Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • He was one of four former top executives from Sam Bankman-Fried's firms to plead guilty to charges.View the full article
    • The private submersible industry was shaken after the implosion of the OceanGate Titan sub last year.View the full article
    • further polished WS using above suggestions and also included couple of more modifications highlighted in orange are those ok to include?   Background   1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of January 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.   Unfair PCN   2.1  On 19th December 2023 the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) sent by the solicitors the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will be reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days of issue).  2.2  Yet the PCN sent by the Claimant is for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced to £60 if paid within 30 days of issue).   2.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.    2.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.  No Locus Standi  3.1  I do not believe a contract with the landowner, that is provided following the defendant’s CPR request, gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-   (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or   (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.   3.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract.  Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed   4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, in response to the CPR request from myself.   4.2        The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Standard Life Investments UK) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.   4.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents.   No Keeper Liability   5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.   5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.     5.3         The claimant did not mention parking period, times on the photographs are separate from the PCN and in any case are that arrival and departure times not the parking period since their times include driving to and from the parking space as a minimum and can include extra time to allow pedestrians and other vehicles to pass in front.    Protection of Freedoms Act 2012   The notice must -   (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;  22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim.  5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable.  No Breach of Contract   6.1       No breach of contract occurred because the PCN and contract provided as part of the defendant’s CPR request shows different post code, PCN shows HA4 0EY while contract shows HA4 0FY. According to PCN defendant parked on HA4 0EY which does not appear to be subject to the postcode covered by the contract.  6.2         The entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract which makes it only an offer to treat,  Interest  7.1  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for  Double Recovery   7.2  The claim is littered with made-up charges.  7.3  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100.  7.4  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.  7.5 Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”  7.6 In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverabl15e under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''  7.7 In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 4) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case.  7.8        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.   7.9        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).   In Conclusion   8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim.  Statement of Truth  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   
    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
  • 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

Erudio - no CAA no default - discount offer - now PAP Letter


pencil
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 526 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

  • 6 years later...

please tell us the full story as to why you sent a cca request

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hi,

 

I have a DCA bothering me about a loan.

 

I asked for a copy of the alleged CCA agreement over a year ago,

gave the DCA multiple opportunities to provide it, and it still has not surfaced.

 

This week I received a 'Notice of Default' for 28 days hence.

 

How should I respond?

 

Thanks in advance for the advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DCA cant issue a default if they own the debt. If they dont own it and are trying to pressure on behalf of a company then the OC can add one.

 

Can you give more info please.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which they have never done.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because, as far as I am aware , most did not have the facility before. However just because they have not done it doesn't mean they can't.

If you look at the FCA register Cabot are the same now.

 

To be honest, for them it makes perfect sense, removes the time and trouble when a creditor doesn't default correctly. They can just fix it.

 

Not saying I like it or agree with it.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

aha its ruddy erudio and an slc loan.

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've moved you into the slc forum

loads of like threads to read

but you really need to give us the full history.

 

in this instance

its not the same as a dca

 

although erudio are arrows in sheeps clothing...

its actually acting as a creditor so they can default you

 

however the history will tell us all

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

  • 1 year later...

Can anyone offer me advice about this issue?

 

When Erudio first contacted me in 2014 I refused to fill in their new credit form, and asked to see the credit agreement, which they have not provided.

 

After a number of months I wrote back stating the account is in dispute,

that was almost five years ago.

 

I have received a few 'notice of default' letters since then but my credit score remains in the high 900s.

 

Last week it was passed to an inhouse DCA.

 

I received a number of missed mobile phone calls and they have also asked for information about my situation by post which I have not responded to.

 

My question is what is the likely chronology of approach by the DCA

and how should I proceed,

 

do I have to respond to their advances,

and if so,

how and when?

 

Thank you in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More info needed.

 

Years you took out loans.

 

Deferment years completed.

 

Repayments made.

 

Are earnings above the threshold for repayment or have they ever been ?

 

People are being taken to court now, so don't presume it won't happen, if you ignored them.

 

Depends on the info needed above.

