Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are 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. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. 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. 9. 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.
  • 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

Rutherford/HFO Capital Ltd & HFO Services Ltd - 2007 BC 'debt' now LINK - set aside hearing


coops999
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3238 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 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Donkey B and all others that have kindly advised and assisted.

 

 

We didn't win on either count.

 

 

Seen by Judge Beck who I believe had already made his mind up before we went in.

 

 

He basically stated that the motion to set aside would not be granted & was dismissed out of hand as the original award had been made to HFO SERVICES LTD and that furthermore he would be granting the change of claimant as he could see no reason not to.

 

 

I stressed all of the points as suggested over & over again, I tried to draw his attention to the fact that title of account was questionable based on the info provided by BC & also based on HFO CAPITAL purporting to own the debt.

 

 

I raised all the points, I used all the phrases but basically he was not interested & was having none of it, I pushed it as far as I felt I could before he accused me of being argumentative & confrontational.

 

 

All over and done with inside of 10 minutes, no opportunity to cross examine or ask any questions of the other side not event given the option.

 

 

I argued against the awarding of costs of £120.00 which he also said he was granting on the basis that the hearing was scheduled for 30 minutes & had only taken 10 so the costs should be reduced by 2 thirds, he said he was awarding the full amount so I suggested that if I was paying for 30 minutes then I wanted the 30 minutes to put forward my argument & go through my statement, again got short shrift.

 

 

Not sure where we go from here?? I have contacted BC and requested copies of statements going back 12 calendar months from date of sale to HFO, although not sure what If any good these will be now.

 

 

Not sure where to go wit this now or what to do, I haven't contacted Asset Link Capital ( No 5 ) ltd yet but im guessing I am going to have to, should I just seek the best settlement figure & be done with it or continue to fight and if the latter how do I do that.

 

 

Totally disillusioned with the legal system, appreciate I am the architect of my own downfall by leaving this matter too long before addressing it but at the same time I thought some of arguments put forward were credible and had merit but that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

 

Just about to make a donation to the site is £50 sufficient? Hopefully it is & will help others to benefit from the help you guys provide and beat these robbing, thieving bustards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

 

 

just clicked on the green box at the bottom of the page to make donation & it has taken me to a pay pal site where they appear to only accept credit cards & not debit cards, is there an alternative way to make the donation using a debit card?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. You got Mr Grumpy. Used to be at Epsom. That's why we call it a lottery. It was a slim chance anyway.

 

I think what you now need to tell us about is the CO — it's only a restriction, so tell us all the detail. Can you post it up with detail removed?

 

Depending on the type, you might still be able to sell despite the restriction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

''Mr Grumpy'' he had a face like a slapped arse had to resist the temptation to wipe his Cheshire grin off of his face..... rant over

 

 

I know it was a slim chance im not overly surprised by the outcome I just thought that I would have got at the very least a fair hearing but didn't.

 

 

The issue isn't so much that the house needs to be sold it is more that my ex father in law is suffering from Dementia & it is getting progressively worse.

 

 

He wants to gift my wife an amount of money so as to enable her to pay off a large part of the mortgage & to enable her to get a mortgage in her sole name, but my ex - wife cannot get a mortgage in her sole name while the CO exists on the Land Registry ( this has been advised to her by the lenders she has approached all of whom are high street lenders )

 

 

As their is no known time frame on the escalation of the Dementia my ex-father-in-law is understandably anxious to get it done so that he at least has that piece of mind.

 

 

I will scan & forward the CO on Monday as I have no access to a scanner until then.

 

 

In the meantime thank you so much for all your kind help & assistance. Was there another way for me to make the donation using a debit card?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Click the red Donate tab coops at the top scroll past the Paypal and it will allow other options of payment.....

 

Dont be to down hearted at today's outcome....Link can be dealt with.

 

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

Ive been watching this thread for a while. I would have loved to attend and see it all in action as I live 45 mins direct from Guildford.

 

Listen, I am sorry that you didnt get the result you wanted. Its a shame because Link deserve nothing but piles and piles of manure for the way they treat people.

As said, Link can be dealt with going forward. Just a shame you got Mr Grumps.

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...