Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I am just tidying up the above and noticed something that I'm not sure is important or not. On the claimform they state:- Claimant purchased the balance on the account on 06/10/2016. The letters I received were all dated 24th November 2016   Once I'm ready I assume it's self explanatory entering the information on the moneyclaim site? I've looked around on here and can't see any particular instructions so I'm assuming it's a copy/paste of the defence above?   Thanks
    • Why do you need to write what down please?   AoS is acknowledgement of service via the MCOL website as per dx's instructions. CPR 31:14 is a legal document you need to send to the other side, asking for information.   HB
    • DX - looked back to my old threads on here - the Ordinary Cause was, indeed, thru Nolans, on behalf of Cabot.   Nolan's requested a Joint Motion for the dismissal of this action by way of Decree of Absolvitor, in favour me (Defender), with no expenses due to or by either party   As they couldn't supply any paperwork, my lawyer suggested (I managed to get Legal Aid for this) that unless they dismiss they'd be due me money, and they agreed. This happened around the end of June/beginning of July 2016. What should I do with them now?
    • Hi ok thanks for replies. I had trouble finding how to reply on  my phone and don't have a computer, so am at the library which is pathetic and closes at 5pm so hard to get there   Name of the Claimant ? Excel Parking claimants Solicitors: BW Legal   Date of issue – don't have on me but it was in Sept 2018 (previous claim from 2017 resurrected) * Court date is 17th Dec -Next Tue   Date of issue   ^^^^^ NOTE : WHEN CALCULATING THE TIMELINE - PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE DATE ON THE CLAIMFORM IS ONE IN THE COUNT [example: Issue date 01.03.2014 + 19 days (5 days for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 19.03.2014 + 14 days to submit defence = 02.04.2014] = 33 days in total   What is the claim for – PCN Not displaying a valid ticket for the private car park 468 Bury New Road, Prestwich I have copied their WS below with map location, signs, etc     **IMPORTANT** WE NEED TO SEE THE FULL POC MINUS YOUR PERS DETAILS>> NOT AN ABRIDGED VERSION**THIS MUST INCLUDE THE LOCATION   What is the value of the claim? original ticket was £100 plus additional fees so its at £255   Has the claim been issued by the Private parking Company or was the PCN assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim ? Original Excel Parking   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not sure what this is?     I WILL TRY TO ATTACH THEIR WS - having trouble Do I just scan it in and attach it?   In the mean time my outline defence is:   No locus standi as have not produce a signed contract Under CPR 31.14 that the claim be struck out on the grounds of no locus   *I requested the contract and they did not provide it initially, however in their WS they have produced a signed contract from the pension fund who own the land    I was not the driver of the car. I have no evidence of the driver's identity. This dates back many years (2015) and difficult to remember who could have been driving  *their WS states I only said I was not the driver at a late stage and when filing an amended defence, and appears I developed a defence to avoid liability. I have stated this from the start.  Also that I alleged no correspondence, and the onus is on the driver to update DVLA. I did update DVLA, but I moved numerous times due to domestic abuse. This was in my set aside Also question how I would be able to comment on the signs if not the driver of the vehicle, as she would not have first hand knowledge, therefore it is the claimants position that she is being disingenuous I put Excel to strict proof that any contract can exist  *Their WS states it falls foul of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999(UTCCR 1999). Claims the regulations don't apply? keeper of the vehicle - as the protocols of the POFA have not been followed so no keeper liability created. DVLA data was supplied for the single strict purpose of enquiring who was driving, not for bringing a case against me years later  Signage not a transparent contract insufficient in terms of their distribution  wording and lighting hence incapable of binding the driver, which distinguishes this case from the ParkingEye Ltd v. Beavis case  Sporadic and illegible charge not prominent nor large lettering site/entrance signage breach of the BPA Code of Practice. The entrance sign is on the left side so not the drivers side. The signs have no mention of any debt collection additional charge  The signage was not lit and not transparent contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.  The entrance sign refers to the terms and conditions on another sign The signs did not have planning permission under the Town and County planning. I have an email stating there was no planning permission from the council. * Their WS says they do not need planning permission by being an approved operator of the trade association, and it is not for the county court to determine planning permission.   The signs do not fall under deemed consent.    * Their WS states my defence appears to be cut and pasted from websites relating to parking whose aim is to assist motorists on contesting PCN's. Large portions are non sensical and irrelevant to the claim   Unacceptable as the defendant has signed a statement of truth whilst clearly not being the defendants knowledge   THANKS FOR YOUR HELP x   You mention I can get it struck out as they haven't sent me a bundle? They have sent me their WS online, no hard copies but I'd prefer not to go if possible  
    • Redacted and merged to one PDF   Attached is my witness statement and supporting evidence that I am going to give to the court, the court have said they will not even look at it until the day of the hearing, so I am OK to send it to them only a few days before the hearing.    Do you think it is worth me sending this to BW Legal, in the hope they will drop the case before it goes to court? Or am I better not showing my hand to them, so they cannot amend their evidence based on what I have stated?   If anyone would be kind enough to read through my statement and give me their thoughts, that would be very much appreciated.  ilovepdf_merged.pdf
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 849 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi folks.

