Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Help with statute barred debt county court claim form


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3328 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 received County Court papers a few weeks ago about a debt for Cabot Financial for £2.7k. The debt is years old, can't remember exactly, but certainly more than 6 years. The debt has been sold on many times in that period.

 

I returned the forms disputing their claim and used the following as my defence:

 

The alleged debt is barred by the Statute Of Limitations Act 1980

 

Limitation action 1980 Section 5 “an action founded on simple

contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years

from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”

 

I have since had a reply from their Solicitors:

 

The Court has served us with a copy of the Defence you filed whereby you dispute your liability to the Claimant on the basis that you believe the Claim is statute barred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980. We note, however, that you have provided no information / evidence of when you believe the limitation period commenced, nor have you provided any details of when you believe you last made a payment towards the debt or when you last acknowledged your liability for the debt.

 

If you are able to provide any evidence in support of your Defence e.g. a copy of the Default Notice served on you to show when the limitation period commenced / statements of account for the last 6 years to show no payments have been made towards this account etc., then please do so within the next 14 days.

 

If however, you are unable to provide evidence in support of your Defence, we invite you to withdraw your Defence by completing the enclosed Form N9A and returning it to this office within the next 14 days.

 

In the event that the Defence is not withdrawn or evidence is not provided in support of it, our instructions may be to make an application to strike out your Defence / for Summary Judgement and to seek an Order that you pay our Client's legal costs associated with that application on a contractual (indemnity) basis.

 

 

I was under the impression that it was up to the claimant to prove the debt is not Statute barred and not me. I can see that they are trying to scare me into an admission and get me to withdraw my defence.

 

My initial thoughts on receiving this was to do nothing and let them prove its not statute barred.

 

I would appreciate any comments or guidance on my next move - if any

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

std rubbish from them if you read a few threads here

you are correct

 

 

can you fill this out please

 

 

so we can best advise further with all the background details

 

 

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

 

 

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...