Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Part of a settlement agreement.   concerbs over her nane online we’re raised and I was blamed for bad mouthing. I explained I put nothing up myself.  cannot discuss details of the case as per agreement.  
    • The sticky thread is locked because it's just a template thread. We need to see the invoice you're disputing. And for you to answer the questions below (I'm guessing this is an ANPR capture, the vast majority of tickets are) -   For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture] (must be received within 14 days from the Incident)   Please answer the following questions.   1 Date of the infringement Give answer here   2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] Give answer here   [scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s   3 Date received Give answer here   4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Give answer here   5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Give answer here   6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Give answer here   Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Give answer here   7 Who is the parking company? Give answer here   8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Give answer here   For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Give answer here   There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, please check HERE   If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here   Copy the windscreen or ANPR section to your thread and answer the questions... …….... In either case scan up both sides of any letters/tickets in or appeals made out to ONE MULTIPAGE PDF ONLY
    • Perfect, thanks Dave.   You're right, a whole dodo storm this has been. As sons of first-generation immigrant parents, whenever something like this happens the old man panics. There was a whole "appeal this now" because my dad paid for the parking as he was with the hirer at the time and he isn't as tech-savvy as my brother so he ended up doing what he did and because I don't live there anymore it came all the way down to this.  But yes, we'll do this SAR and see what comes of it.  Will keep posting here with the hopes that it may benefit someone in the future.  Thanks again, everyone. 
    • saying the thread is locked, what shall I do?
    • Please fill in the forum sticky and upload a copy of the invoice, redacted of anything that could identify you -  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

PRAC/BW Claimform - old Payday UK PDL***Claim Dismissed***


Jess85
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2163 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

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

You are reliant on the Judge Lottery...and with this beautiful weather he/she may be itching to get on the golf course :|

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I'm typing quick because I'm on the move, but I'll update fully later.

 

It's worth a mention though, that I didn't win based on my argument (lack of original default notice) but rather the bad-assery of the female judge who pulled apart some other stuff.

 

Thrilled and THANK YOU for inspiring me to be strong. I will of course be making a donation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Jess

 

Thread title amended.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, more detail:

 

The judge said that even though they didn't have the original default notice, she knew of no reason / case law why the one that they had issued themselves, after being assigned the debt, wasn't valid. (This default notice is shown in #36 if you need reminding of it.) She went through the wording/dates etc of that with a fine tooth comb and said in the absence of the original, which the claimant had already admitted they couldn't obtain, issuing their own was valid to pursue?! I think this is an important point for anyone else reading this who are defending a similar claim as I was relying on the fact they couldn't issue their own!

 

More on the topic of a default notice though, it was then argued by BW that in this instance a default notice wasn't even needed as there was no agreement to terminate as such (short term loan) and that the DN they had issued was more a chance for me to rectify rather than being vaild to enforce the debt - they went back and forth on this over Section 87 and discussed the 'end' point of an agreement in relation to interest being added and the debt being assigned etc. Lost me a bit here, but the DJ didn't knock it out of the water it seemed that one wasn't needed.

 

It was the agreement though that was fatal due to MEM financial being signed on the agreement and that the claim was issued in respect of a debt with Instant Cash Loans (TA PDUK). They discussed the assignment of the debt in a bit of dept, but the DJ wasn't happy without seeing all the proof/debt sale agreement/deeds that these parties (MEM, ICL, PDUK) were all connected.

 

Hope that makes sense how I've explained it.

 

When summing up, the DJ did highlight the irony that it wasn't actually my singular argument about the DN that caused this claim to fail but other points that she was't satisfied with. In short, I think I came across pretty dumb and that the otherside appeared as smarmy chancers.

 

But I'll take the win!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I understand this right...

A loan issued under section 87 for which this loan is governed by doesn't have any agreement?

 

I'm confused 😕

 

These loans have a consumer credit agreement attached to them? So there is an agreement to terminate?

 

Either way not to worry... Well played on this one 😀

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

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

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sec87 is soley regarding defaults and notices

A loan is not issued under 87

 

.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...