 

Just a quick one.

 

I've recently been made redundant, and Rosendale's bailiffs are swift on their heels coming to collect debts. The problem is I owe money to three creditors: HMRC, a parking fine, and a court fine. Rosendales are collecting the debts on behalf of all three clients. My question is, is this allowed? I thought a single agency can only chase an individual for the debts of one client; or have I misconstrued information somewhere?

 

We're struggling terribly financially at the moment and Rosendale's agents are visiting at least once or twice a week. Three different Rosendales bods for three different debts. If I pay one then I still lose out to the other two. I'm in a no-win situation here and feel it's wholly unfair that I'm being harassed to the extent I am at the moment.

 

To add, I've also got a disabled teenage daughter who's 19 years old living with us and she's about to have her first child any day now. The pressure we're under just to eat and pay for the roof over our heads is bad enough, and these leeches are making life almost intolerable.

 

Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.

Cheers.

Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi folks.

 

Just a quick one.

 

I've recently been made redundant, and Rosendale's bailiffs are swift on their heels coming to collect debts. The problem is I owe money to three creditors: HMRC, a parking fine, and a court fine. Rosendales are collecting the debts on behalf of all three clients. My question is, is this allowed? I thought a single agency can only chase an individual for the debts of one client; or have I misconstrued information somewhere?

 

We're struggling terribly financially at the moment and Rosendale's agents are visiting at least once or twice a week. Three different Rosendales bods for three different debts. If I pay one then I still lose out to the other two. I'm in a no-win situation here and feel it's wholly unfair that I'm being harassed to the extent I am at the moment.

 

To add, I've also got a disabled teenage daughter who's 19 years old living with us and she's about to have her first child any day now. The pressure we're under just to eat and pay for the roof over our heads is bad enough, and these leeches are making life almost intolerable.

 

Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.

Cheers.

Craig

 

Good afternoon Craig,

 

Firstly, I am sorry to hear about your redundancy and I do hope that you are able to gain alternative employment very soon.

 

Rossendales are perfectly entitled to pursue debts on behalf of different authorities. Each debt is an individual one and as such, you should have received a Notice of Enforcement for each one with a Compliance fee of £75 being applied.

 

The statutory regulations (the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014) specifically provide that when an enforcement visit is made, that the enforcement company should enforce all debts on their records at that time but that only one enforcement fee of £235 is applied. This specific clause was introduced into the regulations specifically for incidences such as yours to ensure that you are not liable for an enforcement fee of £235 for each account.

 

The imminent arrival of a grandchild would not I'm afraid mean that you are 'vulnerable'. Nonetheless, I hope that everything goes OK.

 

It is vitally important that you make contact with Rossendales to explain your circumstances. They will ask for an Income & Expenditure.

 

The problem that you would face at present would be with any car that you have outside of your home. If you read these forums you will quickly see that a vehicle outside of your home is at risk of being seized. I notice that one of the debts is parking related. The vehicle registration number would therefore feature on the warrant. !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I've recently been made redundant, and Rosendale's bailiffs are swift on their heels coming to collect debts. The problem is I owe money to three creditors: HMRC, a parking fine, and a court fine. Rosendales are collecting the debts on behalf of all three clients. My question is, is this allowed? I thought a single agency can only chase an individual for the debts of one

 

Craig, you mention that one of the three debts that Rossendales are enforcing is a court fine. Rossendale's do not enforce court fines. Could it be something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi folks.

 

I've recently been made redundant.

 

I'm sure that I dont need to remind you but please do make sure that you contact the council etc to ensure that you claim any benefits that you and your family may be entitled to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...