Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In answer to your questions yes even though it wasn't called that, it was the NTK. Had it been a windscreen ticket you would not have received the NTK until 28 days had elapsed. In earlier times if the warden was present then a windscreen ticket would have been issued. It nows seems that the DVLA and the Courts don't see a problem  with not issuing a ticket when a warden is on site. A period of parking must mean that ther e has to be a start time and a finish time in order for it to be considered a period. A single time does not constitute a period. I am not sure what you mean by saying it could be taken either way.  All they have mentioned is  the incident time which is insufficient. There are times on the photos about one minute apart which do not qualify as the parking period because they are not on the PCN itself. The reason I asked if the were any more photos is that you should be allowed 5 minutes Consideration period for you to read the signs and decide whether you want to accept them and you do that by staying longer than 5 minutes. if  more  do not have photos of your staying there for more than 5 minutes they are stuffed. You cannot say that you left within the 5 minute period if you didn't , but you can ask them, should it get to Court , to provide strict proof that you stayed longer than the statutory time. If they can't do that, case over.
    • I recently bought some trainers from Sports Direct and was unhappy with them and their extortionate delivery and return postage charges. I tweeted about being unhappy, and received a reply from someone claiming to be from Sports Direct asking me to send my order number and email address by pm, so a claim could be raised. Which I (stupidly) did. The account used Sports Direct's name and branding, and a blue tick.  The following day I received a call from "Sports Direct Customer Service", and with a Kenyan number. They asked for details of the issue, and then sent me an email with a request to install an app called Remitly. They provided me with a password to access the app then I saw that it had been setup for me to transfer £100, and I was asked to enter my credit card number so they could "refund" me. I told them I was uncomfortable with this (to say the least), and was just told to ring them back when I did feel comfortable doing it. Ain't never gonna happen.  I just checked my X account, and the account that sent the message asking for my details is gone. I feel like a complete idiot falling for what was a clear scam. But at least I realised before any real damage was done. if you make a complaint about a company on social media, and you get a reply from someone claiming to be from that company and asking for personal details, tread very carefully.   
    • The good news is that their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012  Schedule 4.. First under Section 9 (2)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; (b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; The PCN does not specify the parking period. AS you rightly say the ANPR times do not include driving to the parking space and then from there back to the exit. And once you include getting children in and out of cars especially if seat belts are involved the time spent parked can be a fair bit less than the ANPR times but still probably nowhere near the time you spent. But that doesn't matter -it's the fact that they failed to comply. Also they failed to ask the keeper to pay the charge.  Their failure means that they cannot now transfer the charge from the diver to the keeper . Only the driver is now liable. As long as UKPA do not know who was driving it will be difficult for them to win in Court as the Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. Particularly as anyone can drive any car if they have the correct insurance. It might be able to get more reasons to contest the PCN if you could get some photos of the signs. both at the entrance and inside the car park. the photos need to be legible and if there are signs that say different things from others that would also be a help.
    • Farage rails and whines about not being allowed on the BBC ... ... but pulls out at the last minute of a BBC Panorama interview special. It was denied it was anything to do with his candidates being outed as misogynists and Putin apologists, or that farage was afraid Nick Robinson might throw some difficult questions at him ... despite farages recent practice at quickly cowering in fear.   It was claimed 'it wasn't in Nigels diary'     Nigel Farage pulls out of BBC interview at last minute amid Hitler row WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK ‘Panorama’ special postponed as Reform UK party faces row over candidate who claimed UK would have been ‘better off’ if it had...   Waaahhhh
    • i'd say put lowells to strict proof of where the payment came from. cant hurt to send SB letter, even if proved not. at least they get your correct address. they'd have to link the old IVA times scale to a payment  these IVA F&F pots (if thats where it came from) most mugs dont even know they are not only taking most of your payments on fees but also creaming money off to supposedly offer F&F's.  funny when the IVA fails or is complete these sums of money in F&F pots never get given back or even mentions... these IVA firm directors esp with regard to knightsbridge and creditfix were fined and struck off more times than Paul Burdell of Link Fame and still managed to continue to scam people.
  • 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 
        • 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

cohen Statutory Demand situation credit card


VIENNA
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5424 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,

having recently received a Statutory Demand

I looked around the site for some relevant info.

 

I found this awesome post from tomterm8

and I have only just stopped laughing!!!!

 

Tomterm8 wrote-:

 

Dear XXXX,

 

RE: STATUTORY DEMAND SERVED DATE

 

Thank you for your letter dated XXth.

 

For your information, as someone with £XX,XXX assets, and debts of £XX,XXX,

I have been advised by the National debt Line that it would be in my interests to file for bankruptcy.

 

Due to my precarious financial situation, I have been unable to raise the finance to do so.

 

I would therefore like to thank you for offering to pay this substantial bill

- £1,100 I believe, with no prospect of ever recieving a return on your investment.

 

For your convenience, I waive the 21 days normally required before you file for bankruptcy.

 

There is no chance that i will be able to enter into any agreement with you for the repayment of this money.

 

Yours sincerly,

 

XXX.

:D :D

 

I applied for set-aside and later received a letter confirming withdrawal of the demand.

 

My question is that in this letter it states that both parties need to confirm to the court that the demand is withdrawn by consent on terms that there will be no order for costs.

 

However I have been put to certain costs so any advice as to how to proceed?

 

cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is withdrawn different to set aside?

 

Does that mean that they can try again later?

 

(Just a thought that it might be better to say no so that it can actually get set aside)

 

This looks like a cheap way out for a DCA who is going to lose compared with a set-aside hearing, especially if they can re-file or go for a CCJ later.

