Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Could you please show the back of the first PCN you received round about 17th January. Was there a WS included or just the PE v Beavis case?
    • Hey have filed a defence at 4pm today the day before I could request a judgement.  I thought it was last Friday but it was infact tomorrow they would have ran out of time 
    • Hello All,   My query is about the Service charge. I am leaseholder of a 3 bed flat in a purpose build block in London (Westminster) our service charge used to reflect the maintenance of the building and overall look and feel. But now not only service charge goes up every year but quality of service like general maintenance gone down. For example lifts keep breaking down, building needs refurb, walls are dirty, my windows are so old that in winter no matter how much heating you put on room still feel cold.    additionally they keep adding major works charges to service charge with this year being £1917 in addition to £1890 service charge. Don’t mind paying only if I see improvement in the block but we have only seen steady decline over many years now. So today I called them (city of Westminster) saying I don’t want to pay and cannot pay so high charges where there’s no evident results.    I came here to find if anyone has been successful in negotiations on regards to service charges complain or any advice regarding this. Charges are too for what we get    Thanks in advance  
    • this is going to be really simplistic, but have they started by talking to senior management now the bad apple has gone?
    • Hi everyone  . . .  Just an update   The CMD was this morning.  It started with cheap  manoeuvrability  by Intrum’s lawyer, but let me give you quick summery background:   The judge issued an order to us to submit evidence supporting our case such as call for witnesses or ask the court to order the original creditor to some action.  We were giving 21 days for the submission.  In my simple calculation without, allowing time to post, the final date was to be 10 March 2021, with post time 2 days later.   On the 10th March, and to be on the safe side, I send to the court the response version giving to me by DX100UK.   Then on 12th March, I send to the court the version giving to me by Andy, asking the court to replace the first document with the second  one.   On 7th of April I send Intrum lawyer the document 2 as it is our official response.   ON the 12th April I send the court the medical certificate for my niece asking to be viewed exclusively by the court.   At the start of the CMD the Judge ask Intrum lawyer to start.  So he started by claiming the following: 1.    We failed to meet the 21 days deadline set by the court. 2.    He received a response on the 7th April which is only a week ago. 3.    He admitted that he has the two version of our submission. He claimed that they were collected by colleague of his from the court’s Clark while he was in court. 4.    He said that this case has taken too long and the defendant just messing them about and keeping changing their plea.   At that time the judge announced that he does not have the two documents in the case file. He only has the medical certificate.  Then he turned to me to ask me for explanation. a)    I said that we met the deadline set by the court and submitted the required response.  Also I explained the issue with two documents. b)    I confirmed that we have received a confirmation form the court on their receipt of  my submission emails. c)    I stated that Intrum lawyer’s claim is incorrect that we failed to meet the deadline, and pointed out that he has our two documents in his possession which he obtained from the court.   Then the judge started asking Intrum lawyer on the content of the two documents, which is bizarre not to ask the author of the documents.   Intrum Lawyer stated that the two documents almost identical. He then started pointing out the negative sides in the documents such as our change of the 50% settlement.  He continued claiming that we are changing our defence without following the certain set procedure, which it seemed to confuse the judge. The lawyer  continued to ridicule the document in general without being specific.  At the end the judge turned to me  to response.   I said that the court must see the document as it is important to the case.  It is not correct to ask the lawyer to a brief the court on our document as he has been selective in what to read.  The judge came in and said that he asked the lawyer for a general summery of its content.   I continued that the full claim case is fundamentally flawed, and I continued to list why: 1.    The nature of the relation between the original creditor and defendant does not constitute the need for Financial Agreement between the two parties.  The claimant stated in their case that the defendant was in breach of a Financial Agreement. Where is this agreement? 2.    There is no Default Notice that the claimant stated in their submission there was a Default  Notice. 3.    Also has the original creditor served a notice of assignment on the defendant? 4.    The other fundamental issue is the question of the nature of the sum claimed!. .  .  .  . . .   At that time the judge stopped me asked me if I was asking for the other side to present these documents.   I responded:  Intrum are experienced organisation in this type of business.  They know very well the importance of these documents to the case, why they have not been  incorporated them in their case submission , . .  my answer Yes  . . . our missing response document put the claimant to Strict Proof to present these documents to the court.   The lawyer then announced that the Default Note was included in their submission and, he continued to quote a reference number, then he retracted his claim, which is I had a sense that he felt he has gone too far in his BS***t.   However, the judge spend most of session faltering and does not know what to say.  At the end he decided to go for another CMD. But then the funny part he asked the Claimant lawyer to send him the two missing documents.   I feel more positive now on the case but I would appreciate your views and comments.   Thank you
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1398 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,

 

I got a parking ticket in late February which I have been unable and has risen to £165.

 

My council has written to say it will be registered with the county court if not paid within 14 days of service.

 

Is service the date of their letter as it took 8 days to get to me an I do not have the funds to clear it until after the 14 days.

 

Will it stick on my credit file?

 

Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a local authority or a Debt collecting agency.

 

A local authority will use their own baliffs to collect and will not impact your credit file

 

This seems to me to be a private car parking company rather than your local council

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread move to correct forum.

