Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2507 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

just wondering as I am trying to get the notice to owner re-initiated what if my property get visited by bailiffs in between? or is there any sequence of actions which or letter gets sent before they visit the property?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

any bailiff would be a court one

and they aren't commission based and are quite 'friendly'

 

 

if they did appear then with the documentation/story you have it wold be obvious theres some 'clerical' error here

so they shouldn't be a problem to you.

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

any bailiff would be a court one and they aren't commission based and are quite 'friendly'

 

With enforcement of local authority issued penalty charge notices, any bailiff enforcement would be via private sector enforcement agents and not by a County Court bailiff (who by the way, is still referred to as a 'bailiff'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just worried about if bailiff visits my property as I know they it can be tough as I heard the stories of vehicles getting clamped and goods taken away and rough attitude etc.., is there a way I can protect my side? I have also read stories where people start parking their cars somewhere else until the issue gets resolved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

rocky_sharma said:
just wondering as I am trying to get the notice to owner re-initiated what if my property get visited by bailiffs in between? or is there any sequence of actions which or letter gets sent before they visit the property?

 

In your particular case, if your application is to be accepted, the Order for Recovery will be revoked and the local authority will re-issue you a new Notice to Owner allowing you to either pay at the earlier discounted rate or to appeal the penalty.

 

This was the reason why I spent so much time trying to clarify exactly when it was that you advised DVLA that you had left property A (in 2014). All that I was able to get from you, was that you had updated DVLA but that you did have details of when this was. You were however able to ascertain that you have a V5C that correctly exhibits that it was updated you address details with DVLA in August 2016 (see my post number 46).

 

rocky_sharma said:
I am just worried about if bailiff visits my property as I know they it can be tough as I heard the stories of vehicles getting clamped and goods taken away and rough attitude etc.., is there a way I can protect my side? I have also read stories where people start parking their cars somewhere else until the issue gets resolved.

 

Depends on what time the Traffic Enforcement Centre received your PE2 and PE3. If they received it before 4pm yesterday, then your application would have been processed yesterday and the local authority advised by the end of the day.

 

As yesterday was a Friday, the local authority may well not receive instructions to cease all bailiff enforcement until Monday morning so it would be best to park your car elsewhere until Monday. After that, all bailiff enforcement is placed on hold for approx 6 weeks while the local authority (not the Traffic Enforcement Centre) make their decision on whether to accept the reasons given by you for not receiving all notices.

 

What the local authority would be looking for, is to see whether you took steps to ensure that your address details were updated as they should have been. With all notices from the council apparently still going to an address that you moved out of in 2014, this could count against you but there is very little that we can do about that.

 

Just out of curiosity, are you absolutely certain that all notices had been going to Property A and NOT to Property B? Who informed you of this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

With enforcement of local authority issued penalty charge notices, any bailiff enforcement would be via private sector enforcement agents and not by a County Court bailiff (who by the way, is still referred to as a 'bailiff'.

 

 

ah right that's what confused me..

ta

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

when I received the notice from bailiff company called "newlyn" I called them and the representative mentioned address A.

 

I actually sent the email to relevant local authority on 6th may 2017 as soon as I received the notice and also attached utility bill and council tax bill to show that I have been living at this address even before the contravention

 

 

but didn't hear any thing back from them yet

 

 

also sent PE 2 and PE 3 to TEC yesterday but after 4pm.

 

 

I also sent the V5C scan copy to local authority yesterday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

rocky_sharma said:

 

also sent PE 2 and PE 3 to TEC yesterday but after 4pm. I also sent the V5C scan copy to local authority yesterday.

 

You should have also provided a copy of the V5C with your PE2 and PE3 to the Traffic Enforcement Centre.

 

Can I just ask a question. On the V5c copy that you sent to the council, it would be showing your current address (Property C) and date (August 2016) when your address was changed. Does it also show on the V5C, the previous address as being that of Property A or...... Property B ?

 

rocky_sharma said:
@ Bailiff Advice - what will happen if my request get rejected just in case? so that I can prepare.

 

You should expect to receive a decision in around 6 weeks. If the application is rejected, you are given a period of 14 days in which to request that your application be 'reviewed' by a District Judge. Most importantly....(and this is why I attach so much importance to the wording on Out of Time witness statements) a 'review' is very limited in that the District Judge will only be able to consider what you had put on the form and the local authorities reply. He will be looking at whether the decision that had been made (to reject) your application was the right decision or not.

 

A request for a 'review' is made by way of an N244 Application and unfortunately, the court fee for a 'review' ranges from between £100 and £255.

 

The '£100' route is where the the decision is made without the need for you to attend the court hearing. The '£255' route is applicable if you decide that you would like the 'review' to be undertaken in open court and for you to address the District Judge in person.

 

If you decide not to seek a 'review', then the warrant will become 'live' again and bailiff enforcement will recommence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The V5C doesn't show any other address apart from my current one. I have sent V5C to both TEC and local authority. Is it possible to get update from TEC on the PCN?

 

You mention an update from TEC. What is it that you require?

 

I provide assistance with many Out of Time witness statements ever day, and what the local authority (or Dart Charge or Transport for London) will be looking for, is to see whether the applicant had taken the appropriate steps to ensure that the relevant authorities (in this case DVLA) had been advised of a change of address in a timely manner. It was for this reason, that I spend so much time trying to get information from you that you had updated your address details to Property B when you moved out of Property A.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot expect the enforcement company to be informing you that they have been instructed to put enforcement on a temporary hold.

 

I am sure that I have already posted this before,

but when you email your forms,

you should receive an email back from the Traffic Enforcement Centre confirming rceipt.

 

The only time that another email may be received from TEC is in cases where there may have been a problem processing the forms.

 

this is usually only when the wrong forms have been used (TE7 and TE9 forms instead of forms PE2 and PE3).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Yes.....check your dates !!!

 

I calculate that it hasn't even been 3 weeks since you submitted the Out of Time application to the Traffic Enforcement Centre. You stated a number of times that you emailed the forms on 12th May....and we have had one bank holiday weekend since that date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to PCN - newlyn Warrant of control - Notice of enforcement query
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...