Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
  • 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

JC International/Moriarty Claimform - old Talk Talk Broadband debt


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2385 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

Hi all,

 

Today March 30th 2017 i have received Northampton court claim forms for a Talktalk debt of £63.86 its been raised to £68.96. The form is dated 28th march 17.

 

They date it back to 30/10/2009. They also state i agreed to pay this by instalments, but failed to do so (which is news to me).

I vaguely remember when we ended the contract with them the paid me money that was owed to me.

 

Moriarty Law are acting on behalf of JC international.

 

Ive checked my credit file and cannot see any closed accounts or otherwise with Talktalk.

 

Im reluctant to call these companies to find out anymore information.

 

After a search on google i've come across statute barred and another situation extremely similar to mine that ended in claim discontinued.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?463115-moriarty-law-JC-International-Claimform-old-Talk-Talk-Broadband-debt-***Claim-Discontinued***

 

I cant post link due to less than 10 posts

 

I don't know how to approach/resolve this, any help would be appreciated.

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

can you fill this in please

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-2016**

 

and go ring TT and ask last payment date

 

ML/JC are easy to do over

they issue them hoping for a non contested default judgement or a knee jerk payment ...DON T!!

as 99'9% of these claims are already statute barred s you've found

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

Name of the Claimant ? JC International Acquisition LLC

Date of issue – 28th March 2017

 

Date of Acknowledgement 15th April 17

 

 

Date to file Defence - by 4pm 28th April 17

 

What is the claim for –

 

1.The claimants claim is for the balance due under an agreement with Talk talk limited dated 30/10/2009 which was assigned to the claimant on 26/03/2014 and notice of which was given to the defendant on the 26/03/2014 and which is now all due and payable.

2.The defendant agreed to pay monthly instalments under account number

3.And the claimant claims the sum of £64.

The claimant also claims interest thereon pursuant to s.69 county court act 1984 limited to one year to the date hereof at the rate of 8% per annum amounting to £5

 

What is the value of the claim? £143.96

 

Is the claim for a current account (Overdraft) or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? Broadband

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? after

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor

or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Debt purchaser has issued the claim

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Don't believe so

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? no

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? no

 

Why did you cease payments? Contract ended

 

What was the date of your last payment? I have contacted talk talk and they wont talk to me about any payments

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Not that i'm aware of

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No - Not needed

Link to post
Share on other sites

you state in post one they said some stuff in letters

can you scan those up to ONE multipage pdf please

follow the upload

 

 

I'm thinking this is statute barred

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

The information i have given in post 1 is just from the claim form. The only letter i have from Moriarty law tells me to expect county court claim forms and i have 14 day to still amicably resolve this matter.

 

Im not sure how to get any transaction history from talk talk. so how would i know if this is statute barred?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok thanks.

 

you might file the defence as that other thread you found but not yet

we need to know if this is state barred or not

for now...

 

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.

.

register as an individual

note the long gateway number given

then log in

.

select respond to a claim and select the AOS box.

.

then using the details required from the claimform

.

defend all

leave jurisdiction unticked.

click thru to the end

confirm and exit MCOL.

.

get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors

.

don't sign anything

.

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

Great i will get straight onto that first thing in the morning. Once i have completed the cpr 31.14 letter could i pm it to you to check all is good before i send?

 

Does this now mean i am not going down the statute barred route? sorry for my ignorance on this subject.

 

thanks DX

Link to post
Share on other sites

surely it cant be SB'd you've paid within 6yrs?

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

you mentioned SB in post one , but if it had a mobile phone account linked with it? which these mobile dongles normally do, then you've probably paid on the account with 6yrs. anyway.?

 

 

but lots of time to sort that out till defence needs filing and we'll use the one in that other thread if its not SB'd

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

Okay. I've never had a mobile dongle or mobile phone with Talktalk. The only contract i can ever remember with Talktalk is a home broadband one.

 

I'm trying to complete the cpr 31.14 template and i'm finding it difficult to amend and understand what to take out due to it being Northampton court? Is there a copy i can open in Word?

Link to post
Share on other sites

what northant got to do with it?

 

 

copy and paste the CPR text into word

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

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

have you ack'd [AOS] the claim on mcol website?

 

 

why not ring TT and ask your last payment on the account number in the claimform POC

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

particulars of claim

 

now go back to TT and tell them that under the Data protection act and the prevention of fraud act

they MUST hold your data FOR 6 YRS.

 

and if they don't hold it then you consider the debt statute barred

 

and if you find out later they DO hold your data you will complain to the information commissioner and the financial conduct authority and seek financial compensation against them.

 

ask to speak with a manager not the front line telephone staff.

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 have called them again,

another 3 times trying to see if i can get a better answer.

 

They all state the same thing.

'cant access the account as the debt has been sold'.

 

I quoted your points from the last post, but it didn't make any difference.

 

However the last person i spoke with (manager) has agreed to try and get the information i've asked for.

He says they will call me back within 72 hours.

 

The CPR31.14 was signed for on the 4th.

Not had anything back as yet!

Link to post
Share on other sites

See them. But you'll be waiting 40 days for info. Could use sb or check your bank statements because the new owner certainly wont have the last payment date and can't prove its.not sb. Especially if talk talk say they don't have the info. Even though they have to leep.itnfor 6 years regardless of who owns it.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

well you don't want a reply to the 31:14..think about it.

 

 

you've got until the 28th no rush

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...

So tomorrow is the 28th.

 

I have today received an email from talk talks ceo office. My complaint has been escalated numerous times. It states they are still trying to gain the information i require.

 

What is my next move? The defence?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have been researching that here anyway regardless

Lots of like mobile claims here withe the no paperwork/holding defence

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

not a good idea to operate on a last-minute.com-basis.

you've had since the 11th to do this

cag is self help too.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...