Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 4.3(4) The court serves the claim on the defendant by sending a paper version of the completed online claim form to the defendant at the postal address given for the defendant. https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/practice-direction-51r-online-court-pilot Practice Direction 6A, paragraph 4.1 says: “[w]here a document is to be served by fax or other electronic means the party who is to be served or the solicitor acting for that party must previously have indicated in writing to the party serving – “that the party to be served or the solicitor is willing to accept service by fax or other electronic means; and “the fax number, e-mail address or other electronic identification to which it must be sent.” This means that delivery or sending court documents by email is not service, unless the other party expressly consents to it.
    • This should be a matter for the School Head to deal with, have you been to see them?
    • Just a very interesting point for the witness statement when needed, is that all the missives they've sent are demanding £160. The claim, again issued by their "expert" solicitors, is trying to extort £170. Naughty!
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Please have a look at the letter below. I made a couple of further refinements. We will try to finish it for tomorrow so that you can get enough tomorrow evening.   Also, I did ask you whether the same toilet which you installed was used to the new installation – you haven't answered this. Any reason for that? I also asked you about obtaining a statement from your electrician and you didn't respond to that either. Any reason for that? Also, I can't remember if I did ask you – had you already made a snagging this? I think I did ask you to give us a list of the snags but I don't think you respond to that either. It will be very helpful if you did address questions that we put otherwise the whole thing takes much longer much more than is necessary. In the end we will need information from you. You will have to provide it
  • 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

Bailiff bullied step mum for payment (Marstons) step sons driving fines


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2672 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

Good morning :)

 

A bailiff attended my mother in laws address to retrieve payment of near £1200.

 

The debt is owed by her step son for driving offences. We only know this much because we read about it in the newspaper.

 

The step son used to live at the property over 2 years ago - and hasn't since.

 

The family no longer speaks to the son, and the bailiff visit came as a bit of a shock.

 

The bailiff was rude, arrogant and happy to shout out repeatedly that he was going to take goods if she didn't pay - making a scene presumably for effect - he even threatened to ring the police...

 

My step mum was frightened and didn't know her legal rights - and reluctantly paid £500. It was 7am and she had work and just wanted them to clear off.

 

Just under 2 weeks previously, they had posted a leaflet with a contact number on - which father in law called and explained to the bailiff that the debtor was no longer associated to this address - and hadn't for some time.

 

We have since contacted the courts - and they have told us that we shouldn't have paid.

 

The court also told us the bailiff had a Warrant of Order - and should not have threatened to take stuff or call police once informed the debtor didn't live there.

 

From what I have read up - this is the typical bullying behaviour that Marstons are seemingly licensed to employ.

 

I have contacted Marstons and been fobbed off with an email address to complain to - interestingly they did tell me that their agents wore body cams - however I'm betting that this agents probably 'malfunctioned' during this visit as he certainly did not conduct himself appropriately.

 

Where do I stand with this? The likelihood is now that they have had a payment - they will return for the rest.

 

Is there a way I can challenge their initial visit and reclaim the money paid - purely because of their threats rather than culpability?

 

Any help is greatly appreciated.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread moved to the appropriate forum..please continue to post here to your thread.

 

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

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

no harm in trying..

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

Good morning :)

 

A bailiff attended my mother in laws address to retrieve payment of near £1200.

 

The debt is owed by her step son for driving offences. We only know this much because we read about it in the newspaper.

 

The step son used to live at the property over 2 years ago - and hasn't since.

 

The family no longer speaks to the son, and the bailiff visit came as a bit of a shock.

 

When contacting the court, did you ask them for the address where they had been writing to? There should have been a summons, followed by a Notice of Fine/Collection Order and a final notice from the court called a Futher Steps Notice. Were any of these notices received?

 

I would certainly suggest that you make a Formal Complaint to Marston's. That is the correct course of action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The court were reluctant to tell us specific details - but anything that comes through in the debtors name is usually put to one side in the hope that he'll turn up one day to collect it. It's possible they were therefor sent - but not opened. I'll sit tight and see what happens with the complaint - should be interesting to see them defend their thuggish collectors behaviour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...