Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That's their problem. They said account was £89 in credit when it was closed. Sent the cheque after about 3-4 weeks. They can't get it back from dead people. Unless they hold a seance.
    • Yes it was in her name at her address.  She used my address as a care of address when she moved into a care home.  I was managing her affairs from my address while she was in the care home.  Eon was made aware of this and agreed to it.  She/we used the Royal Mail redirection service from her old address to my address. 
    • @maroondevo52 what appears to be happening, is that the companies arranging vaccinations have been provided with bulk supplies of both flu and covid boosters. So the staff doing the vaccinations have trays with both ready to go into arms.                       
    • EON may have paid £89 refund in error and now they want it back.   Up to you really. But once you have sent the copy death cert that should stop any further communications.  You can of course look to take this further, but whether you would easily gain any compensation, is the question that you need to ask yourself.  They may dig their heels in and you then get into months of ping pong communications.
    • Great thanks, will leave 2 in then, replace 3 and I think its good to go.    This is exactly what I have in my word file ready to send, I think im happy with it and can send to mcol monday morning. Any further thoughts or things to update please let me know.   Again thank you both for your help, really is priceless.         Defence:   1.     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.    2.     The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   3.     Paragraph 1 is noted. It is accepted I have in the past had agreements with New Day LTD RE Aqua. I do not recall the precise details or agreement nor the claimant either having failed to plead an agreement/account number within its particulars of claim and have therefore sought verification from the claimant.   4.     Paragraph 2 is noted but until such time the claimant can clarify the agreement account number any breach has yet to be proven.      5.     I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served by either the Claimant or New Day LTD RE Aqua pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.   6.     It is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of the Agreement/Assignment/Default notice or Termination requested by CPR 31. 14, and will shortly be in default of my section 78 request, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a)   show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; (b)   show and evidence the breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974 on which the Termination referred to relies upon. (c)   show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d)   show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   7.     As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8.     On the 17th of November I requested to The Claimants Solicitors, Mortimer Clarke by way of a CPR 31.14 copies of the documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for. Mortimer Clarke have failed to fulfil my CPR 31:14 request.   9.     On the 16th of November I made a section 78 legal request to the claimant for a copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement. The claimant has as of of 06/12/21 failed to comply.   10.  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.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

(Information/ discussion) Criminal procedure. (a brief introduction.)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2277 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 notice from the reaction I received when I mentioned the basic procedure for processing criminal actions, that there seems to be confusion as to the procedures and terms involved. It is not really surprising as most of the matters discussed here are of a civil nature. But for those not familiar with the fundamentals, here is my take on it.

 

Firstly all criminal proceedings must start in the magistrate’s court. I have read people saying that you can chose where to start an action on say a private prosecution, you cannot.

 

There are two kinds of offences which can be considered at the MC, these are defined by their seriousness, and the maximum fine or term of commitment that can be imposed on conviction.

These are: A “summary offence” and “indictable offence”

 

A “summary offence” is for less serious criminal offences. The sentencing is limited to a far lower level than in more serious(indicatable) cases which are passed up to the Crown court

 

An “indictable offence” can only be heard at the crown court, this is after the defendant has attended the magistrate’s court. The magistrates will remand or bail them to appear at the Crown Court after consideration of the case in question. These more serious offences such as theft rape or murder are generally heard by a jury.

 

In addition to these there are also “each way” offences; this is where the action could fall into either of the two categories. On application to the magistrate, they will make the decision as to which court is most appropriate for the offence, and assign it to the relevant one.

 

Most legislation which presents the possibility of criminal charges will also state the kind of action which may be taken.

 

For instance in section 68 of the Tribunals Act schedule 12, the action which may be taken for obstructing an EA in the course of his duty, is prescribed as “on summary conviction”.

 

68(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he intentionally obstructs a person lawfully acting as an enforcement agent.

(2)A person is guilty of an offence if he intentionally interferes with controlled goods without lawful excuse.

(3)A person guilty of an offence under this paragraph is liable on summary conviction to—

(a)imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks, or

(b)a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or

©both.

 

Similarly the theft act of instance will say by indictment and the fraud act may say either way.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a process, before Magistrates will hear any case. If someone prevents an EA doing their job, then i presume this would be reported to the Police and considered by the CPS first. This may happen quite quickly, as i think there are CPS Solicitors based in Police stations who will make a quick decision based on the evidence compiled by Police.

 

The Police will have questioned those involved and it would be up to a duty Sargeant or higher rank to decide whether to involve CPS, try to give a caution or to not pursue if they are not sure of the evidence.

 

If an EA allegedly assaults a member of the public, it would be up to Police to investigate. If the Police decided to not pursue, it is up to the person assaulted whether they wanted to pursue a private prosecution by laying information at Magistrates or to issue a civil court claim. In either case, it would be extremely unwise to do either without getting full legal advice. Magistrates are unlikely to view a criminal allegation by a member of the public with much merit, but may listen to a Solicitor. I understand there are cost implications if any case goes ahead, as the EA will seek to recover their costs. It is probably easier with a civil court case, to claim for injuries and any consequential costs.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite often it seems that there are associated offences in addition to the obstruction. Assault being the most common.

 

This again is triable as a summary offence under section 39 of the criminal just ice act, both may be tried together and the sentence may be cumulative.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/33/section/40

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...