Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
    • Massive issues from Scottish Power I wonder if someone could advise next steps. Tennant moved out I changed the electric into my name I was out the country at the time so I hadn't been to the flat. During sign up process they tried to hijack my gas supply as well which I made it clear I didn't want duel fuel from them but they still went ahead with it. Phoned them up again. a few days later telling them to make sure they stopped it but they said too late ? had to get my current supplier to cancel it. Paid £50 online to ensure there was money covering standing charges etc eventually got to the flat no power. Phoned Scottish Power 40 minutes to get through they state I have a pay as you go meter and that they had set me up on a credit account so they need to send an engineer out which they will pass my details onto. Phone called from engineer asking questions , found out the float is vacant so not an emergency so I have to speak to Scottish Power again. Spoke with the original person from Scottish Power who admitted a mistake (I had told her it was vacant) and now states that it will take 4 weeks to get an appointment but if I want to raise a complaint they will contact me in 48 hours and it will be looked at quicker. Raised a complaint , complaints emailed me within 24 hours to say it will take 7 days till he speaks with me. All I want is power in the property would I be better switching over to EON who supply the gas surely they could sort it out quicker? One thing is for sure I will never bother with Scottish Power ever again.    
    • Hi. Please don't follow McD's advice to contact Met to appeal. They won't listen and you could end up giving them helpful information. HB
  • 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


The Phantom
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3072 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 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

what other scenario is there in a roundabout when you hit someone from the left ? He can't really say he came from the right as there is no entry into that roundabout from the right. I was going straight on and he came from the left and hit me. What story could he make up to make it my fault ?

 

Could have said he was already on the roundabout before you were anywhere near it, that you were speeding and didn't manage to stop in time?

 

This exact thing happened with my sister the day after she passed the test. She fought it and won as far as I know.

 

Insurance companies will always go for 50/50 as it is easy for them. My mother has a pending claim, she rejected 50/50, then 70/30 so they are trying for 80/20 instead. Despite her being stationary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could have said he was already on the roundabout before you were anywhere near it, that you were speeding and didn't manage to stop in time?

 

This exact thing happened with my sister the day after she passed the test. She fought it and won as far as I know.

 

Insurance companies will always go for 50/50 as it is easy for them. My mother has a pending claim, she rejected 50/50, then 70/30 so they are trying for 80/20 instead. Despite her being stationary.

 

Well it was evening rush hour (5.30 PM) so traffic was slow and damage to my car minor, but he would struggle to proof my speed either way I suppose. It is all going to be one word against someone elses.

But so far there is nothing forthcoming anyway. The claim just sits as open for what I suppose another year and then I have to see what the story is with my overpayments for this time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

OK, Minster Law is back on the case, new case worker has been in contact, they are now working on submitting the final claim to the MIB.

Also had a call from local police station today ref the accident. They asked whether I would be prepared to participate in an ID Parade, to see whether I can identify the driver of the vehicle.

They will be in touch again next week or so to give me a date for this as apparently it has to be done by an specially trained police officer.

 

Nice to see they are actually working on this, not so good to ask me almost 5 months after the event. Surely it would be better to do this sooner after the actual accident, considering they had the registration plate of the vehicle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for premium increase just got response letter from the Claim Processors of the Underwriters:

 

In regards to the additional premium I recommend you contact your brokers to discuss further.They will have based your premium on this incident being a fault incident. If the judge decidesthat it is a non fault incident, the brokers may be able to re -quote your policy based on thisbeing a non fault incident and reimburse any overpayment. However not all brokers are ableto do this.If this is not an option and you have legal expense cover on your policy your brokers will be able to redirect you your legal representative and they will deal with your uninsured losses.

