Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are 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. 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.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © 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;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   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 alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, 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 credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1179 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

hi to everyone,

i parked my car on whitechapel road today at 13.04,

an went to collect the pre ordered cotton bale from from a shop which is 7 min walk away from loading bay.

 

 

it took me 15 -16 min to go n come back.

 

 

i came back in my car with goods at 13.19 i saw pcn on my car.

 

 

traffic warden observed from 13.04 till 13.09 n then issued a ticket.

 

 

i m just confused as there was 20 min loading was allowed

and i went to collect the goods and came back within 20 min.

 

 

why he issued the ticket?

 

 

i also got a letter from the shop in which they said that i was there to collect my goods.

 

 

what do you think guys i have any grounds to appeal?

 

 

n one thing more there is no contravention code on the pcn,

 

 

only reason is mentioned which is (Stopped where prohibited red-rout clearway)..

 

thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you in a commercial vehicle or private car? Loading bays are for commercial loading only and not for general shopping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you in London ? If so, read this https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/red-routes/rules-of-red-routes/loading-for-the-public

 

Loading bays, unless otherwise specified on the sign at the loading bay, are for anybody to use as long as they are loading/unloading.

From the link, "Loading bays are an essential part of the red route network as they allow businesses and the general public to make and receive vital, and often bulky deliveries.". There is no mention of commercial or goods vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh I understand, car also can stop for loading in loading bay... But what type of proof i should submit to them that i was loading? Manager letter is okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can only try. Explain what you were doing in writing, and send the manager's letter too.

 

You are not guaranteed to have it cancelled, since most of the time you were walking as opposed to loading/unloading. I don't know how far you had to walk in seven minutes (generally, walking pace is about 3 miles per hour, so that would work out at around a third of a mile), as loading/unloading is permitted on yellow lines, and the council may well decide that you could have stopped closer to the premises. All you can do is try an appeal and see what they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

isn't the idea of a loading bay to be close to where your are loading / unloading

 

for example the observation within 5 minutes should show some sort of movement between vehicle and business or even if your vehicle is parked in a loading bay and you saw an observer watching your vehicle surely you would approach and discuss how long you are going to be

 

where I understand you were loading your vehicle you were not loading from the immediate vicinity therefore may not have much of a log to stand on

 

out of interest the business you were collecting from do they not have a loading area close to them or even on there property ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There wasn't any free space available mewr to that business on that time , i checked all nearby spots , all of them were packedup...n that business they don't have their own parking ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally think you are going to struggle with this one, as you were not loading or unloading in the immidiate area,

 

If you were able to carry your load from company back to loading bay the argument would be you could carry your load to a car park, therefore the loading bay was of no use to you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx liverpolluk for your suggestion. I have sent them the representations in writing , gonna see what is thier reply..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done on persisting with this, but nice to see a bit of leniency on the council's part.

Incidentally (this being my first reading of this thread), I would have said that you weren't technically "Stopped where prohibited on a red route clearway". You could have been done for being parked contrary to the restrictions of a loading bay.

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...