Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

VCS/ELMS Spycar PCN PAPLOC now Claimform - Liverpool Airport - No Stopping


Recommended Posts

correct it is

so now as post 17

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

If not, any suggestions what the letter should say?

 

Many thanks

 

Well for a start, the figure of £60 plucked out of thin air and added to the initial "debt". The original "debt" being nonsense as this is a bye-law matter which they have no interest in. The fact you know they are serial bottlers who soil their underpants when it comes to actually appearing in court.

 

Make it clear that you've sussed them, their claim is rubbish and you would have no problem humiliating them in court.

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

what you send is in almost every other liverpool john lennon airport thread in this forum.

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

OK thanks - the suggested reply I came across that I like best is from ericsbrother...

 

"Dear sirs,

 

Unfortunately for you I wasn't born yesterday so I won't be paying the demand to your client as both you and they know what I know and that there is no liability in this matter because the land is covered by its own byelaws, the signage is prohibitive and not an offer of a contract so none has been breached and anyway the POFA limits any charge to the specified sum so your demand for £160 is just a nonsense.

 

As VCS has been spanked at court on this very same thing several times before I suggest that you tell you client to discontinue this foolishness and that way you will at least obey the SRA rules of conduct and obey Civil Procedureicon as well. I know that may well be a first for you but call it your new year's resolution.

 

Should they decide to continue then I shall be asking for a ful costs recovery order for unreasonable behaviour and the seek damages for breach of the DPA as per VCS v Philip, Liverpool CC dec 2016.

 

Even Will and John, the parking worlds worst solicitors seem to have got fed up with Simple Simon's stupidity and greed and presumably that is why you are wasting your ink on his behalf."

 

I'll send this, unsigned, by recorded delivery to BW Legal tomorrow unless someone tells me otherwise.

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks pretty magnificent to me!

 

I'd be tempted to send a copy to VCS as well, as dodgy solicitors are quite happy to egg on their clients to go to court knowing they will lose, after all they still get paid.

 

You don't have to waste money on recorded delivery, but get a certificate of posting (free) from the post office.

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

I'd edit it just a tiny bit.

 

Procedureicon

 

And it's a little late for New Years resolutions :lol:

 

 

Apart from that :thumb:

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the suggestions. I just copied and pasted ericsbrother's original wording, I did intend to check everything before typing it up :-)

 

I'll update the thread when I hear anything back...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

***Latest Update***

 

I received a reply this morning from BWL (letter attached).

Excuse the quality of the image, it came all screw up in the post and it's difficult to get a good scan of it.

 

They say they still intend to pursue me, or the driver (not sure which), but interestingly they no longer mention any legal action.

Do you think that means they have given up on that route?

 

Is there anything I need to do at this stage or do I just ignore it for now unless they start mentioning legal action again?

 

I'm not in the slightest bit concerned if they do decide to take the legal route, but it would be good to know what the likely outcome is from here :smile:

 

Many thanks

 

bw chase letter june 2018.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that this is their writhing death throes.

You notice that they ignored your deception statement largely because it is true I guess.

 

We haven't seen a copy of your NTK to see if they have alluded to POFA at all.

If they haven't then "pursing" you as keeper has less hope than Bob Hope of getting a result for them along with all the other hurdles that they cannot get over.

 

Sometimes it is just better to slink away with tail between legs than persist. IPC and its cronies at their finest.

How can the DVLA treat them seriously?

Heaven knows what the compensation would be for you if they do go to Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

lookinforinfo said:
We haven't seen a copy of your NTK to see if they have alluded to POFA at all.

 

I didn't realise I'd never posted the NTK - apologies, it's attached now...

 

They don't mention POFA anywhere in the NTK, the back of the letter has info on how to pay or appeal but no mention of POFA at all.

 

Surely as lawyers these people must know they have zero chance of enforcing these invoices?

 

It makes me really angry that they are allowed to get away with trying to scare people into paying considerable sums of money with threats of CCJ's etc. when they know full well that it's not true :-(

 

It's one thing for a dodgy company to try that, but for lawyers to then get involved, and keep up the pretense, must flout some Law Society rules???

 

PCN NTK.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Solicitors for hire ...paper tigers

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

the solicitors will say that they only do what their clients instruct them to do.

 

If you have even taken on someone who has relied on their lawyers trying to distort the law you will find that they will say they were advised by their lawyers to do this or that even though it is supposed to be the other way round.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its what you should done when you got the very first letter

Instead you entered into pointless letter tennis.......

