Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • He was one of four former top executives from Sam Bankman-Fried's firms to plead guilty to charges.View the full article
    • The private submersible industry was shaken after the implosion of the OceanGate Titan sub last year.View the full article
    • further polished WS using above suggestions and also included couple of more modifications highlighted in orange are those ok to include?   Background   1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of January 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.   Unfair PCN   2.1  On 19th December 2023 the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) sent by the solicitors the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will be reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days of issue).  2.2  Yet the PCN sent by the Claimant is for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced to £60 if paid within 30 days of issue).   2.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.    2.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.  No Locus Standi  3.1  I do not believe a contract with the landowner, that is provided following the defendant’s CPR request, gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-   (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or   (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.   3.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract.  Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed   4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, in response to the CPR request from myself.   4.2        The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Standard Life Investments UK) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.   4.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents.   No Keeper Liability   5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.   5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.     5.3         The claimant did not mention parking period, times on the photographs are separate from the PCN and in any case are that arrival and departure times not the parking period since their times include driving to and from the parking space as a minimum and can include extra time to allow pedestrians and other vehicles to pass in front.    Protection of Freedoms Act 2012   The notice must -   (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;  22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim.  5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable.  No Breach of Contract   6.1       No breach of contract occurred because the PCN and contract provided as part of the defendant’s CPR request shows different post code, PCN shows HA4 0EY while contract shows HA4 0FY. According to PCN defendant parked on HA4 0EY which does not appear to be subject to the postcode covered by the contract.  6.2         The entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract which makes it only an offer to treat,  Interest  7.1  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for  Double Recovery   7.2  The claim is littered with made-up charges.  7.3  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100.  7.4  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.  7.5 Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”  7.6 In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverabl15e under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''  7.7 In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 4) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case.  7.8        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.   7.9        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).   In Conclusion   8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim.  Statement of Truth  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   
    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
  • 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

Unknown Lowell CCJ/warrant - got that set aside ok, now lost re original debt again!- old HSBC OD


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2742 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

Last year out of nowhere I received a warrant for execution for a CCJ that I had no knowledge of.

It transpired that it related to an old overdraft with HSBC that I knew nothing about.

 

 

The claim was filed by Lowell who had never contacted me regarding the debt at any time.

I arranged to have the Judgment set aside and then proceeded to defend the claim.

Judgment has now been found against me and I want to know if anyone can advise me as to what to do next.

 

I have no knowledge of an account with HSBC and never used one.

Lowell have not provided any application form showing that I opened it or used it.

The only evidence they have provided is some copy bank statements from their own database.

The account is in a variation of my name - not the name I used.

I in fact had a different bank account at the time - have had it and used it for over 10 years.

 

First question therefore

- if they do not have an application form or any other form of official evidence

- is that enough basis for a claim?

 

 

I cannot believe that some print-outs from the claimant's own computer is sufficient evidence of anything but is there a legal authority on this point?

 

Second point,

the overdraft was "called in" in 2007 but the claim was issued in 2014.

I disputed this as being statute barred.

 

 

In response Lowell suddenly came up with a spreadsheet from their own computer database with payments supposedly made my me and therefore claimed that it was capable of being the subject of a claim.

 

They have not provided any evidence linking me to these payments

- they are just dates, amounts and say they were made by "standing order" (but no details of the bank they were made from).

 

 

I have spoken to my bank and they confirm no standing order payments or payments of any kind were made on the dates they allege.

 

Do they not have to show where the payments came from?

 

I am now in the position where I need to decide whether to apply to have the Judgment set aside again and dispute it further but having already failed once I am a bit concerned about this.

 

I cannot understand how they can have a valid claim when they have no evidence other than that mentioned above.

How did the Judge find in their favour?

 

I can't afford to make the application to the Court unless I have some solid evidence behind me to fight my corner....

. which is why I am posting on here.

Can anyone point me in the right direction or give me some pointers on how to fight this?

 

I have reported the account to Action Fraud but I don't feel that Lowell will investigate this properly as it is in their interest not too!

If they find evidence of identity theft or fraud - then they don't get their money!

 

I have also reported Lowell to the Financial Ombudsman as I think they are wrong to pursue a statute barred claim.

 

Any help here would really be appreciated as I am at a real loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Data Protection subject access requests to both Lowell Finance and HSBC.

In the request letters you can ask for specific information.

 

in the letter to Lowell ask them for all data they hold, including full payment information

 

. In the letter to HSBC, provide your full name, DOB and addresses over say the last 15 years, plus any sort code/account numbers to see if there is a match woth you.

 

Ask HSBC to confirm in writing, if your details do not match those of the account holder, as you believe you have been subject to mistaken identity by a Debt Collection Agency.

 

The FOS won't be interested if the courts have been involved.

 

What is the value of this debt roughly ?

 

Are you being chased for payment of the judgement ?

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for that. That is really helpful.

 

The value is just over £1,000 - Lowell's costs of £400 odd have been added on to that.

 

The date for payment of the judgment set by the court is tomorrow

- I guess I have to apply to have the judgment set aside as I do not plan on paying that?

