Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
    • Thanks for all the suggestions so far I will amend original WS and send again for review.  While looking at my post at very beginning when I submitted photos of signs around the car park I noticed that it says 5 hours maximum stay while the signage sent by solicitor shows 4 hours maximum stay but mine is related to electric bay abuse not sure if this can be of any use in WS.
    • Not sure what to make of that or what it means for me, I was just about to head to my kip and it's a bit too late for legalise. When is the "expenditure occured"?  When they start spending money to write to me?  Or is this a bad thing (as "harsh" would imply)? When all is said and done, I do not have two beans to rub together, we rent our home and EVERYTHING of value has been purchased by and is in my wife's name and we are not financially linked in any way.  So at least if I can't escape my fate I can at least know that they will get sweet FA from me anyway   edit:  ah.. Sophia Harrison: Time bar decision tough on claimants WWW.SCOTTISHLEGAL.COM Time bar is a very complex area of law in Scotland relating to the period in which a claim for breach of duty can be pursued. The Scottish government...   This explains it like I am 5.  So, a good thing then because creditors clearly know they have suffered a loss the minute I stop paying them, this is why it is "harsh" (for them, not me)? Am I understanding this correctly?  
    • urm......exactly what you filed .....read it carefully... it puts them to strict proof to prove the debt is enforceable, so thus 'holds' their claim till they coughup or not and discontinue. you need to get readingthose threads i posted so you understand. then you'll know whats maybe next how to react or not and whats after that. 5-10 threads a day INHO. dont ever do anything without checking here 1st.
  • 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

Moorcroft Halifax CCA not signed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3361 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

I currently have 3 credit card debts which have been defaulted and are now with DCA's

and have been paying them off to varying degrees for 5 ish years.

 

I'm in the position where I can offer reasonable Full and final settlements,

so decided to send CCA requests to them all to hopefully help me with the negotiation.

 

Moorcroft initially wrote back saying that they had suspended the account whist they found the terms and that I didn't need to pay.

 

This is a Halifax card that was taken out in 2004 and defaulted in April 2010.

MY CRA shows it as settled with Halifax in June 2014 and now shows as Cabot with the same default date.

 

Now I've had a response back from Moorcroft who have sent 2 reconstituted(?) CCA's,

one for my previous and one for my current address.

Neither are signed or dated or have anywhere to sign or date.

They also both state that "we will decide your credit limit and tell you what it is". i.e. no credit limit

 

They've also included the letter from Halifax which states that "a copy of their signed application form will be sent under separate cover".

 

Now they are saying that they've complied with my request and I need to pay.

 

My query is,

am I right in thinking that because it's pre 2007,

I can go back to them and say that it's unenforceable until such time as they produce a signed

and dated CCA and also because there's no credit limit?

 

 

Or do nothing on the same basis?

 

 

The plan being to hold out and then start the f&f process.

 

Any advice would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

recons are no good

yes they 'comply' but not for court purposes.

 

 

no need to tell them anything

 

 

cabot will write you now antway

 

 

Moorcroft were chasing for the OC

 

 

they can be ignored now cabot has it [they are not linked]

 

 

await cabots new move

 

 

all very well trying to pay the debt off by F&F

 

 

but it will do bugger all for your credit rating.

 

 

waste of money

 

 

the default is there for 6yrs paid or not.

 

 

have you lookedat PPI and penalty charges reclaiming?

 

 

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

yes

 

 

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've had a copy of my original signed terms back from Moorcroft. On my CRA this debt shows as Cabot.

 

I've attached the signed terms plus the single page that was attached (not dated but signed in 2004, a copy of terms in my current address and a copy of terms in my previous address (where I lived where I applied).

 

Any advice as to whether the signed form plus single page of terms changes anything re enforcability please?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant see how page 2 T&C's are the reverse of the application form

and even if they were its an application form!

 

 

await the sar

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

  • 5 weeks later...

Quick update. I've had a reply to the SAR, stating that they don't hold any information other than my details and amount owed. Therefore, they've returned my postal order on that basis that I need to SAR Cabot.

 

So no more contact with Moorcroft then! I'll SAR Cabot and see what comes back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cabot rarely ever have the correct CCA. Food for thought ;)

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Quick update - I've had a letter from Moorcroft saying that they've been asked by Cabot to stop collecting on this account on their behalf and to refer to Cabot if I have any future queries.

 

No response to the Halifax SAR yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cabot wont have the paperwork. What cabot will do ( instead of admitting the debt is uncollectable), is pass it around every DCA they can, hoping they break you down and you pay.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore till statute barred.

 

Not wise advice at all. Cabot will go to court if they think they can get judgement by default. If they dont, then they will sell it to someone who will. Ignoring a debt until SB is not a good idea.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...