Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Eurido again.... Can I claim for time wasted?


axil23
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3431 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

Wow. What a bunch of bullies these guys are.

 

 

I have just gone through the various threads and have a similar story with Erudio student loans.

 

 

I have supplied them everything under the sun to request a deferment and they keep on rejecting it.

 

 

My income is only 15k a year but the guy on the phone was saying that since your bank statements show an higher income

we will take that as meaning its over the allowance!

 

 

My response was that I am self employed so someone pays me for a job out which I make only 5-10%.

No we don't agree.

Send us your Tax return which I have and they want the form from HMRC which I don't get for another 2 months!

 

Supplied them my tax return documents which show my income - Not accepted

Supplied them my Tax return from my accountant - Not accepted

Supplied them my bank statements - Not Accepted

 

I have wasted a good 3-4 hrs on the phone with them and what a bunch of idiots they are.

 

I have read the threads and will fight them. What should I do next?

 

Also I want to be able to claim expenses them for the time wasted. Any suggestions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watchdog had good feature on this a few weeks back.

 

As for expenses for wasted time, very unlikely, you can claim costs in a court setting and it would be feasibale to claim damages from them for time spent but would be very hard to prove and win.

 

Even then you could only realistically claim 3-4 hours of what your time is worth, this would unlikely to be much. perhaps minumum wage x 3 or the litigant in person rate of £18 x 3.

Link to post
Share on other sites

tell us about your loan

 

 

you REALLY need to stay off the phone to these people

 

 

you'll have no papertrail and they'll screw you over.

 

 

seems like they've got you jumping through every form/paperwork request they can.

 

 

they have NO ENTITLEMENT WHATSOEVER

to see 90% of those documents you have mentioned already.

 

 

quite honestly until we get more info on your loans

I'd simply find the ORIGINAL SLC deferment form

its on here somewhere

 

 

copy it and fill it in

 

 

sign it

 

 

and end it back.

 

 

sadly I suspect you've already filled in and sent their expanded form

which is how they fleeced all the other stuff out of you.

 

 

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

tell us about your loan

 

you REALLY need to stay off the phone to these people

 

you'll have no papertrail and they'll screw you over.

 

seems like they've got you jumping through every form/paperwork request they can.

 

they have NO ENTITLEMENT WHATSOEVER

to see 90% of those documents you have mentioned already.

 

quite honestly until we get more info on your loans

I'd simply find the ORIGINAL SLC deferment form

its on here somewhere

 

copy it and fill it in

 

sign it

 

and end it back.

 

sadly I suspect you've already filled in and sent their expanded form

which is how they fleeced all the other stuff out of you.

 

dx

 

 

Taken out in 1996-1998.

 

 

My annual income is 16k right now and

 

 

I wanted to defer it for another year

 

 

they are saying that since the income for my self employement is 36k they will go with that figure.

 

 

Thats just silly if I get 36k in but spend 20k back on expenses on the business like buying goods

 

 

then my net income is only 16k which is what the HMRC taxes me on. Are they correct?

 

Yeah I thought they were a legit organisation and have a perfect credit history.

 

 

So to avoid any damage to it which they said that they would do with their various pressure tactics

I have given them what ever they have asked for.

 

 

Luckily everything has been done over email and only 2-3 phone calls. But all documents have been submitted over email.

 

Also since this has been going on since June to to their incompetence.

 

 

They are now claiming that they will only back date 3 months and

I will have to pay the rest once they finally agree to defer it.

 

 

Is that correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You go by the old SLC rules end off

no matter what these fleecers say.

 

 

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

You go by the old SLC rules end off

no matter what these fleecers say.

 

 

dx

 

Can they put any sort of negative remarks on my credit history? Or charge me late payments fees? I have complied with the original request and sent my deferment form off within a week but it hasn't been deferred due to their new requirements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no-one can charge PENALTY fees

they are unlawful and reclaimable.

 

 

lowells claim they can trash your file

as your loans are old style

I don't think we have ever actually seen them do it

 

 

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

I just went through some mail that I got yesterday and the letter from HMRC is here that they want. Shall I email it off to them and be done with it? I really don't want to as they have really troubled me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you've done the rest

 

 

might shut them up?

 

 

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

anyone chasing money etc etc

MUST hold a copy of the SIGNED loan Agreement.

 

 

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

Submitted the form that they asked for and got a call back from one their team leaders who questioned me on my income and bank statements. I advised him that I owned 3 properties through loans and he says that they will go off my income before expenses since I was a Landlord. As a LL I have various expenses which account for more then 50% of the income. If the HMRC calculates my taxes on my take home pay of 16k can these guys insist on me paying back my SL since my income before expenses is 36k.

 

He was saying that if someone gets 36k a year they can't then say they pay 1k for dinners, 4k for clothes, 3k for Petrol. My answer to that was that my expenditure does not include anything that is personal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

or tell them when they ring IN WRITING ONLY and hang up

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:headbang:

 

 

 

 

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

:headbang:

 

dx

 

I know... I just wanted it dealt with and had the document that they needed so spoke with them.

 

Can anyone advise if legally they are right in their claim that they go of my income before any expenses?

Link to post
Share on other sites

in all these cases you need to refer to the ORIGINAL SLC T&C's

 

if the SLC calculated things one way

and arrows are doing in another

unless you sign a NEW AGREEMENT with arrows

 

they CANNOT change the deferment rules.

 

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

I don't have these.

 

 

Is this when a CCA comes in?

 

 

yes we have blank deferment forms but I don't think the full T&C's

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

whatever they are saying pers id ignore it.

I bet they've not put that in writing have they?

 

 

you need to refer to the original SLC T&C's.

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

I would have thought they could only assess on your nett profit, which in your case id £16K, no matter what carp they spout

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

I will ask them to put it in writing and update "if" they do.

 

They can be quick when they want to be.

 

 

someone called me last week about my earning being counted as gross before expenses.

 

 

I asked them to put it in writing and

 

 

they sent me a letter today to say that since my gross earning is over £2,000 odd a month I am liable to pay it back.

 

Thats just silly..... So say you own a sandwich shop and your turnover is 50k but you only make 10k after expenses they can't say that your income is 50k.

 

Any suggestions who I can speak to about this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to refer to the original SLC T&C's.

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

you need to refer to the original SLC T&C's.

 

See the original says that I need to be under the threshold

but it doesn't state anything about what qualifies as a income.

 

 

Interesting article http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/may/20/student-loan-erudio-under-fire

 

It seems that they are advising credit agencies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...