Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well we can't predict what the judge will believe. PE will say that they responded in the deadline and you will say they don't. Nobody can tell what a random DJ will decide. However if you go for an OOC settlement you should still be able to get some money
    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
  • 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

Old Welcome Finance Debt - Almost 6yr SB - Should I act before CCJ? MKDP / Robinson's


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3173 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 all,

 

Sorry this may be a tad long-winded!!

 

Car purchased from Welcome Finance in mid-2008,

stopped paying the instalments in mid-2009 as I was unhappy with the car,

how they operated and how they had treated me.

 

 

I have no records from that time as to when the last payment was made

but I know that the car was returned to them around October 2009.

 

 

They agreed on the phone to collect the car and because I had rectified some existing faults at my expense etc etc

I was told the final balance owed was up to £300 once the car had been handed back depending on a few factors.

I asked for written confirmation of this as a full & final settlement offer and would make payment immediately.

I never received this and then didn't hear anything else for quite some time.

 

In the mean time I had been in and out of the country, moved house etc

 

 

eventually a couple of years ago I received some letters via my mum's address from MKDP saying I owed £4000.

Significantly more than £300!!

I confirmed this detail by applying for a credit report with experian and note that they hold an account on my record for £4000 which is defaulted as of 28/10/2009.

 

Then today I was passed a letter from MKDP, which was again sent to my mum's address,

stating that the debt of £4000 had been sold to Robinson's and also enclosed was an offer letter from Robinson's

saying I can pay £10 per week for several years,

£15 per week for less years or call them to discuss options.

 

 

I've always ignored all letters and never replied to them or spoken to them on the phone.

 

 

As I was;t even in the country for some of the past few years I never even needed credit so it didn't affect me,

however I'm now back permanently so want to make sure this doesn't go to CCJ.

 

Now, I'm aware that this debt is either Statute Barred already or is about to be. If, for instance, the SB start date is indeed 28/10/09 then this is just 2 months away from now, however I'm not exactly certain when the car was returned or when exactly the last payment was made to Welcome Finance.

 

I've never received a default notice, never received a notice of assignment to MKDP

and generally didn't receive anything after the car had been handed back

so I assumed there was no outstanding amount and that was the end of it.

 

 

I moved house a couple months after the car went back so I can only guess that some paperwork may have been sent to my old address,

but seeing as I hadn't heard anything from Welcome Finance in that time I assumed, rightly or wrongly,

that there was no need to update my address with them.

 

Now my questions, if I may....

 

1. Should I just sit it out and hope a claim form doesn't arrive in the post?

 

2. If no to Q1, then I'm looking to clarify exactly when the debt was/will be SB. What''s the best way to do this and how long does that add to the process?

 

3. If yes to Q1, then I guess if a claim form does arrive I'll need to formulate a defence and cross that bridge when it comes?

 

 

Any advice is greatly appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

let it run

as long as you get mail swiftly it wont hurt.

 

 

get an sar off to welcome.

 

 

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

Agree wurh a SAR and letting it run. More than likely has PPI and other reclaimables which wont reset the clock on the SB

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly certain there was PPI on it, I vaguely remember them saying it was with a payment protection scheme incase of unemployment etc..... Probably not worth the paper it was written on as I was self-employed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...