Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. 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 of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. 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.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

EXCEL PCN 2015 Peel Centre now BW claimform


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2726 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

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

then you watch the clock and if they dont pay the allocation fee in time ask for the calim to be struck out.

 

 

You can do this via MCOL but generally the courts service give the plaintiff a reminder and a few days grace so if a week has gone by and nothing new on your case lodged get on the phone and ask them again to dismiss..

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter from HM C & T Service was dated 5th September. It says that the claimant has 28 days after receipt of my defence to notify the court that they wish to proceed. If not, I can ask for it to be stayed.

If that is not correct, please let me know, thanks.

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, Chris,

there is a difference between the claim being "stayed", as HMCTS have told you to do,

and being "struck out",

 

 

as EB has suggested.

The latter is chancing your arm a little, and the court would need to take a view of whether you have "a reasonable prospect of success" if the case was to be heard.

 

I would guess that,

whereas an application for the case to be stayed on the grounds of timing-out should be granted automatically,

a request to be struck out might need to include a repetition of the main points of your defence (including any failure to provide a response to a CPR request) in order to convince the court of your "reasonable prospect of success".

 

 

Fingers crossed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter from HM C & T Service was dated 5th September. It says that the claimant has 28 days after receipt of my defence to notify the court that they wish to proceed. If not, I can ask for it to be stayed.

If that is not correct, please let me know, thanks.

 

Chris

 

 

you don't need to ask for it to be stayed

its automatic as OD states

 

 

agree also.

its rather a gamble to ask for a claim to be struck out.

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...

wait until tomorrow and if they havent paid the allocation fee write in and ask the court to strike out the claim as the claimant has not shown a cause for action by way of showing any authority as per a CPR31.14 request ofr proof of such authority and that the claim does not meet the requirements of CPR 16.4.

 

You can refer to another court decision on exactly this point with BW at St Albans county court on the 20th Sept 2016.

 

Ask the parking prankster for the case ref number as he has the full details.

 

Today I received a letter from BW Legal in Leeds indicating that they intend to continue with court proceedings.

What is my next step? They never replied to my CPR 31 letter.

 

Regards

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, getting through on the phone is a nightmare though. If you have used MCOL check there and then write in as suggested and follow it up via the phone a week later.

Thecourts service normally give the plaintiff a bit of grace to pay up and often go to the trouble of phoning them to remiind them. Very kind if it is an individual who doesnt know the ropes but these solicitors really should get a rollocking instead of kindness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did use MCOL and I have had a look at the website. In the `claim history` section the last entry states that a `DQ` has been issed on 3/10/2016 i.e. today. Nothing else seems to have been added. Where would it state that they had paid the allocation fee?

 

As I mentioned in my last post, the form N149A Notice of proposed allocation to the Small Claims Track arrived this morning.

 

It appears to be a form primarily sent to Excel and a copy to me.

under the `TAKE NOTICE THAT` section, bullet point 3 states that `You must by 20th October 2016 complete the Small Claims Directions Questionnaire(Form N180) and file it with the court office and serve copies on all other parties.

 

I assume from that, they have NOT yet paid the allocation fee?

 

There is also a poorly photocopied from asking whether anybody wants to use Settlement/Mediation Service. Assuming that all partied would need to agree to this, I would tick the NO box and return it?

 

There is still no mention of any allocation fee having been paid on the MCOL site, so should I still call them anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
return this form rejecting mediation and fill out the rest of the form as required. Send a copy to BWL. Chase the matter up after the 20th as they wont have been asked to pay it yet.

 

I have today received a letter from BW Legal containing two copy photos and a PCN dated 14/08/2015.

 

This is just a rehash of their original PCN dated 06/07/2015.

 

There is no mention that this is a response to my official CPR 31:14 request.

 

The photos only show the vehicle arriving and leaving.

there is no picture of the vehicle without a ticket.

 

There has not been any mention of the fee having been paid by the court and their time runs out on Thursday.

 

Their letter is asking me to call them to `discuss` the matter other wise they might seek their clients instructions which `may` result in legal action?

 

I`m not sure whether they are that competent or not, but I assume that should they miss the Thursday deadline, their claim is dead in the water?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excel have a problem with photographs showing different times and even dates but are actually the same photograph rehashed.

 

You do not contact them,

let them do their worst and waste their money.

 

 

they are hoping you will agree to pay them something-anything even.

The chances are they will use this as an admission of liability and go after you for the full amount unless you get a solicitor to read their letetr and tell you otherwise.

 

Ask the court on friday if they have paid or not.

You can then write a letter asking for a strike out under CPR 16.4 for not showing a cause for action via a CPR 31.14 discovery request. and a POC that doesnt have enough information either to show locus standi

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excel have a problem with photographs showing different times and even dates but are actually the same photograph rehashed.

 

You do not contact them,

let them do their worst and waste their money.

 

they are hoping you will agree to pay them something-anything even.

The chances are they will use this as an admission of liability and go after you for the full amount unless you get a solicitor to read their letetr and tell you otherwise.

 

Ask the court on friday if they have paid or not.

You can then write a letter asking for a strike out under CPR 16.4 for not showing a cause for action via a CPR 31.14 discovery request. and a POC that doesnt have enough information either to show locus standi

 

I received a copy of their DQ today

.

they have said they want to use the mediation service,

agree that the small claims track is correct,

no court is designated by them,

No use of written evidence from an expert,

number of witnesses they have written `TBC`, and NO FEE PAID.

 

There is nothing in the `claim history` on the MCOL site yet.

 

 

I will check again tomorrow and call them in the afternoon to see if any fee has been paid.

If not, can you send me the wording for a suitable letter asking for the proceedings to be struck out?

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

A copy of their form?

Not worth a light, they are trying to harass you into throwing in the towel.

 

I refer to post 66 line 2

 

Try phoning the court if you can get through and ask if the fee has been paid.

 

 

If they havent paid then a letter asking that the claim be struck out under CPR16.4 would be in order.

 

 

This will prevent them from just paying up or resurrecting the claim by starting again if successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Try phoning the court if you can get through and ask if the fee has been paid."

 

I have had my phone set to call me the second they become available. That was 2 hours ago!!

Assuming I do not get through and that their DQ clearly shows they did not pay the fee with that from as directed by the court, I should assume they have not paid it.

If you agree, have you got a template letter to send to the court asking that the action is stayed?

 

Regards

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

its already stayed

you mean struck out surely

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

something stayed can be resurrected but a struck out claim cannot.

 

The courts service usually give a claimant the benefit of the doubt in the former and will allow a late payment so it is worth asking for a strike out if you can show that the claim had no chance of success in the first place.

 

A rubbish POC and lack of authority will certainly do that.

 

What you got today is from them an not the court.

 

You can phone your local county court and ask them about whether the fee has been paid, the case number will link it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have today sent a letter by recorded delivery requesting that the claim be struck out.

 

 

I have cited the claimants failure to comply with CPR16.4(1),

their failure to respond to my CPR31:14 request

and their failure to pay the Allocation Fee on time.

 

I will let you know when anything further happens.

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

read the pranksters latest blog about this very place,

it has some very relvant points that you should note and add to your defence bundle when the time comes.

 

 

You will also need to quote the case numbers of that particular failure by Excel to screw money out of the innocent as well as furnishing copies of the Fairlie Fenton judgement rather than just quoting it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...