Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Student Loans 1995-1998


DonKenobi
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2409 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, everyone!

 

I'm new here so apologies if I have or if this has been answered before somewhere!

 

I had three student loans in 1995, 1997 and 1998.

I deferred paying them for years on end up to around 2010 when I moved abroad and my salary meant I could no longer do so.

However, I didn't pay the full amount they required because of my circumstances and eventually stopped paying altogether.

 

After being sent umpteen letters for Thesis and now Link Financial / Capquest,

I agreed to pay around 20 quid a month to each.

 

 

I then stumbled upon this website and read something about my loans being statute barred and the fact that I might not owe anything now as there was more than a six year period where nothing was paid.

 

Can someone just clarify this for me?

If I deferred for over six years are my loans considered statue barred or not?

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be statute barred, there has to be 6 years where you did not pay anything or acknowledge owing the debt. If you deferred the loan debt, it means that you acknowledged the debt.

 

So unlikely to be statute barred unless you can show no payment or deferment for a 6 year period.

 

If you are abroad and never intend coming back to the UK, then you might decide to just advise anyone chasing debts, that you are resident abroad. It is then up to them, whether they try to enforce the debt in a court where you live. It is pretty unlikely, as they have enough trouble enforcing debts in UK courts. The debt buyers of these old loans are very unlikely to incur costs in using foreign lawyers.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for replying!

 

Well, there was a period where I stopped deferring and didn't pay anything at all, but I can't remember how long that lasted.

 

I guess I could contact the SLC or Thesis to find out via an SAR.

 

will the fact that I deferred, paid some, then stopped completely (until last week) count if the period of me not paying or deferring was six years?

 

 

Or will me deferring and then paying some simply mean that the loan is not statute barred anymore?

 

I travel to the UK once a year but yes, I doubt they'd chase me where I am!

Link to post
Share on other sites

ANY period of 6 years without payment or deferment means it would be SB. Would not matter if you paid later, it would still be SB.

 

Doubt they will send an SAR response abroad. Don't get it sent to a UK address, as they will have it recorded as you being contactable in the UK.

 

If you contact SLC, just write to them asking for the years on record, where either no payment was made or the loan was not deferred.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, by payment or acknowledgement by you

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

capquest on behalf of erudio [arrows DCA]

link on behalf of thesis [same lot trying to spoof you]

 

pers id ignore both of them if residing abroad.

 

unless you really want to upset them and simply write to each informing them you are resident abroad and will not be returning.

 

that way if they do sneak a backdoor CCJ whilst you are a known foreign resident you can hit them with a set aside that a winner

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

that way if they do sneak a backdoor CCJ whilst you are a known foreign resident you can hit them with a set aside that a winner

 

OK. I mean, they already know I'm abroad (they send letters here and call me too). Would I still need to write to them to remind them of that fact, or simply to say I have zero intention of returning to the UK?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they know you are abroad, then no need to confirm this again. Any debt buyer can check UK records to see if you are active again in the UK.

 

On another forum that is nothing to do with these issues, i had a discussion with someone quite senior dealing with student loan debts. Apparently SLC have tried lots of different ways to enforce loan debts, but have found it very difficult and this is in regard to UK residents. They have sold on these student debts to debt buyers and these debt buyers have had problems as well. In fact so many problems, that they have so far not been interested in buying any more student debts, even though Goverment have been keen to sell more.

 

The UK has international agreements on UK student debts with countries like Australia, so in theory SLC could enforce debts in some countries. But i don't think they bother, beyond sending threatening letters. There is very little chance of a debt buyer enforcing a UK student debt abroad. They will just wait to see if a debtor returns to the UK.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep ignore them

 

 

we've not seen any CCJ's to foreign students to be honest

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 had student loans from a similar period, they have been sold to Link Financial (see my thread). Link wrote to me a year before they became statute barred, then wrote five or six times more in the hope that I would contact them. I have not contacted them, and they last wrote to me in May last year. The debt buyers know the debt is unenforceable and give up chasing when they realise that the person they are chasing knows this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...