 

The byelaws trump then

They cant enforce them

There is no such thing as no stopping.

You've got fo stop to read the signs....

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

Sorry, you must be mistaking me for some other thread.

 

I've only sent 1 letter to them as I was advised to do in response to the Letter Before Action I received from BW Legal. I sent them the reply suggested by ericsbrother - this...

 

"Dear sirs,

 

Unfortunately for you I wasn't born yesterday so I won't be paying the demand to your client as both you and they know what I know and that there is no liability in this matter because the land is covered by its own byelaws, the signage is prohibitive and not an offer of a contract so none has been breached and anyway the POFA limits any charge to the specified sum so your demand for £160 is just a nonsense.

 

As VCS has been spanked at court on this very same thing several times before I suggest that you tell your client to discontinue this foolishness and that way you will at least obey the SRA rules of conduct and obey Civil Procedure as well.

 

Should they decide to continue then I shall be asking for a ful costs recovery order for unreasonable behaviour and the seek damages for breach of the DPA as per VCS v Philip, Liverpool CC dec 2016.

 

Even Will and John, the parking worlds worst solicitors seem to have got fed up with Simple Simon's stupidity and greed and presumably that is why you are wasting your ink on his behalf."

 

I've followed the advice on this thread to the letter - can't see the point in asking experienced people for advice then choosing to ignore it, that doesn't make sense to me.

 

Are you saying I shouldn't have replied to their LBA?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you responded as indicated and they havent sued you then you can think it isnt likely they will be in a hurry to do so.

They are particularly dim when it comes to threats as VCS dont rely on the POFA to create a keeper lliability so they cnat threaten you with this as it doesnt exist.

 

Likewise the amount cant be £160 If they are claiming from the keeper as the POFA limits any claim to the amount on the NTK.

 

They are not really that thick, they are just greedy and hope that you dont know better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi,

 

Not had any new threats from BW Legal or VCS Ltd since my last post, but just want to update the thread with what has happened since I was last here...

 

BW Legal have somehow gotten hold of my email address and have sent me 2 emails within a week!

 

Don't have a clue where they might have got it from, I certainly didn't give it to them. I've only ever been in contact with them once when I wrote the letter (sent by post) to them that the guys on here recommended I write telling them to jog on.

 

It's no biggie, not looking for any advice on this one, just thought it might be of interest to anyone that keeps track of these companies activities.

 

Cheers

Edited by DragonFly1967
You should know better than that Ray :)
Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I'd suggest with your email is block their address, and do it in such a way as they know that it's been blocked. Auto-reply perhaps?

 

What I did to begin with (with DRP & Highview) was return an email to them that said.

 

 

My personal email address is not for any communication from you. Your address is blocked and anything that has been delivered has been deleted without being read. If you want to contact me you will need to use a suitable method of postage.

 

 

I then blocked them on my mail server, but that's a little more complex :lol:

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I can block them on the mail server and send them an auto-reply each time they try to mail me. I am tempted to just mark their emails as spam, that way if enough people do the same, none of their emails will get through to anybody.

 

Forgot to mention in my last post they say they are contacting me about my account with VCS Ltd - must be the account I opened last time they had a half price sale :???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

these bandits may well try and harass you to get you to react somehow but dont rise to it.

 

They know that their hand is a busted flush and that is why they are dojg this.

 

VCS know they have no chance now but are going on the hope that having got a promise out of BWL that they are not as useless as Gladdys they want their moneys worth

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
On 15/04/2019 at 14:23, Baguettes54 said:

Thanks.  So you have saved me a letter.  As I do not intend to pay there is no value in writing at all!

 

I had the same issue with VCS at Liverpool Airport last year although I was the keeper, not the driver, of the car.

 

If you have a read of this post - https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/408248-vcs-pcn-liverpool-airport-no-stopping/#comments - you can read all the helpful advice I received.

 

If you go straight to comment #42 you can read the exact wording of the letter I sent to their lawyers (wording courtesy of EricsBrother if I remember right) after I received their Letter Before Action

 

Never heard a word from them after the letter apart from a couple of weird emails that were easily ignored.

 

Keep the faith...

 

Edited by _Ray_
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

no change at JLA, the byelaws still trump their stupid signs and no stopping is still not a contract to park so lose lose for them.

They know this so may well eve go as far as issuing a court claim before they give up but only if you show you understand why their letter is a waste of ink.

You can sue tem for breach of the GDPR but again we would suggest that you leave that until after they have shot their bolt

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

please complete this

 

 

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...