Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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 2576 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

Yes...but only one of you can get judgment

 

Thank you Andy. Can you point me to any information on this please. I could have worded that slightly better, lack of sleep! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 235
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Information with regards to securing your judgment as a Charging Order ?

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

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

:thumb: Whats good for the goose.....

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

I've been trawling my email and found, the confirmations from my insurance company when I did the change of vehicle after speaking to the salesman late afternoon on 30th March 2012.

 

I'm going to add to my evidence the agreement for the vehicle that I had from them in 2010. This agreement is very different from the one for the BMW and has a different agreement number. On the first vehicle I left a holding deposit, but couldn't pickup it up for almost two weeks, I also found the transaction in my online banking for payment of the deposit balance which shows as 25/9/2010 - and the agreements were signed on 24/9/2010.

 

As for the I don't need to send you an agreement, because you've got a pre-contract and your an existing customer and know the terms and conditions, would this be the right section to quote? http://http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/61A

Correct section

 

I wouldn't worry too much about the old

agreement, he hasn't got a leg to stand on

in this regard

 

Totally new and separate agreement

He's in breach of s61 a

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Sounds like it, wonder why he didn't disclose earlier if it's suddenly so important 😀

 

I've received a copy of the diary entries, as expected theres things in there that didn't happen. Shouldn't these have been included with the SAR?

 

Not quiet sure how I should respond to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its personal identifiable data then yes it should

 

Does your existing ws and disclosures

 

cover the matters he has now raised?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for coming back to me rouge,

it is personally identifiable in as much as it includes my name and account number.

 

 

I would say that my ws and disclosure were/are at odds with the bogus entries in this new document.

 

 

However after going through the 400-500 pieces of paper gathered on this issue since 2012, I unearthed a previous copy of the diary notes provided to me under the SAR last September that I'd attached no importance to, because until today it wasn't important and was covered in my ws.

 

The deadline for filing additional evidence was today,

since we last spoke I've had the case transferred to my local court which is 10 mins away by car,

so I've handed delivered a copy of the notes I'd been given to the court today

- so, with two conflicting sets of diary notes, he's dug himself a bigger hole probably.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read s55cca1974

 

CONC 4.2 FCA Consumer Credit Sourcebook

 

inc

(4) for bill of sale loan agreements:

(a) the risk of losing the asset which is the subject of the bill of sale and the loss this could entail;

(b) that repossession can take place without a court order;

© that repossession may not clear the debt owed; and

(d) unlike in the case of hire-purchase agreements and conditional sale agreements, the customer is not protected under this arrangement from repossession of the asset where one third or more of the total amount payable has been paid off;

 

 

 

and

The Consumer Credit ( Agreements) Regulations 1983

 

That should occupy your evening RCT😀

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read s55cca1974

 

CONC 4.2 FCA Consumer Credit Sourcebook

 

inc

(4) for bill of sale loan agreements:

(a) the risk of losing the asset which is the subject of the bill of sale and the loss this could entail;

(b) that repossession can take place without a court order;

© that repossession may not clear the debt owed; and

(d) unlike in the case of hire-purchase agreements and conditional sale agreements, the customer is not protected under this arrangement from repossession of the asset where one third or more of the total amount payable has been paid off;

 

 

 

and

The Consumer Credit ( Agreements) Regulations 1983

 

That should occupy your evening RCT😀

 

Thanks again Rouge, I've sent you a PM, hope you don't mind...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm just wondering whether someone could tell me please what the likely outcome is if the claimant doesn't provide trial bundles prior to the trial taking place?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Failure to comply with Directions RT......request sanctions be imposed

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

The Court can impose various sanctions.....strike out... or else order....last chance saloon warning..but you have to notify the court....have you checked to see if they have filed it with the court?

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

It hadn't been filed with the court yesterday - I'm trying to get through to check again today. Trial is on Tuesday, what would you suggest that I do Andy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you email your Court?

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

Just a quick update on the outcome of this one,

 

Claimants claim dismissed as Credit Agreement found unenforceable.

 

My counter claim also dismissed.

 

Quite happy with this, my credit file can be cleaned up and don't have it hanging over me any longer.

 

Thanks to everyone that helped with advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done RCT

 

Delighted that this has been resolved for you.Perhaps give a little synopsis of the outcome for the benefit of users following your thread so they know how and why it was dismissed.

 

 

Thread title amended to reflect the outcome

 

Regards

 

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

The essence of it being dismissed was because the claimant insisted that he gave me the car on 31st March and I returned on 6th April 2012 and signed a finance agreement

- the judge wouldn't buy that,

 

 

and with the evidence we provided found that the agreement was signed on 31st March and therefore the Bill of Sale document was not registered within the specified period giving way to an unenforceable agreement.

 

Our counter claim failed,

because we had intended to enter a valid agreement and had made those payments in the thought that it was indeed valid.

However I still think the counter claim was worthwhile as it put pressure back on the claimant.

 

The claimant didn't provide any bundles as directed,

however the judge other than had a moan at him didn't take any further action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was dismised due to the Bill of Sale issue

 

Can the Claimant instigate another claim??

 

Now CPR 38.7 Prohibits a new claim on the same particulars but a second bite at the apple without the Bill of Sale and simply on the Consumer Credit Act??

 

And finally if the Car was repo on a dodgy Bill of Sale, can a debtor then sue Finance U or the creditor for breach of contract with an unlawful repo??

Edited by obiter dictum
Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO yes and off you go RCT

you've done it once already...and WON

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...