 

The brokers however already said it is the underwriters who put this as pending and it has nothing to do with them. So I can already see how this is going to pan out : Finger pointing backwards and forwards and nobody willing to cough up and refund my money in the end. !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I had an incident last year where a driver on my left veered into my lane sideswiping my car.She refused to admit liability even though I had 1 witness.My insurers sent 1 set of 4 photographs in 3 months.I got excuse after excuse every time i asked my insurers for an update, so I gave them 14 days to sort it, otherwise I will take it on myself.fast forward a month later, and no more update from my insurer, so I said i would take it on my self, so I took a county court summons out against the third party. 3 weeks later a cheque for just under £800.00 from Quinn insurance.Thank you very much.Going at it with a softly softly approach gets you nowhere..You need to be forceful.I have 2 county court wins from 2, and 2 out of court settlements from 2, and another county court case in June, but I think the defendant will be settling out of court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the difference is that you had money to recover in these instances , so were claiming. in my case I have nothing to recover, the other party who caused the accident is trying to claim off my insurance for the damage to his car and personal injuries. There are no witnesses and no evidence. He has just provided a medical report that states he sustained some injuries (almost two years after the accident) and an estimate for the repair to his car (almost two years after the accident).

Strictly speaking all the paperwork he submitted shows there was an accident. Of course it doesn't proof liability for this accident.

The claims processors of my insurers now say they want to offer him a 50/50 which I find outrageous.

They admit he can't proof any of his allegations but on the other hand they say we can't proof it wasn't like that. I find that a very strange way putting the burden of proof on the defendant rather than the claimant. Surely if he wants money he would have to proof his side , not me having to proof he is lying.

No wonder the premiums are so high if they pay out like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Here now the latest.

No ID Parade after all, the police seemed to have lost interest and are now saying (without an ID Parade) that the owner / keeper was not the driver at the time (not sure how they know that ) but he won't tell them who drove the car so they will prosecute him for that. The car was scrapped but only after the accident so the vehicle is now gone.

However, with my MIB claim almost at the end (solicitor submitted it back in April to them) the police phoned me today and said the owner/keeper has produced some insurance details I could make a claim against.

I have no idea where this is now coming from after everybody told me the car wasn't insured at the time of the accident (including the police) and now they have some insurance details for me almost six months after the event.

What do I do now ? My claim with the MIB is ongoing and almost complete. Do I now have to withdraw that and start all over again with the insurance company ?

I have e-mailed the claims processor at Minster Law but have had no reply so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, can I detect a hint of sarcasm :-D

 

The claims processors at Minster Law are just that , administrators, when speaking to them they don't appear to be installed with much legal knowledge. They just mass process these claims on paperwork and when something like a curve ball occurs then I am met with silence.

But you are right I will have to call her today as she is simply not replying to my e-mails.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, can I detect a hint of sarcasm :-D

 

The claims processors at Minster Law are just that , administrators, when speaking to them they don't appear to be installed with much legal knowledge. They just mass process these claims on paperwork and when something like a curve ball occurs then I am met with silence.

But you are right I will have to call her today as she is simply not replying to my e-mails.

 

Just a bit. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoke to MIB yesterday. Claims handler said she got my e-mails but hadn't done anything with them as she has had no time. Great. For what they charge I think " i was too busy to deal with you" is pretty poor.

She said she would pass the info on to the MIB and we will have to wait and see what they say.

I feel a bit ripped off now, I could do that my bl**dy self. And faster !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here now the latest.

No ID Parade after all, the police seemed to have lost interest and are now saying (without an ID Parade) that the owner / keeper was not the driver at the time (not sure how they know that ) but he won't tell them who drove the car so they will prosecute him for that. The car was scrapped but only after the accident so the vehicle is now gone.

However, with my MIB claim almost at the end (solicitor submitted it back in April to them) the police phoned me today and said the owner/keeper has produced some insurance details I could make a claim against.

I have no idea where this is now coming from after everybody told me the car wasn't insured at the time of the accident (including the police) and now they have some insurance details for me almost six months after the event.

What do I do now ? My claim with the MIB is ongoing and almost complete. Do I now have to withdraw that and start all over again with the insurance company ?

I have e-mailed the claims processor at Minster Law but have had no reply so far.

 

The situation is that now there is a motor policy in place your claim would normally be referred to the Insurer of the vehicle as the RTA makes the Insurer liable, however this is only if a judgement is obtaine against the driver, in practice the driver of the vehicle only needs to be identified for the insurer to be liable.

 

As no driver of the vehicle has been identified your accident is in effect with an uninsured driver so will come under the umbrella of the MIB, however membership of the MIB for an Insurer (Which is compulsory in the UK) is subject to the MIB's articles of association which will mean claim will be handledand paid by the Insurer of the vehicle but under the umbrella of the MIB under the obligations & liabilities of the MIB 1989.

