Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Better version attached with the late appeal explained more clearly for the judge. This will sound silly, but I think it would be a good idea to e-mail it to the court and UKPC on Sunday.  It's probably me being daft, but Sunday is still March, and as it's late, sending it in March rather than April will make it sound like it was less late than it really is.  if you get my drift. You can still pop in a paper version on Tuesday if you want. E-mail address for the court: [email protected] And for UKPC: [email protected]   [email protected] Defendant WS.pdf
    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
  • 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
      • 160 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

Cabot/retons Claimform -old Cap1 card 'debt' prob Statute Barred?***Claim Discontinued***


Lynchy65
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2776 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

Thanks for the reply I was getting in a panic.

..their just bamboozled me withall the regulations.

 

Should I cca Cabot again although I have already sent it once and the postal order.

 

Can you just clarify for me the date I should have my defence filed for please.

 

Date of claim was 24th june.

 

thanks. ..hope you're enjoying the hot weather!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Tues 26th July is your deadline

 

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

no you don't repeat anything

one shot fleecers

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

Is the cca my only defence?

I'm more than sure that they must have defaulted the account before crabot claim they did.

But I can't get evidence to prove it.

 

 

Although I may be able to get it if I write to crap one before the court hearing.

...that's assuming there will be one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no docs will kill the claim till/if they find them,

 

you've not exhausted the SB route yet.

 

in post one you say they wrote back and said it was not SB'd

because the termination date was inside 6yrs

 

go look at the letter again.

 

IS that what they said

, or its what you think it said

or you are getting confused with the defaulted date being the termination date or something?

they are not the same.

 

its rare for restons to use the term date as a non SB excuse - they know better than that.

its also quite rare for them to state its not SB'd because of the defaulted date....

 

typically with restons, if they have evidence there was a payment within 6yrs - they'd use it and trumpet that loudly

they haven't..that makes me wonder

 

go read that letter and report back.

 

 

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

Thanks Dx. .

So the letter from Restons states

 

" we note you have provided no information or evidence of when you believe the limitation period commenced

nor have you provided any details of when you believe you last made a payment towards the debt or when you last acknowledged your liability for the debt.

 

In any event the information we have received from our client is that the termination date of this account was on or around 26th June 2010 which is within 6 years of today's date.

 

In these circumstances we entirely disagree with your assertion that the claim is statutebarred ".

 

That's the letter.

I thought it was up to them to prove when the last payment

or the limitation period kicked in and they definitely wrote "termination date".

 

What do you think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of cobbrers

Yes for them to prove not SB

Not for you to prove it is

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

Restons and Statute Barred should not be stated within the same sentence :-)

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

:lol::lol::lol:

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 thought these solicitors for rent and DCA stopped with this nonsense about statute barred being the termination/default date

 

Is it not still contrary to the OFT Debt collection code of practice to deliberately mislead a debtor a debt is not statute barred when it is?

 

Yes it is...but try telling Restons et al this

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

Yes it is...but try telling Restons et al this

 

Thanks for the replies guys much appreciated. So I'm guessing there's a statute barred letter somewhere on here that I can use? I'll get on with it on Friday or should I leave it until the last day my defence needs to be submitted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter ? You mean a defence ?

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

Came across this defence. Wait until you get the go ahead in case things have changed but use this template

 

1 The Claimant's claim was issued on xxth July 2016??

 

2 The Claimant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation acticon 1980. If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 yearslink3.gif have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of

the Claimant.

 

3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £xxxx.xx plus costs of £xxx.xx or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

Edited by obiter dictum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for that. Do I add anything about putting them on strict proof as they have provided nothing despite evidence being requested? Also do I leave it until the last day or can I do it tomorrow?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for that. Do I add anything about putting them on strict proof as they have provided nothing despite evidence being requested? not yet Also do I leave it until the last day or can I do it tomorrow? Do it now

 

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

Why fingers crossed

The debt is statute barred

Ruddy fleecers

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi all hope you've had a good weekend? So to update.

 

 

..ive had a letter from rectums acknowledging my statute barred defence.

 

 

They say

'I haven't provided any proof that it is SB blah blah blah therefore I should withdraw my defence and fill in their lovely form and offer of payment otherwise they will apply to have my defence struck out! Really? I have 2 weeks to respond!

 

 

I really want to write and tell them to swivel but probably not a good idea.

Do you lovely people have any advice?

Can they get a defence struck out?

Doesn't seem logical to me.

Am I suppose to receive any info they have on their claim etc

...like the cca and cpr info I asked for and never received?

 

 

What do I do?

Ignore the letter?

Tia x

Link to post
Share on other sites

std letter rectums send all defendants the file an SB defence

if you go read other rectum threads.

 

 

in terms of SB

its upto the claimant to prove its not SB'd

rather than the defendant to prove it is.

 

 

nothing to do.

 

 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi just thought I'd update.

 

 

yesterday I had a letter from rectums saying their client (Cabot ) has decided to discontinue with their claim and they have notified the court as to their decision.

 

 

I'll check on mcol tomorrow make sure they have.

 

 

If so I would call that a result!

 

 

Many thanks for all the advice guys you do a sterling job supporting people like me. Xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...