Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The postcode is an important point. You cannot be in two postcodes at the same time and the contract only covers the F area and not the E area where Met placed your car. See there is some   advantages in with idiots.🙂 The other fact about the electric spaces is that as you are not allowed to park there, the sign is prohibitory so cannot  offer a contract anyway. and another biggie in your favour is you were not the driver and the PCN does not comply with PoFA. I had another look yesterday at the PCN and there is another error since it does not say that the driver is responsible to pay the charge during the first 28 days. Schedule 4 Section 9 [2][b] (b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; so that is another nail in their coffin and it s something I would include in  your WS since that is one that every Judge would accept as a failure to comply. As far as their WS is concerned some of them leave it to the last minute to prevent Defendants being able to counteract their claims. However if they leave it too late [ie after the stipulated time] you can email yours to the Court on the last day and complain at the bottom of your WS that you have not received it and therefore you are asking the Court not to accept their WS. In your case it isn't that important since you have a virtual walkover in Court. I would be surprised if they don't concede beforehand. It is a lost cause for them. Not that I would advocate parking in their electric bay in future with a petrol driven car again.🙂
    • I think the post code 0 v O is nonsense personally and would just annoy the judge.  Cases are decided informally at small claims and judges are not interested in the weakest of trivialities. Understood re FY v EY.  So add to the Unfair PCN section that the PCN includes the wrong post code and places you at a residential area rather than the car park in question. You should wait till 7 June before filing your WS - as a Litigant-in-Person you wont't be penalised for being a day late - to see if MET's WS turns up.  It will also give you a chance to see if they have paid the hearing fee.  If it doesn't turn up you can attack them for defying court directions.  If it does turn up you can ridicule their arguments.  Win win. Also you can see if they have bottled it - which they have done with the last two cases we have here. I think the exact points of your WS have become a tad confusing - and I have heartily contributed to the confusion! - so can you please add the latest version. I think the post code 0 v O is nonsense personally and would just annoy the judge.  Cases are decided informally at small claims and judges are not interested in the weakest of trivialities. Understood re FY v EY.  So add to the Unfair PCN section that the PCN includes the wrong post code and places you at a residential area rather than the car park in question. You should wait till 7 June before filing your WS - as a Litigant-in-Person you wont't be penalised for being a day late - to see if MET's WS turns up.  It will also give you a chance to see if they have paid the hearing fee.  If it doesn't turn up you can attack them for defying court directions.  If it does turn up you can ridicule their arguments.  Win win. Also you can see if they have bottled it - which they have done with the last two cases we have here. I think the exact points of your WS have become a tad confusing - and I have heartily contributed to the confusion! - so can you please add the latest version. I think the post code 0 v O is nonsense personally and would just annoy the judge.  Cases are decided informally at small claims and judges are not interested in the weakest of trivialities. Understood re FY v EY.  So add to the Unfair PCN section that the PCN includes the wrong post code and places you at a residential area rather than the car park in question. You should wait till 7 June before filing your WS - as a Litigant-in-Person you wont't be penalised for being a day late - to see if MET's WS turns up.  It will also give you a chance to see if they have paid the hearing fee.  If it doesn't turn up you can attack them for defying court directions.  If it does turn up you can ridicule their arguments.  Win win. Also you can see if they have bottled it - which they have done with the last two cases we have here. I think the exact points of your WS have become a tad confusing - and I have heartily contributed to the confusion! - so can you please add the latest version.
    • Thank you Dave for jumping in yesterday and advising not to send off the letter I wrote. I am sorry Clou but I thought at the time that both car parks were owned by Alliance. Before doing a snotty letter does anyone in your family able to alos drive your car apart from yourself and are you the keeper?
    • Thanks for this. UPS never said they delivered to the wrong address. Tracking just showed as delivered. EBay couldn’t find it for weeks and then said they found it and it had chocolate in it. Something clearly doesn’t add up here.
    • Try to think things through logically & legally - the two go together as the civil court system in England is pretty decent and easy to get your head round. 1.  Say you & I got into legal dispute.  Who could sue who?  Well I could sue you and you could sue me.  My next-door neighbour couldn't sue you and your best mate couldn't sue me because the case would have nowt to do with them.  The same goes for a DCA.  It's not their debt.  They can do nothing. 2.  Of course a DCA can't affect your credit score.  If they could, then there would be nothing stopping you picking on someone you dislike, saying they owed you a billion pounds, and affecting their credit score.  Logically there must be more to it than some daft allegation.  CCJs are issued and credit scores wrecked after a judge has decided on the matter and the losing party has still refused to pay.  With nine grand in play the matter will not magically go away but you need to gen up and seperate daft threats from paper tigers from concrete threats which could really cause you trouble. The others are right - you need to inform the original creditor of your address in order to avoid a backdoor CCJ. Also, why did you decide not to sue UPS who have admitted to delivering to the wrong address which in turn led to the theft of your goods?
  • 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

