Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5  
    • stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return   dx  
    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. 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 crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  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. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the 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.   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. 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 crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   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.  Regards  Andy    
    • Hi   Just read your thread and looked at the Docs posted in your PDF.   1. from AST to rent a Car Parking space you need to have signed a Car Parking Agreement for a Space and for visitors you should have asked permission for another space in advance with a fee to pay. (i also assume renting a parking space would be at a cost)   2. You have no signed Car Parking Agreement nor visitor space agreement.   Did you not fully read that AST before you signed it and pick up what is stated about parking and ask them about this Car Parking Agreement and if you need one to park in the car park?   You could formally complain to them about what was verbally said to you but unless you have evidence of this it may be hard to prove.   You should also contact them and ask how you go about renting a Car Parking space/costs and about the Car Parking Agreement also what the process is for a visitor car parking space/costs.   You need to be aware that they could class you and your visitor as illegally parking in there car park without consent nor a signed car parking agreement which they could use as a Breach of your Tenancy Agreement so you need to be careful in how you are approaching this and where you are parking.   Just for info on checking Manchester Life website they have numerous buildings/apartments/car parks but you may be in a building where some of the apartments are leasehold and as part of there leasehold they may have purchased a car parking space in that building. (so how do you know you are not parking in a space that someone in the building has legally purchased?)
  • Our picks

Jamesx81x

Jacobs 3rd time council has issued an order for recovery proceedings re PCN

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1400 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

How many times can a council take action on a PCN?

 

This will be the 3rd time this particular council has issued an order for recovery proceedings and we are now on the 3rd different bailif - Jacobs!

 

Isn't there a time when they can no longer keep re-issuing it and sending it to bailiffs?

 

Thanks


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that only one Order for Recovery can be issued and that unless paid, the local authority request permission from the Traffic Enforcement Centre to permit them to issue a warrant.

 

Can you provide some further background information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original PCN was back in 2012.

 

I received the first order for recovery back in 2013 and it was then sent to newlyns.

 

After 12 months a 2nd Order for recovery was issued and again sent to Newlyns.

 

The regs had changed and I received the new letters with new charges but they never came and can only assume they returned it to the council as unable to collect.

 

In September I received a 3rd order for recovery and they have now sent it to Jacobs who have since issued the usual standard letters.

 

I have my reasons for not paying and will not deal with the bailiffs only the council but that is a separate matter.

 

I was under the same impression once they had issued the order that was it...up to the bailiffs company to collect and if they do not then the council can take other action such as county court claim etc.

 

What I'm wanting to know is how many times can they keep repeating this process as each time they are re-setting the time frame it lasts for under the new regs are they not?

 

Thanks in advance


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that they can ask for the "money" after the Warrant expires, but only by using a Debt Collector of which many Enforcement Co's have an arm of.


Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ploddertom

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Yes that's what I was under the impression of including as said above issue County Court proceedings if they choose.

 

I do not understand how they can issue an Order for Recovery each year then re-send to a bailiff company. It is this area I want to clarify.

 

Thanks


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know its not the same type of thing but once a CCJ has been issued for example a company cannot keep applying for them for the same debt just enforce it.


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you asked the Council why & under what Legislation they are doing it? If you live in the same area then I would be also making a song & dance about it with the local Councillors and/or the Leader of the Council & hiss opposite number.


Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is my next step.

 

I am trying to gain information on the legalities of it first before I go to them as there does not seem to be much information on-line.

 

What I want to avoid is for me to ask them and them turn round and say 'because we can' without me been able to tell them the exact reason why they cannot.

 

This is what am looking to clarify.


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would let them dig their own hole - possibly write a Formal Complaint addressed to the Council CEO and when it all breaks down it will allow you to go to the LGO. Agreed it is not a quick process but as its dragged on for so long now does that matter.


Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats what I am intending to do just need to know the legal bits surrounding it first.


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James, can you let us know how much Jacobs are requesting in their letter. For instance, have they charged you a Compliance fee of £75?

 

Secondly, have to spoken to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to ascertain whether or not a warrant of control has been authorised by them . If so, you need to ask for the date of the warrant ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes received the first standard letter.

 

They are requesting the original PCN plus their £75 fee!

 

This is now the 3rd order for recovery and a different enforcement agent.


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone point me in the right direction on this?

 

Thanks


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick one...what happens if the amount on the order for recovery is wrong? Would they have to reapply?


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a quick one...what happens if the amount on the order for recovery is wrong? Would they have to reapply?

 

I am just concerned that if you fail to pay during the 'compliance stage' that the debt will then progress to the 'enforcement' stage and with it, an enforcement fe of £235 will also apply.

 

Have you spoken to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to ascertain the date on which the warrant had been issued?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29/09/2015

 

Understand what you re saying but I been through these stages for the last 2 years with the other companies and they didn't get a thing neither will these guys.

 

As said £75 PCN + £7 court fee on the order does not make a total of £96 which they are trying to claim!


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall what I really want answering is are they allowed to keep applying for a warrant every time one runs out?

 

It was my understanding they were allowed to apply for an extension before the warrant ran out but once expired thats it end of it.


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The councils can pay a 7 pound fee to re register the fine at tec so it lasts a further 12 months

 

This isnt a debt avoidance website so i really dont know what you expect any of us to say to you


None of the beliefs held by "Freemen on the land" have ever been supported by any judgments or verdicts in any criminal or civil court cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didnt say it was did I so how about jump down off your high horse when you dont even know the full story! Already said thats a different ongoing matter if you read you will see!

 

So you saying a council is entitled to issue an incorrect Order of Recovery and claim on it when its wrong?

 

Thats the question I was asking!


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And where in the regulations does it state what your saying exactly?

 

It states It can be extended if it is applied for before the current warrant runs out! Where exactly does it state they can let the warrant run out then apply for a new one?


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't think for one minute that a site that gives people the advice of hide your car dont let bailiffs in would imply not paying in any way!


IVA Entry Removed

Nationwide Default Removed

Nationwide Joint Account Default Removed

Natwest Default Removed

Blackhorse Car Finance Court Claim - Won

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The councils can pay a 7 pound fee to re register the fine at tec so it lasts a further 12 months

 

Not since April 2014. The position now is that whilst the LA can indeed apply to extend the warrant for a further 12 months this CANNOT be achieved by applying to TEC. It is a far more difficult procedure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An Order for Recovery can be re-served (if for instance a new address had been identified) but what you really need to be doing is contacting the Traffic Enforcement Centre to ascertain the date on which a warrant had been issued and what date any PREVIOUS warrants (if any) had been issued. Unless you obtain this information you will merely be guessing what has happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...