at the same time

 

It's 1 calender month not 28 days as i previously stated

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is great, thanks heaps for all your advise. I did take my old MOT with me when I went for MOT he took it with him to make new MOT. When they were both passed to me together from him the old one read November 29th 2006 and new one November 3rd 2007. MOT date was Friday 3rd.

 

So this is a mistake ? Doesnt really matter though its only like 26 days so not sure if worth going back. Guess if I am passing I will drop in.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty certain the new computerised system picks up any remaining days and adds them on automatically, so could possibly be a error by VOSA.

 

I could be wrong but I tend to think for the new computerised format to do this both MOT's (expiring one and new one) should be in this format. I doubt that an MOT expiring in November 2006 would be (my old one expired in October 2006 and was the 'old', handwritten type).

Jimbo 44 - always happy to help, but always willing to learn from being corrected too!!! Whilst any advice given may be based upon personal experience, please always be sure you seek guidance from a professional in the particular field.

 

Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark, but a large group of professionals built the Titanic.

 

A 'click' on the scales is always appreciated if I have helped. Many Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could be wrong but I tend to think for the new computerised format to do this both MOT's (expiring one and new one) should be in this format. I doubt that an MOT expiring in November 2006 would be (my old one expired in October 2006 and was the 'old', handwritten type).

 

 

Depends on the garage in question, some garages went "live" before others as the they these test stations, so when they did an MOT before the computerisation came into effect they also did a dummy computerised version as they had the equipment installed by VOSA.

So when the computerisation came into effect, not all garages had the computerised system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jimbo you are right about the system picking up on any remaining time and adding it on but for an old handwritten type certificate the time has to be added manually and the old cert number typed in. I have still had some through recently hand written so there are still some out there though not many. Likewise if you take a vehicle in for its first test early unless the DVLA have messed up the log book(surprisingly common) it will date it from that date as well without you needing to produce the V5 document (despite it saying otherwise on the system!!)

To be picky about duration using the new system it is possible to have an MOT for 13 months less 1 day as I have tried in the past to run one from for example 18th March 2006 to 18th April 2007 and it rejected it so do bear that in mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it was an hand written MOT previous. The new MOT is the first one I have had computerized. To be honest I will probably just leave it as I dont have time to go back to garage for 3 weeks extra. Worry about it next year lol.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...