Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So if the breach occurred say Dec 2017 (first missed payment) and the default notice was issued Sept 2018 and the claim was issued 7th June 24 the claimant will of course be arguing it is within the limitation period (by 3 months)
    • Yep, I would  have brought up the other things like asking for their contract and receiving no response etc. but the mediation phone calls were rather short. Evri just said the contract was not with them (i said 1999 act response etc.) and the goodwill offer thing. Whole process took about 10 minutes in total. Seems like they don't even want to negotate in mediations anymore. "they're only given a certain amount that they can agree to in mediation per day" I mean its hard for me to say if thats the mediator paraphrasing or aa direct quote from evri I will look through that thread and share what I find, also for what its worth I also have everything I made for the previous claim WS and bundles etc. that I can tweak for this parcel, since it did go almost all the way to court and is a virtually identical case. that + this new stuff you shared above should be helpful to me
    • If I haven't referred to it before then please check out this thread another case where the claimant contracted directly with Packlink for a courier delivery service carried out by Evri. Please read this thread very carefully and eventually you will get to a point where the claimant – our OP – discovered some interesting terms and conditions and has referred to them in his case. He incorporated these into his witness statement and was given judgement – not on the basis of rights of third parties but on the basis of direct responsibility. I would suggest that use the witness statement as a model although we will want to see it before you file it off. When you find the particular post with the witness statement, please can you post a link to it here as well as a copy of the witness statement because I don't have the time to look for it at the moment and the thread is rather long. However it is very important to you and you should go through it very carefully indeed. We have applied for a transcript of the judgement and hopefully it will be along in six weeks or so. As soon as we receive it we will make it available on this sub- forum.
    • Yes they are criminal charges. The law requires you to stop/report if "...owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place an accident occurs by which— [injury or damage to a third party or their property is caused]. "I would be disinclined at this stage to offer anything more than you do not believe any such accident took place.  You could provide a brief description of the altercation in an attempt to explain why another party might be making these allegations. I know it's a silly question, but are you sure that you did not collide with anything? Could you have mistaken hitting something for the other party thumping your car? Could it be that you passing closely caused him to damage something somehow?  
  • 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

CEL/DEAL parking charge CCJ set aside - now have 14 days to submit a defence - help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3195 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

Thank you.

 

 

The link is very helpful but I have no idea what sort of defence to mount.

 

 

I don't want to have to pay the amount,

but I will if I really have to in order to get the CCJ wiped out.

 

 

Is the defence merely to get the set aside because I didn't receive the letter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The application to set aside will be that you did not receive the paperwork

despite the claimant being aware that you had moved from the address that the claim was sent to,

and therefore had no opportunity to defend.

 

 

Your defence will be for one of the usual reasons why private parking claims fail if taken to court

- research for the ones which best fit your particular case

and the experts here will help with that if you provide more information.

 

There is a fairly hefty fee for the application.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can show that they had the correct address and that it was their fault that the proceedings were incorrectly issued, you should be able to get your application fee back.

Follow the advice on the setaside link

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have spoken to the court and they have confirmed that it was issued by debt recovery plus for a parking charge

 

. I have the number for their legal section but there is no answer and only an answering service but

 

I am reluctant to leave a message.I am going to complete the N244 and send it back to HMCTS with the fee, then just wait I guess. I hope I am able to get a set aside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sincerely hope they didn't say it was issued for a DR+ parking FINE!!

 

 

no such thing

 

 

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

You're going to have a field day with this in court when it's re-heard.

 

DR+ aren't the principle so have absolutely no right to bring any kind of county court claim against you.

 

 

Technically, it's the landowner that's the principle, but the PPC's believe that they also have this right. They've be proven wrong many times in court.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi everyone.

 

I was given a default CCJ against my name earlier this year by debt enforcement action Ltd

but they sent everything to my old address, as I have explained in a previous thread.

 

I have paid the money to the court for the hearing and I feel that I fit the criteria for a set aside

because I had let them know my new address and even offered a settlement,

which they ignored and went ahead with the CCJ,

sending the papers to my old address so I could not do anything about it.

 

The company has since written to me stating that they have no objection to the set aside

and are happy for the case to be reduced to a defended case.

They will also not be in attendance at the hearing.

 

I am happy if this is the case, but do I have a defence?

If the CCJ is removed and comes off my record

then I am also happy to make an arrangement with the company

as I don't want to then go to a defended case and lose it.

 

What are the options for me?

 

 

Any help much appreciated.

 

 

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Three threads merged for history

 

If you now go back and read the thread from post 1

 

The defence is already outlined

 

Don't forget to get your set aside fee back too

 

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 doubt they'll bother

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

" The company has since written to me stating that they have no objection to the set aside and are happy for the case to be reduced to a defended case. They will also not be in attendance at the hearing.

 

I am happy if this is the case, but do I have a defence? If the CCJ is removed and comes off my record then I am also happy to make an arrangement with the company as I don't want to then go to a defended case and lose it."

 

I would suggest a set a side by Consent Order and negotiate a settlement payment plan within the Consent...otherwise the claim will just proceed and you will have to submit a defence for the original claim.

 

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 offer you proposals now by way of a Consent/Tomlin Order...and stay the claim.Unless you wish to proceed to defend.

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

Several things for your defence,

no liability as keeper so not the debtor as no contract existed between you and the parking co (CEL) or DEAL,

 

 

no assignment of the debt so no cause for action or locus standi for DEAL,

 

 

no notification of any assignment of the portion of original debt owned by the Co-Op as it didnt occur.

 

 

The costs claimed include solicitors fees claimed fraudulently as M Shwartz not a practicing solicitor

as per judgement at Eastbourne CC in case ref A84YP582 and others.

 

 

Company is being run contrary to Companies Act by failing to register the true ownership and control.

 

Deal also continued to send papers to old address when given the correct service address by the courts in this case as well.

 

look at their record in these matters and point out that CEL have been prosecuted in Scotland for fraud by the Trading Standards there.

 

 

See parking prankster for a lot more cases you can quote

Link to post
Share on other sites

DEAL dont attend court in person as they would be dragged off by the polis if they did and it would give the individuals concerned crooked game away to have to answer things when they have claimed that they are writing in the capacity of an agent of the COOP or as an employee of CEL

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...