Or is there another way to stall enforcement action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to understand how you had the judgement set aside but then went on to lose the case, when presumably a hearing occurred. And this despite the fact that you say that the debt had nothing to do with you – just apart from the fact that you also say that in statute barred.

 

I think that we need much more detail please

Link to post
Share on other sites

I now see that you are suggesting that you might apply for a set-aside again – second time. I'm not sure that you have very much joy with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The first time the Judgment was set aside because I had not received any notification about the debt or the case generally so I was allowed to submit a defence.

 

 

The Judge simply stated that in his Judgment that he was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the debt was mine and dismissed my defence. That was it. It seems quite unfair and I don't see the logic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you attend the hearing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, unfortunately I could not make it

 

 

I wrote to the court in advance of the hearing putting forward my case and asking for my defence to be considered.

I also asked for directions on applying to have the claim struck out for being statute barred.

 

 

It's not ideal but I did think that my correspondence would be given some consideration and not just dismissed out of hand.

 

 

I suppose expecting the Judge to be fair in my absence was asking a bit much!

It doesn't change the fact that the claimant has absolutely no evidence in support of there claim

- other than that printed from their own computer!

 

 

The way I understand it is there has to be some evidence that the person actually entered into a contract (ie an application form).

Link to post
Share on other sites

You stand very little chance unless you attend a hearing as a defendant....relying on submitted evidence in your absence is not advocated.

 

Regards

 

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

Unfortunately, that is not always possible.

 

I need assistance going forward - not judgments about circumstances people know nothing about!

 

That may be the case but my question related to what I can do going forward.

 

The court have advised me to apply to have the Judgment set aside but I need some advice before doing that!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im afraid we do know a lot about the process...as stated above thats why your defence was dismissed.

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

The first judgment was set aside, (presumably on grounds that you hadn't been aware of the case and wished to offer a defence).

The case was re-opened and heard, and now you can't ask for another 'set aside', but based purely on nomenclature, as what you now wish to do is "appeal", rather than "seek a set aside".

 

If you had been at the hearing you may have been better able to present your case, and even if you had still lost, sought "leave to appeal" at the end of the hearing.

 

So, what you have to do now, is both ask for "leave to appeal", and submit the appeal.

For the appeal to stand any chance of success you'll have to identify grounds for appeal (where the judge has made an error of fact, and/or an error of law).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Data Protection subject access requests to both Lowell Finance and HSBC.

In the request letters you can ask for specific information.

 

in the letter to Lowell ask them for all data they hold, including full payment information

 

. In the letter to HSBC, provide your full name, DOB and addresses over say the last 15 years, plus any sort code/account numbers to see if there is a match woth you.

 

Ask HSBC to confirm in writing, if your details do not match those of the account holder, as you believe you have been subject to mistaken identity by a Debt Collection Agency.

 

The FOS won't be interested if the courts have been involved.

 

What is the value of this debt roughly ?

 

Are you being chased for payment of the judgement ?

 

Suggest you send off urgent Subject Access Requests to get hold of the information you need.

 

If you find this debt is not yours, you can always approach Lowell with the evidence and suggest that they contact the courts to remove the CCJ or you will appeal and look to Lowell to cover your costs, as well as seeking appropriate compensation for the error.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why was the OP persuing a "statute barred" defence if the alleged debt wasn't theirs?.

 

Surely the defence is either "not my debt", or "was my debt, but is statute barred", but claiming both makes it look like the OP wasn't sure it wasn't their overdraft!

 

(It'd be fine to argue both, in the alternate, if e.g. the overdraft was for a limited company, and an individual director was being sued personally : argue "if the company did owe it, it is statute barred. The director never owed it personally"). No problem there.

Arguing "wasn't me, I'm sure, but just in case it was me it is statute barred" might cast doubt on the reliability of your evidence, which might make their claim it wasn't statute barred more likely to be believed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggest you send off urgent Subject Access Requests to get hold of the information you need.

 

If you find this debt is not yours, you can always approach Lowell with the evidence and suggest that they contact the courts to remove the CCJ or you will appeal and look to Lowell to cover your costs, as well as seeking appropriate compensation for the error.

 

The OP should act quickly.

Appeals have a strict timeframe in which they can be lodged, and you'll likely be outside of this by the time you get an SAR back.

The OP can ask for a later appeal to be heard but will have to justify it, and show there was no "undue delay".

Link to post
Share on other sites

The first judgment was set aside, (presumably on grounds that you hadn't been aware of the case and wished to offer a defence).

The case was re-opened and heard, and now you can't ask for another 'set aside', but based purely on nomenclature, as what you now wish to do is "appeal", rather than "seek a set aside".

 

If you had been at the hearing you may have been better able to present your case, and even if you had still lost, sought "leave to appeal" at the end of the hearing.

 

So, what you have to do now, is both ask for "leave to appeal", and submit the appeal.

For the appeal to stand any chance of success you'll have to identify grounds for appeal (where the judge has made an error of fact, and/or an error of law).

 

Indeed you would need to seek permission to appeal which you would need to do within 21 days of the verdict. Upon what grounds would you seek to appeal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...