 

Grumpy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Grumpy,

 

If the demand is withdrawn then the hearing is cancelled

I presume there is no set aside because there is nothing to set aside.

 

 

However, am I wrong to assume that they should inform the court of withdrawal and do not need my agreement to do so?

Are they simply trying to avoid costs and if so is it possible for me to obtain costs if there is no hearing?

 

I presume that they can try again but I'm not sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Vienna....can you give us a little more information on the situation, what are they claiming you owe (don't be too specific) ? what is the alleged debt for ? and what have you sent them ? what have they sent you so far ?.... Why have they withdrawn ? Is there a date set ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi 42man,

the claim is for a credit card

but they have failed to comply with my cca request but still issued this demand

 

. A date is set for next month [ after I applied for set aside]

 

then I received a letter stating their withdrawal and that I should contact them to agree to no costs and then our mutual consent would be forwarded to the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm very interesting, to be honest i'm not sure what the best thing would be to do....you could write to them and indicate that you will see them in court and claim full costs, or you could write and say that you are willing to agree to withdraw if they pay your costs to date + removal of any adverse data on your credit files that they may have put against your name. Or if you're feeling extra generous then you can say you will withdraw if they remove all the adverse data they have put on your credit files (but get everything in writing)....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually not feeling that generous at all!!

 

I'm thinking that their abuse of process has them worried,

but never having dealt with a stat demand before I wasn't sure if a withdrawal was normally concluded in this way or if in fact once they withdraw the matter is closed as far as the court is concerned.

 

However as I am the one who has applied for set aside is it up to me,

given that they have informed me of withdrawal,

to inform the court they have withdrawn?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Update!

 

My meeting with the sols was virtually a waste of time, he even told me that I would not be able to ask for costs! [Goodjob it was free].

 

onto the Hearing

, I simply explained my situation to the Judge,

who was quite helpful,

and said he had received a letter from the sols regarding mutual agreement as to costs.

 

He asked me if this was acceptable if he agreed to the set-aside and I said no!! :o

 

I explained my reasoning and he suggested a figure he would consider awarding me:shock: ,

 

I agreed with this figure and said it would be a fair amount.

 

They never turned up,

so I was in and out in minutes:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Vienna,

 

That’s very encouraging news, as I have my own set aside hearing coming up in a couple of weeks time and I’ve been wondering about costs as well.

 

For anybody else that’s interested I did find out some case law in this area, although it is more about companies than individuals.

When a ltd company is faced with a statutory demand and then a winding up petition then it can only go ahead if there isn’t a genuine substantial dispute about the debt. This is (as far as I can see) exactly the same thing as the Set Aside hearing for an individual in that if there is a genuine dispute then there cannot be a bankruptcy petition.

 

The authority for this is Stonegate Securities Ltd v Gregory (1980) 1 Ch., (1980) A11 ER (1980) 3 WLR CA. This was confirmed last year in Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch) (17 August 2007) where the judge said:-

 

27. So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).

 

I understand that, normally, it is very rare in civil cases for an indemnity costs order to be made, but obviously, in these types of cases it is quite common.

 

Any comments from the more knowledgeable legal people here would be welcome

 

Regards

 

nicklea

Link to post
Share on other sites

well done well worth turning up and a warning shot to these companies that sd's are not to be used as confetti:)

 

Barclaycard Student credit card £400 partial refund received, S.A.R -

Open & Direct Finance- extortionate, cca to Rockwell debt collection they ran away, now with Bryan Carter, no cca 17/03/08 sent back to Open

Pugsley v Littlwoods, have not received the signed credit agreement only quoting reg of 1983

Pugsley v Fashion World JD williams, 17/03 2008 Debt Managers returning file to JD williams as they could not supply the credit agreement

Capital one MCOL Settled in full

Smile lba settled in full

advice is given informally and without liability and without prejudice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

subscribing

LOWELLS-Stat Demand Set Aside-No CCA & Statute Barred-£1800-Gone Away-April 2008

 

Scotcall on behalf of Cabot-£2200-no CCA returned to Cabot-file closed-March 2009

 

Cabot-Court Claim issued despite no CCA and Stat Barred-Claim discontinued-March 2009

__________________________________________

 

IF I HAVE BEEN HELPFUL PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

the Court allowed 14 days for payment to be made directly to myself and this time is now up:confused:

 

It wasn't Lowells:eek:

 

 

Enforcement you say? Sounds good to me:roll:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Same situation as you. Awarded costs and they haven;t paid. I'm tempted to go the "order to provide information" route first. This is wehere the court ordrs them to send a company officer to provide information so as you can work out the best way of getting your money. It seems if they fail to appear they can go to jail!. Once you understand the financial structure of the DCA you can get a court order to seize assetts i think

Link to post
Share on other sites

ask the court what to do, I know they will send the bailiffs into the DCA if they do not pay, wouldn't that be nice:D

 

Barclaycard Student credit card £400 partial refund received, S.A.R -

Open & Direct Finance- extortionate, cca to Rockwell debt collection they ran away, now with Bryan Carter, no cca 17/03/08 sent back to Open

Pugsley v Littlwoods, have not received the signed credit agreement only quoting reg of 1983

Pugsley v Fashion World JD williams, 17/03 2008 Debt Managers returning file to JD williams as they could not supply the credit agreement

Capital one MCOL Settled in full

Smile lba settled in full

advice is given informally and without liability and without prejudice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 10 months later...

I think its possible that Mr Cohen has contracted swine flu................................or maybe he has sunstroke, whatever is affecting his memory he has failed to pay my costs. Oh well, it was only a Court Order, why would he bother about that:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...