Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm afraid that standing on principles almost always involves a bit of risk. I hadn't noticed the case that you have referred to – and our site team member @Andyorch has already commented on it that there is a lottery in so far as judges are concerned. I haven't seen the claim form and I don't know precisely how it was argued in court. I feel very strongly that the decision is wrong because it effectively allows contractual terms to overcome statutory rights – and this has to be in error. Whatever the case, it is most likely that Hermes will simply put their hands up and pay you out and if you had claimed 5 pounds more they would have done the same. Even if they had gone to court, your chances of winning on a claim for the £25 would be better than 95% and the worst you might have expected would have been for the court to refuse to award you the extra 4 pounds and simply to give you the £25. I think that Hermes and the other courier companies rely on the fact that their customers don't have sufficient confidence to refuse to pay for the extra insurance. Clearly this is something which needs to be tested at a reasonably within the court structure but of course this is most unlikely to happen given the value of claims. I was sorry to see that your original reason for not claiming the full value was that   I asked you to post up your claim form. I think it will be helpful if you did that.
    • 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.
  • Our picks

Emz87

2011 VCS Private parking charge - now BW letter

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1111 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,

Would really appreciate some advise before my next step.

 

A few months go I started receiving letters about parking charge i received from VCS from 2011 I had long ago forgotten about.

 

 

I ignored the first few until I received one from BW Legal.

 

 

After looking through threads on this forum I sent them a one line letter claiming I didn't know who the driver was at the time.

 

 

Today I have received another letter from BW acknowledging my letter but also saying

" we confirm that in the absence of driver details we are instructed to pursue you for payment of the outstanding balance"

 

From reading through this forum am I right in thinking they are very wrong with it being before the 2012?

 

I am thinking my next step should be to reply to BW stating this ?

 

Any advice on what to do next would be great.

 

Thank you in advance.

 

Emz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quite correct

you now ignore them.

 

 

unless or until you get a claim form


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Agree with DX. What you do need to be aware of is that around the time of the event, VCS (and sister company Excel) were members of the BPA. In early 2015, they moved to the IPC and will base any claim on who they are with now. They shouldn't be doing this.

 

At the date of the event (2011) PoFA was not in place meaning that ONLY the driver could be pursued, not the keeper. With them stating that they are going after the keeper will not wash.

 

If they think this will scare you into paying, they are sadly wrong.

 

If court papers do arrive, I would mention that this case could be seen as vexatious as they knew they couldn't take any action. If the judge agreed, he may allow LiP costs against VCS which could cost them dear.


If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much silver and DX. Not a chance are they gonna scare me into paying. I will sit tight.

 

Emz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

agree with the above comments,

it all smacks of desperation and greed,

they know that they have no chance of winning a defended claim

so hope that you are scared into paying them.

 

As a decent percentage of people either pay up or ignore it to the point they geta default CCJ then it is worth them trying it on.

 

Now you have made them aware that you are not burying your head in the sand they know that chasing you will cost them money so they will probably now go quiet again.

 

Also, note the wording of their response

- they say instructed to pursue you, not take legal action on behalf of their client

so you may read this as they are for some reason going to harass you and then blame their customer if you complain.

 

Well, I would keep that letter safe for the moment and use it a evidence to the SRA should they continue to write to you.

 

They are not ignorant of the law, they are solicitors for god's sake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks erics. Yes I will keep the letter safe and wait for what rubbish scare tactics they are going to try next !!

 

Emz

 

Do you think I should reply to BW just to stress that I am aware of PoFA and that I will be defending any claim if made ? I am just thinking this would shut them up and stop them from even trying to claim.

 

Thanks Emz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, any further correspondence will look like weakness and may come back to bite you. They know what is waht, at the moment they dont know what you know and they will have to risk their money to find out. Continue playing letter tennis and they get to know your limitations for free.

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...