Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You will probably get a couple more reminders followed by further demands fro unregulated debt collectors with even increasing amounts to pay. They are all designed to scare you into paying.  Don't. It's a scam site and they do not know who was driving and they know the keeper is not liable to pay the PCN. Also the shop was closed so they have no legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear. So to charge £100 is a penalty as there is no legitimate interest which means that the case would be thrown out if it went to Court.  Keep your money in your wallet and be prepared to ignore all their letters and threats. Doubtful they would go to Court since a lot more people would not pay when they heard  MET lost in Court. However they may just send you a Letter of Claim to test your resolve.  If yoy get one of those, come back to us and we will advise a snotty letter to send them.  You probably already have, but take a look through some of our past Met PCNs to see how they are doing.
    • Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
    • hi all just got the reminder letter, I have attached it and also the 2nd side of the original 1st pcn (i just saw the edit above) Look forward to your advice Thanks   PCN final reminder.pdf pcn original side 2.pdf
    • The airline said it was offering to pay $10,000 to those who sustained minor injuries.View the full article
    • The Senate Finance Committee wants answers from BMW over its use of banned Chinese components by 21 June.View the full article
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Offshore Account


sharperesidence
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6418 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

And it is because of the Reciprocal Enforcement that Count Court Judgements

cannot be enforced certainly in Jersey and the Isle of Man. Both the Royal

Court of Jersey and the Court in the IOM consider themselves "superior courts"

so will not be bound by rulings from our County Courts.

As you probably know, the Channel Islands have their own Laws even Jersey

Laws do not apply in Guernsey or Alderney, each of which are Bailliewicks,

and all have a French based legal system.

I cannot find the website that puts it very clearly, the position with County

Court judgements in the Islands, that is.

However there is one that does go round the houses a bit, but confirms

that only judgements from a high court or above in England, will be

enforceable in Jersey and the Isle of Man.-

http://www.jerseylegalinfo.je/Publications/jerseylawreview/Feb00/editorial_miscellany.aspx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Our Courts enforce fines on parking tickets even when the tickets are

later found to be unenforceable.

So if the right defence was not entered in regards to your judgement, it

could well go through. in any event, that defence would only have been a

delaying tactic till the High Court became involved.

It is a pity that I can't find the other website since it lays down the law

unequivocally. Though you would have thought that the Courts in those

Isles would have sorted the jurisdictions of our Courts and theirs long

before Hardwick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been bugging me POCA that I couldn't find the relevant website

again. However I did find part of it on the Jersey info site-

 

 

"But the earlier Manx case is of interest to Jersey lawyers because it dealt with precisely the same point as that dealt with in Hardwick but came to the opposite conclusion. In Video Vision Broadcast, the respondent had obtained an English county court judgment against the appellant, but by that time the appellant had moved to the Isle of Man. The respondent obtained the transfer of the proceedings from the county court to the English High Court, and then proceeded to register the judgment in the Isle of Man under the Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Isle of Man) Act 1968, section 4(I).

 

The appellant applied to set aside the registration, on the basis that the judgment had not been “given in the superior courts” in England, as required under section 1 of that Act, since “superior courts” were defined so as to exclude county courts in England. It will be observed that the wording of the equivalent Jersey legislation is identical in this respect, and that it was precisely this submission which found favour with the Royal Court in Hardwick. However, both at first instance and on appeal, the Isle of Man courts took the view that, once the judgment of the county court had been transferred to the High Court for the purposes of being enforced, such a judgment was for the purposes of the Manx legislation relating to enforcement a judgment of the High Court in England, and the registration was accordingly valid."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite sure how you can say "precisely" when this is what you said on a

previous post-

"Both County Court and Crown Court Orders for final sums can be enforced in the Isle of Man or Channel Islands under the Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933. See County Court Rule 35.CCR ORDER 35*-- ENFORCEMENT OF COUNTY COURT JUDGMENTS OUTSIDE ENGLAND AND WALES "

And your post was in response to my previous post stating that County Court judgements cannot be enforced unless the judgement is transferred to the

High Court, thus implying that my post was incorrect.

 

C'mon POCA, you have to let me win once in a while. lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Sharpey, we have rather taken over your thread. The upshot is that

though the answer is yes, if the initial claim comes via the County Court, you

can appeal, but they are free [if they know]to have the judgement

transferred to the High Court. This will delay proceedings by a month or

two.

The same rules apply in Jersey, as it says in the explanation, the wording

in THe IOM is the same as Jerseys'.

That is not to say that Guernsey and Alderney are the same since they have

a different set of laws again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...