Cabot/Weighmans- Claim form Halifax OD 'debt'


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3368 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

.

Hi Guys,

 

I've had alot of debt problems from my past. Depression amongst other things led to me 'ignoring' instead of acting.

 

I've recently received a CCJ for another debt which was devistating for many reasons.

 

I now would really like to tackle my problems and sort them out.

 

I've received a claim form from the above for circa £2500. This was for an overdraft from 2012.

 

I know I do owe it. Maybe around £600 was daily interest.

 

I would love to make this CCJ go away for now and try to deal with things. But I can't see how.

 

There is a possibility I could borrow £800 max (very small chance). Is there any chance they would accept an offer of this to avoid CCJ?

 

Any other advice would be appreciated. I would like if possible to avoid this CCJ and completely ruin my future further.

 

Otherwise bannkruptsy might have to be done? I've just started a part time role and even then the security isnt guaranteed. I also have no assets.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi freshstart and welcome to CAG

 

If you could read the following and post your responses here...this will give you guidance on how to deal with the claim and also provide us with information to determine what options are available.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-December-2014**(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

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

Hi Andy,

 

Thanks for that. Information below:

 

Name of the Claimant: Cabot

Date of issue: 06 Feb 2015

Current Acc/Overdraft value: £3340

particulars:

 

1. The defendant entered into a credit agreement described by the original creditor as HALIFAX - current account

and having account number XXXXXXXX (the account)

 

The claimant, a UK limited company with company number XXXXXXX, is the assignee and legal owner of all righs previously

enjoyed by the original creditor in respect of he account.

 

3. The defendant is indebted to the claimant in respect of the account in the sum of £3340.

 

4. The claimant claims the said sum of £3340, plus costs.

What is the value of the claim? £3603

Is the claim for a current account or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? Account overdraft

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? After

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. Probably, DEBT PURCHASER

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? UNSURE but likely

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? UNSURE but likely

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? I DONT THINK SO

 

Why did you cease payments? Depression.

What was the date of your last payment? sometime in 2012

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 adebt management plan? NO

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay many thanks....

 

Your first task is to send the following to the solicitors named on the claim form....

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?387483-LEGAL-CPR-31.14-Request-when-Claim-is-being-made-for-a-Current-Account

 

You have 33 days in total subject to you defending in full........19 days to acknowledge service (6th Feb being day 1) you can do this on line once registered to use the MCOL on line service (details contained within the claim pack) your password is already on the claim for,

 

 

If it is your intention to defend in full you then have a further 14 days to submit your defence...so work out your dates and mark that date.

 

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

Well you still need to question it...and by defending in full this allows time to mediate and possibly resolve without the need to proceed to trial......anything less is an automatic CCJ...no way around it.

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

Many thanks for clarification Andy.

 

I've just acknowledged service and will send the letter out today.

 

Any ideas what my next move should be?

 

Is it worth calling and explaining my situation? that My income is very low. They would get £3-4 p/m max, and that id have to consider bankruptsy if this ccj stands as my chances of meaningful employment will be pretty much 0.

 

Any realistic chance they would agree a plan with no ccj or be open to a low settlement?

 

many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its entirely your call if you wish to speak/write to the claimants sols with view to agreeing a settlement..with view to avoiding a CCJ...that they would be prepared to withdraw or discontinue the claim.

 

In the meantime to protect your own position...it is advocated that a defence is submitted on time...this has no bearing on your ongoing talks to try to resolve.

 

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

Once they know you intend to defend...they are usually quite amicable ...its when they know you don't intend to defend the door slams:madgrin:

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi guys,

 

I received the following yesterday. In response to my CRP 31.14 request.