 

What the council are saying is that they will take court action should you not pay within the time frame stated. If they do go to court, you can defend it or admit the offence. Once you get a County Court Judgement, you have up to 30 days to pay this judgement and if done so, there will be nothing on your credit file. If you don't pay or can't afford to pay within the time allowed, an entry will be made on your credit file and that will stay there for 6 years, royally screwing your chances of decent credit.

 

Did you not appeal the ticket?

 

As it stands, I would be borrowing off someone and pay this before it gets to court as the amount will increase due to court costs and solicitor fees.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both. Councils own parking service chasing it.

 

Don't have any ground to dispute it.

 

Council are saying they may register with the county court (£8) and it will be paid within next seven days.

 

It is an automatic judgement for issues like this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, with council tickets you will not get a CCJ.

 

What you have received is a Charge Certificate, which consists of the original full penalty of £110 + 50% = £165.

 

You have 14 days to pay that. If you don't, they will send you an Order for Recovery which adds £8 = £173 and you have 21 days to pay that. If you don't, bailiffs will be instructed and that's when it gets really expensive, up to £573

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thread move to correct forum.

 

What the council are saying is that they will take court action should you not pay within the time frame stated. If they do go to court, you can defend it or admit the offence. Once you get a County Court Judgement, you have up to 30 days to pay this judgement and if done so, there will be nothing on your credit file. If you don't pay or can't afford to pay within the time allowed, an entry will be made on your credit file and that will stay there for 6 years, royally screwing your chances of decent credit.

 

Did you not appeal the ticket?

 

As it stands, I would be borrowing off someone and pay this before it gets to court as the amount will increase due to court costs and solicitor fees.

 

Practically nothing in this post is correct. There is no court action - it's decriminalised. You cannot "go to court" and you cannot admit or defend the offence as there's no such mechanism (plus, it's not technically an offence anyway). There is no county court judgement possible, and nothing on your credit file for 6 years, or ever, and so no royal screwing of credit ratings. There are no court costs or solicitor's fees to pay Indeed, no solicitors are involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need civil action to obtain a liability order for the debt to be passed onto baliffs and enforced as a civil debt

 

Council tax as an example is a civil debt but enforced through the magistrates court

 

In either of the two examples the debtor will be liable to any enforcement costs, civil or criminal court

Edited by obiter dictum
Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you talking about? Decriminalised parking isn't council tax. It's decriminalised. Tax evasion isn't.

 

There is no court in decriminalised parking enforcement. The debt already exists, and the enforcement process follows as matter of course. The council already has a legal right to recover it, and that's what they do every day. Why would a court even need to be involved?

 

The only point at which any court enters the picture is through a formal rubber-stamping operation by Northampton TEC which is practically an automated computer message pinged back and forth. No human being will even look at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we go down the line with insults, my comment has everything to do with either a parking ticket or council tax

 

In both cases the local authority cannot enforce that debt without some kind of liability order obtained through either the civil or criminal justice system to instruct recovery agents such as baliffs

 

So kindly wind your neck back in

 

https://www.gov.uk/appeal-against-a-penalty-charge-notice

Edited by obiter dictum
Link to post
Share on other sites

OD they don't need to do court for PCN's

it was decrim'd years ago.

 

 

read whats being said properly

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

Never, and i repeat never did say they needed to go to court

 

What i stated was that they need some kind of liability order to enforce through either the civil or criminal justice system to instruct baliffs to collect.

 

The council simply cannot do that themselves without a third party intervention

Edited by obiter dictum
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What i stated was that they need some kind of liability order to enforce through either the civil or criminal justice system to instruct baliffs to collect.

 

The council simply cannot do that themselves without a third party intervention

 

Liability Orders relate, in the main, to council tax arrears. For council PCN's, the Order For Recovery enables councils to instruct bailiffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't insult you "obiter dictum", I corrected you.

 

In your relatively short post you managed to bring up "a liability order" "magistrates court" and "civil or criminal court", all in the context of a PCN.

 

It's not only misleading as to the due process, but plain wrong. I'm not trying to insult anyone, but if you give this sort of advice out, I will challenge it. The OP needs correct info.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

You're actually both right and both wrong.

The matter does go to Court; in that although TEC is as Jamberson describes, it has the powers of a Court, i.e. appropriate authority as part of Northampton County Court.

 

The term 'Liability Order' is riling Jamberson and I can understand.

 

The equivalent, in this process, would be the Order for Recovery Michael mentioned.

£8 is the registration fee charged by TEC who 'authorise' the issue, by the local authority, of that Order.

 

Obiter you are mistaken and misleading by referring to 'civil action' which most will perceive to mean an action in Court:

There is none, as liability for the debt is pre-confirmed by the parking (or related) legislation; requiring no judgement.

Jamberson has already explained this.

Hence registration is all that is required and it really is all automated.

 

Your earlier mention of 30 days is further misleading and, given the OP's situation, potentially dangerous.

 

The Order, in this instance, will allow just the 21 mentioned earlier.

 

FAR MORE IMPORTANTLY:

What is MICHELLE actually asking here?

Does she just want to delay payment? - in which case she has a little time.

 

Or something else?

 

Perhaps she should explain how it got this far and exactly what documents she received prior to the Charge Certificate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...