 

The Insurer in this situation is known as an "Article 75 Insurer".

 

If you need any clarification on this give us a shout.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, so basically the MIB and the newly emerged insurers will sort it out between themselves but the MIB will continue to deal with my claim ?

The Minster Law claims processor didn't know and said we will have to wait and see....

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be the Insurer who handles the claim, however I expect there will be a delay before they accept this as they will want to wait for the Police to see of their policyholder identifies who the driver of the vehicle was. If the P/H identifies the driver then the Insurer will have a Statutory duty to deal with the claim under Section 151 2) B) as you would then be able to satisfy 151 2b by obtaining a judgement although this is not necessary as the driver only needs to be identified.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/151

 

Assuming they don't identify the driver, I strongly suspect the P/H will say the vehicle was stolen or TWOC to protect themselves from a permitting a vehicle to be used without insurance conviction and / or failing to report an accident. The Insurers are then likely to want to correspond with their p/h about the situation and probably also send an investigator out to their client once they've got to the bottom of it they often enter into arguments with the MIB about whether or not they're an article 75 Insurer.

 

If you're googling Article 75 Insurer, be careful as it changed in June 2010 so some of the information on the web is out of date now

Link to post
Share on other sites

The owner is not telling the police who the driver was, so they said they will prosecute him for that and for failing to notify the insurers of an accident.

He told them the car was scrapped, but the police found out that the car was scrapped after the accident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

. I took a photo of his car and registration plate with my mobile.

It really is annoying when people drive around without insurance! I would have been tempted to get a photo of the guy himself. But there again, you were not to know he had no insurance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried but he was too quick getting back into his car, the picture was too blurred to be used. The mobile phone camera always takes a moment in order to focus and he kept moving so picture was unusable.

I was also in two minds about whether it was legal to take a picture of someone without their permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried but he was too quick getting back into his car, the picture was too blurred to be used. The mobile phone camera always takes a moment in order to focus and he kept moving so picture was unusable.

I was also in two minds about whether it was legal to take a picture of someone without their permission.

 

No it is not, even though most people think it may be so. Provided the person is in a public place, you are free to take anyones photo. I think I may have been tempted to get a copy of his DNA, by punching him on the nose. (Only joking) Hope you manage to get things sorted, even though things do not look too good .

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it is not, even though most people think it may be so. Provided the person is in a public place, you are free to take anyones photo. I think I may have been tempted to get a copy of his DNA, by punching him on the nose. (Only joking) Hope you manage to get things sorted, even though things do not look too good .

 

In an ideal world it's best to take at least a picture of the driver but if possible all of the passengers in the other car (If it's a non fault accident)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The owner is not telling the police who the driver was, so they said they will prosecute him for that and for failing to notify the insurers of an accident.

He told them the car was scrapped, but the police found out that the car was scrapped after the accident.

 

As detailed in my previous post I expect his Insurers will engage in a fairly prolonged investigation before they accept "Liability".

 

I would recommend you get onto the MIB whose staff will understand the law and what happens better than the Minster Law staff, they should be able to explain what happens next. This will also hopefully save some time as they can get in contact with the police to obtain the details of the Insurance or trace them through the MID (Insurance database).

 

If you don't get onto MIB about it the process will become much slower than if you do contact MIB

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I spoke to Minster Law about two weeks ago and they said they would pass the info on to the MIb and get back to me. I have still not heard anything. Have chased them at the beginning of the week and still nothing. They don't even reply to me.

 

Initially they said they disclosed my information with medical report on the 20th of April and the MIB had 6 weeks to respond, so basically until the 8th of June but of course they were meant to have passed the insurance details on to the MIB two weeks ago which may have thrown a spanner in the works.

So at the moment I am still in the dark about what is going on as Minster Law is not responding to my enquiries.

 

I am reluctant to phone the MIB direct and sort it out as I am paying Minster Law 25% of my comp to do this for me. But I think they are doing very little for 25% share. I have a feeling at the moment they are actually doing nothing at all and not following this up and just sit and wait for the MIB to contact them at some point.

As I am not getting any joy from Minster Law and I may have to phone the MIB myself, but don't want to get pushed into doing Minster Laws job for them and still have them deduct 25% of the settlement figure.

 

Annoying...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...