Can anyone shed some light of what I should make of it? or indeed what to do next.

 

Many thanks,

 

Further to your correspondence dated 20 feb 15,

the documents which you have requested at paragraphs 4 to 8 of the same are not referenced within the claimants particulars of claim

and, as such, cannot be requested pursuant to civil procedure rule 31.14. in the event that you proceed to make an application under CPR 31.14

for disclosure of these documents, we hereby put you on notice that we will oppose the same, placing this correspondence before the court,

and seek our costs of opposing this application from yourself directly.

 

Whilst we have requested copies of your current account application form, together with monthly bank statements,

banking terms and conditions and notice of assignment from the original creditor,

it may take a period of time to obtain copies of these documents.

 

 

Once we are in receipt of these documents however, these will be forwarded to you without delay.

 

 

Please not that once directions have been provided by the court to take this matter to trial,

a deadline will then be provided for both parties to disclose all documents on which they seek to rely on at trial.

 

 

As the documents which our client will seek to rely on are likely to include some, if not all, of the documents listed above,

you will therefore be in receipt all documents relied upon in advance of any subsequent trial.

 

In accordance with CRP 15.2, you must file a defence to proceedings, by the deadline specified by the court,

should you wish to defend this claim to trial. In the event that you fail to do so, our client could request a default judgement

be against you pursuant to CRP 15.3 and CRP 12.3.

 

Please note, in the event you fail to file a defence within the specified time period,

resulting in our client obtaining a default judgement against you which you later seek to have set aside,

we will draw the contents of this correspondence to the courts attention both in opposition of your application

to have the default judgement set aside and on the issue of costs.

 

We trust that the above clarifies our client’s position but should you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact us.

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

Standard template response. No action on your part required at this stage.

 

The PoC is craftily worded so as not to mention any document other than credit agreement , making this the only thing your 31.14 could realistically elicit. Don't worry : your defence will cover this.

 

And wipe from your mind bankruptcy for such small sums. It isn't going to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just keep your eye on the defence date...10th March..nothing else.

 

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

Check the success forum and other likewise threads...you will get the idea.

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi guys,

 

My defence is due tomorrow (6th Feb + 33 days). I've been looking around for a suitable defence but am struggling! and unning out of time.

 

Any help or pointers in the right direction would be really helpful please!!!

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

ideally your def should have been filed by 4pm today!

 

 

why have you left it so late!!

 

 

ok lets see what we can find for your

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

1. The defendant entered into a credit agreement described by the original creditor as HALIFAX - current account

and having account number XXXXXXXX (the account)

 

2.The claimant, a UK limited company with company number XXXXXXX, is the assignee and legal owner of all righs previously

enjoyed by the original creditor in respect of he account.

 

3. The defendant is indebted to the claimant in respect of the account in the sum of £3340.

 

4. The claimant claims the said sum of £3340, plus costs.

Defence

 

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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.

 

Paragraph 1 is accepted, I have had financial dealings with Halifax in the past .

Paragraph 2 is denied, I am not aware or have ever been informed of any legal assignment of this account number to the claimant.

Paragraph 3 is denied with regards to the amount the Defendant is owing monies to the Claimant.

 

On receipt of the claim formlink3.gif the Defendant sent a CPR 31.14 request dated XX/XX/2014 for a copy

of the overdraftlink3.gif facility agreement,

Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974,

notice of assignment

and a statement of account showing how the amount claimed has been reached, which forms the basis of this claim.

This was signed for by the claimants solicitors on XX/XX/2014. The claimant has yet to comply.

 

Therefore the claimant in their none compliance to my requests have frustrated my attempts to clarify

their claim and against pre action protocol should be considered when the question of costs arise.

 

Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and

(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

© show Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974

(d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

As per Civil Procedurelink3.gif Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is

owed.

 

On the alternative, if 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 creditlink3.gif Act 1974.

 

Until such time the Claimant can comply with my request for a copy of the Overdraft facility agreement/Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 it relies upon they are prevented from enforcing or requesting any relief as pursuant to the CCA 1974

 

By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief[/i]

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

ok found one I think

 

 

just gonna adapt it to your poc

if I can

 

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...