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

Erudio are arrows are capquest

 

They failed the CCA

The debt is unenforceable

 

You ignore them

Unless/until you get a letter of claim

Or

A claim form

 

And they can't make it appear on your credit file either

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 was that CCA request and to whom?

is this showing on your credit file?

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

Time to go read up

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

  • 10 months later...

This week I too received a PAP from Fairfax.

It's been 5 1/2 years since I last deferred and acknowledged the debt

4 1/2 years since Erudio contacted me in 2014 to say they were managing my student loan and asked me to complete their form, which apparently would have amounted to a new contract with them, so I did not.

 

At the time I sent a CCA request by recorded delivery which has still not been provided, therefore the debt is in dispute I believe. I

replied to them a further two times during 2014 and simply reminded them of the CCA request.

I have not responded to them since.

 

In the four years since I have received

a default notice for 2016,

a letter of termination,

a letter apologising for missed statutory notices,

a letter saying capquest would manage the loan with an offer of settlement, and

now the letter stating it has been passed to Drydens and the PAP.

 

I intend to dispute the claim on the basis my CCA request of 2014 has not been fulfilled and therefore the debt is in dispute.

Is that satisfactory?

Is there a template I can use to craft my response to the PAP?

Edited by dx100uk
spacing.
Link to post
Share on other sites

you indicate an offer of settlement

do you mean a discount letter? if so lets see it in PDF read upload.

this is an important step I've been awaiting regarding disputed SLC loans.

 

yes there is a PAP temple, but we need to do one to emcompass student loans , I would feel better its customised somewhat

but its in the financial legal forum stickies.

 

dont reply yet please

and if I were to be honest, for future readers, i'd not even suggest replying to any other letters once a CCA fails, unless its a PAP letter of claim

OR

YOU HAVE MOVED and not informed the owner of your SLC debt of you new address IN WRITING.

do ever NOT assume that just because you get a phishing letter to where you are now they KNOW your correct address

its normally a pre-cursor to them instigating a backdoor claim to an old address hoping to get a default CCJ you know nowt about.

 

these APPEAR to be the only ones that are going anywhere near to a court at this stage in the erudio portfolio debacle

so don't fall foul of them as they WILL get a CCJ if they think they can file to an old address

 

dx

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 have received a letter of claim, which I believe is a PAP. I have ticked box 4 'I Dispute the Debt' and will explain on a separate page. A few questions, what should I say on the letter, should I enclose copy letters and do I need to sign the form?

 

 

Name of the Claimant ?

Drydens Fairfax solicitors

 

Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.

22nd October 2018

 

Particulars of Claim

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? Please type out their particulars of claim in full (verbatim) less any identifiable data and round the amounts up/down.

 

-The amount owed is £9357.40 and no charges/interest are being added at this stage

-A statement of account is attached

-The agreement this debt relates to was entered between you and Student Loans Company on 12 June 1997 and assigned to Erudio Student Loans Limited on [no date] . A copy of the agreement can be requested using the reply form.

 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?

No

 

What is the total value of the claim?

£9357.40

 

Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account?

Mortgage style student loan

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ?

Before

 

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ?

No

 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.

Originally with Student Loans Company, sold to Erudio, Passed to Capquest, and then to Dryden Fairfax.

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment?

 

I received a notice of assignment from SLC to Eurdio.

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?

No

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ?

No, a letter of termination and two 'default' letters [no default on credit file] were received during 2016, and in 2018 I received a letter apologizing that no statutory notices had been sent out since the period of non-compliance started, which the letter states was 15 Dec 2017.

 

Why did you cease payments?

When the account was sold to Erudio in April 2014, I asked for copies of the credit agreements under CCA rules, which have not been forthcoming. I received a letter from their legal council in April 2014, and a duplicate letter in Dec 2014, stating they are 'investigating the matters raised and will be in contact in due course'. As far as I am concerned the debt is in dispute.

 

What was the date of your last payment?

I last deferred in April 2013.

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved?

As above, I requested copy agreements under the CCA as soon as it was sold to Erudio.

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management planicon?

No

Link to post
Share on other sites

as have numerous people in this forum.

 

just look for the threads with drydens PAP letter in the title follow those.

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...