Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Evening, I've got a fairly simple question but I'll provide some context incase needed. I've pursued a company that has operations in england despite them having no official office anywhere. I've managed to find a site they operate from and the papers there have been defended so I know they operate there. They've filed a defence which is honestly the worst defence ever, and despite being required to provide their witness evidence, they have not and have completely ignored the courts and my request for copies of it. I'm therefore considering applying to strike out their defence on the grounds the defence was rubbish and that they haven't provided any evidence for the trial. However, it has a trial date set for end of june, and a civil application wouldn't get heard until a week before then, so hardly worth it. However, my local court is very good at dealing with paper applications (i.e ones that don't need hearings, and frankly I think they are literally like 1-2 days from when you submit it to when a Judge sees it. I'm wondering if I can apply to strikeout a defence without a hearing OR whether a hearing is required for a strikeout application.   Thanks
    • I have just opened another bank acc with lloyds (i have a few already) After doing some research they may have some relation to tsb or be apart of the same group will this cause me issue if my salary is paid into my lloyds account? Also, if the debts do go into default and nothing is paid then after 6 years it all goes away? As the DCAs cannot do anything? I do want to start paying in like 3/4 months or do you advise I leave it if it goes into default? again sorry for all the questions, i am just processing everything
    • one reply only  follow post 2 of letter of claim <<clickme link. dx
    • Sorry, I got confused  Yes, it states all three   Thanks, 
  • 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

Finance U aka Corner Park Garage - claim form***Claim Dismissed***


RCT40
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2574 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,

 

I'm really hoping for some advice on how to proceed with an issue

I have with car finance if possible. I don't want to name the garage/finance company.

 

I purchased a car in April 2012, and lost my job in October the same year.

I struggled to maintain the monthly payment until December

 

when I contacted the garage/finance company in the hope of a reduced payment,

or even a short payment holiday to tide things over into the new year, and expected to be back in work around April time.

 

To cut a long story short when speaking with the manager director and explaining my situation,

he lost the plot and insisted on repossessing the car on that day,

although to avoid a scene outside my home I reluctantly agreed to drop the car at his garage.

 

The garage sold the car, in January 2013 and has since attempted to claim close to £8,000

being the balance of the agreement after the sale of the vehicle.

 

However until now I have received an annual letter to which I have posted a standard response

due to issues over the sale of the vehicle, and at one point I did make a complaint to OFT about their conduct.

 

The reason I have decided to post today,

is that I've received my annual letter,

this time it attempts to address some issues I raised more than three years ago,

although with a rebate making the sum outstanding £5,000

 

- should I not chose to accept this offer I will receive a county county summons within the next couple of weeks

- I've heard all of this before, but I think this one might arrive.

 

The vehicle was purchase with a fixed sum agreement, and a bill of sale,

it is this that the owner suggested gave him the right to insist on the return of the car

the very same day as the telephone call back in 2012.

 

Look forward to any assistance, or insights into where I stand with this.

 

regards

 

rct

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 235
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

sounds like your old advantage finance debacle.

 

there was no dn issued so they repo'd unlawfully

off you go

exactly the same as before.

car and all the moneyback please

 

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

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

Notice of Default?

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

Notice of Default?

 

 

no notice of default,

only things I received is a letter acknowledging they have received the car,

an annual statement

and a letter about the outstanding amount,

 

 

until the latest letter mention in my initial post.

I also receive a monthly black mark on my Equinox credit score which is somewhat killing my credit rating :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

as with your advantage thread then..

 

no notice of default

then the repo was unlawful.

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

This article explains well--

- Motor finance is an area which often requires an additional consideration when contemplating debt recovery action,

because the relevant credit agreement may be a hire-purchase or conditional sale agreement.

In these cases, where the debtor (or hirer) has paid over one third of the total amount payable,

the vehicle is provided with the special status of ‘protected goods’ under section 90 of the Act.

This means that it cannot be taken from the debtor without either a court order or his consent.

If a vehicle is taken in the absence of either of these,

then it could become an expensive and time-consuming exercise for the lender that entirely defeats

the purpose of seeking to recover the asset in the first place.

This is because section 91 provides that where section 90 is breached,

the debtor is released from all liability under the agreement,

but he retains a right to recover damages equal to all payments made.

These payments may even include the value of a part exchange vehicle.

The first issue to be addressed

– in common with all credit agreements

– is that of bringing the contract to an end through default and termination.

In the event that this is not done correctly,

then there is no basis upon which to take the vehicle,

and instead the debtor will retain his contractual right to possession under the terms of the agreement.

Assuming that the agreement has been brought to an end correctly,

then the contractual right to possession will terminate alongside the agreement.

But that is not the end of the story

– if the hirer has statutory protection against the owner

repossessing the vehicle under section 90,

then, in view of the consequences,

it means the lender will have to approach the matter with a certain degree of care.

In theory the easiest method of repossessing a protected vehicle is for the lender to obtain the debtor’s consent to take the vehicle from him.

This approach also has a commercial logic in minimising costs when ultimately they may not be recovered.

It is important to remember that the consent must be genuine and given voluntarily,

and, therefore, lenders should make sure that where third party recovery agents are used to repossess protected vehicles,

the processes that they adopt are reliable in this regard.

Practices involving either coercion or misrepresentation could cause licensing issues

when considered under the OFT Irresponsible Lending Guidance.

As a minimum,

the lender should obtain from the debtor a signed mandate at the time of the repossession,

stating clearly and unequivocally that the consent is given freely.

The mandate should also provide full details including the debtor’s name, address, vehicle description and related agreement number.

It is useful too if the mandate includes a declaration to this effect,

together with a comment on the fact that the keys and logbook have been provided

– such an approach is likely to indicate informed consent and so reduce the risk of any future claim under section 90.

If consent to repossess the protected vehicle cannot be obtained from the debtor,

the only option available to the lender is to obtain an order from the court for its return.

As ever, the process of issuing proceedings inevitably involves risk, additional costs

and may cause delay in recovering the vehicle because attendance at a hearing is likely to be necessary.

  • Confused 1

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

Thank you dx, I've still have everything from the Advantage issue, so I guess its a matter of waiting for Finance U aka Corner Park Garage to make the next move and I'll deal with it from there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi DX,

 

Not been around for a while,

 

in the meantime claim issue,

defence filed & DQ due to be filed.

 

Although as you pointed out from a CCA point of view

my previous issues set me in good stead to deal with the issue,

but I have little experience in the Bil of Sale department.

 

The CCA & BOS I have are signed and witness by one and the same person.

 

When digging around on the web, I came across

 

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/uk/cases/UKUT/AAC/2011/280.html&query=nine+and+regions+and+v+and+oft&method=boolean ,

 

this seems to say that this makes the BOS void,

but do you or anyone else have knowledge of this being used in defence?

 

As ever thanks for any input

 

Regards

 

RCT40

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may read on the internet that your BOS will be void if witnessed by your lbl lender

.

Since the OFT( as was) lost the attestation case on appeal by 2 to1 this is NOT the case

.

full details here http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup...method=boolean

 

any chance you could fill this out

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-December-2014**

 

and copy up your defence and DQ/ws

[suitably redacted ofcourse!]

.

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

Thanks DX, I get url not found when following the link.

 

I'm up to my eyeballs with work this week and away over bank holiday, but I will certainly provide all information requested during next week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not sure about the link

i'll find out later

just that what you quoted is now old hat.

 

 

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

Name of the Claimant ? FINANCE U LIMITED

 

Date of issue – 22/07/2016

 

What is the claim for –

 

 

1. By a credit agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 and dated 06/04/2012 the claimant lent the defendants the sum of £10.337.25 to be repaid with interest and charges

by

one instalment of £295.00 on 06/05/2012

and 48 monthly instalments of £398.16 thereafter.

2.By a letter dated 26/04/2016, the amount outstanding was £7,911.68.

No payments have been received from the defendants since the letters before action were issued.

However a rebate of interest amounting to £2,911.68 has been applied.

3.Accordingly, the defendants are indebted to the claimant for the sum of £5,000.00.

Copies of the sales invoice from C.P.G(Wales) PLC T/a Corner Park (Item 1),

The credit agreement (Item 2)

and the letters before action (Item 3) have been sent to the defendants.

 

 

The claimant claim the said sum of £5,000.00.

What is the value of the claim? £5,000

 

Is the claim for a current account (Overdraft) or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? Fixed Sum Credit Agreement and Bill of Sale.

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? 2012

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor

or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Claim by original creditor.

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? No

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? No

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? No, a document entitled annual statement has been received each year.

Why did you cease payments?

When contacting Finance U in December 2012,

hoping to setup a temporary reduced payment arrangement, as I had lost my job,

I was informed that as I no longer had the means to pay the full monthly pay

the car should be returned by close of business that day,

or it would be collected at my cost £195.

 

 

I elected to take the drop it off myself route to save costs as money was tight,

and under duress returned the vehicle as requested.

From this point I made no further payments.

 

What was the date of your last payment? November 2012. At the time I was forced to return the vehicle the account was up to date, with no defaults issued to date.

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved?

There was no dispute until I was forced to give the vehicle back.

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan?

Mentioned above, this approach caused the demand for return of the vehicle that day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks dx, I've copied the questions into my thread, and will follow up after bank holiday (sooner if possible) with Credit Agreements, BOS and defence that I have already filed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

go get 'em!!

 

 

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

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 have read your thread with great interest, although the outcome doesn't seem to be there - could you fill in the gaps?

Link to post
Share on other sites

it was a long long time ago i am afraid...i only remembered by having a search as i had dealings with him...i have a feeling there maybe some other threads from way back that postgjj was doing with finance u...i will have a search and see what i can find for you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...