Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've given it a try, I expect alot of work required so will give my eyes and brain a rest as I'm getting word blind.. and I'll come back later following your initial bashings Thanks IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;   I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. 4. The Claimant claims a Notice of Assignment was served on the 22/02/2022. This is denied. 5. The Claimant claims a Default Notice was served on the defendant. This is denied. 6. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 7. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. 8. Point 3 is noted and denied. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 9. Point 5 is noted and disputed. 10. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked *** The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 11. Point 11 is noted and disputed. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. 12. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** (dates are wrong) 13. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 14. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. Conclusion 15. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 16. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 17. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter into settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter into such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment. Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • eh?...no you are simply telling them you have moved...
    • I agree with you. You and the company are separate legal entities so the company property that you damaged is third party property as far as you are concerned..  Get the company to write to you holding you formally responsible for the damage to their fence with the quotations for the repair. Send it by post (proof of posting) to Prima and ask them to confirm they will deal with the the third party directly. Best that someone other than you writes on behalf of the company! I suspect this is simply lack of knowledge by staff on customer service desks who don't understand the concept of companies and their shareholders being separate legal entities. If Prima still make difficulties use their formal complaints system until either they agree to cover the TP claim or issue a deadlock letter. You can then go the FCA.
  • 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

PCM Windscreen PCN claimform - Sailsbury village - REsidential Permit fallen on Floor **WON**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1867 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

Name of claimant: Parking Control Management (UK) Limited

Claimants Solicitors: Gladstones Solicitors Limited

Date of Issue: 3/10/18

 

What is the claim for: the driver of the vehicle incurred the parking charges on 31/01/2018 for breaching terms of parking on the land at Sailsbury village. The Defendant was driving the vehicle and/or is the keeper of the vehicle. And the claimant claims £160 for parking charges/damages and indemnity costs if applicable, together with interest of £7.58 pursuant to s69 of the county courts act 1984 at 8%pa, continuing to judgement at £0.04 per day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

so, for starters you need to register and log in at moneyclaim dot gov dot uk and then tick the box saying you intend to defend.

there is an awful lot wrong with the claim, for starters PCM/Gladdys havent followed the Civil Procedure regs because they ahve failed to send you a proper PAP letter before action.

Secondly, the claim doesnt state in what capacity they are claiming from you, they cant claim from the keeper UNLESS they follow certain protocols and to weld the driver and keeper liabilites together requires proof of who was driving at the time. Also they dont say why there are aprking charges, is this money due under a contractual condition or money for breach of contract?

 

After that they have no cause for action as the singage isnt an offer of a contract but prohibitive in nature.

 

 

You then will have to file an outline of your defence so you will use these points. We recommend that you do this nearer the end of the allowed time so they dont send in a revised Particulars of Claim. It is probably enough to get them to drop the matter before it costs them more money as this abuse of process is their norm. Theyknow there is no real prospect of actually winning a defended claim and they slap in a court summons as a way of coercing you to pay up rather than as a last attempt to collect a genuine debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.

.

register as an individual

note the long gateway number given

then log in

.

select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.

.

then using the details required from the claimform

.

defend all

leave jurisdiction unticked.

click thru to the end

confirm and exit MCOL.

.

 

.

get a CPR 3114 request running to the solicitors

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim)

 

no need to sign anything

.

you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.

you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.

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

get the acknowledgement if service done NOW, the CPR 31.14 request is now of less importasnce because you are too late to hit them with that stick in your outline defence.

 

 

So your defence so far is

"1. no monies are owed by the defendant to the claimant because there was no offer of a contract to park so there can be no breach of contract. The signage they rely on is prohibitive in nature so their claim is at best an unlawful panalty

2 The claimant does not say in what capacity they are claiming form the defendant as both their sigange and paperwork is defective to creat ANY liability whatsoever under the POFA and thus any demand has no lawful basis

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have done the acknowledgement form, so my next step is to write a letter of defence? who do i send it to? sorry i don't know much about this :(

 

Neither did any of us at the start, but start reading and get genned up.

 

What you've done today is excellent. You've opposed their moronic claim. That's already a spanner in the works for them. Unfortunately most motorists just cough up due to being frightened of going to court or else pretend it isn't happening and the PPC get a default judgement.

 

You've also requested important documents from them, which they won't send, so that'll make them look bad in court.

 

BTW, I've been to civil court, it's not intimidating at all, the judge will appear in a suit and invite you to sit down round a table and give your side of the story.

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

once you have given them 14 days to respond or the day before you need to submit a defence you sned your outline defence to the court via your moneyclaim online account ( open an account if you dotn have one, it is much easier to see how things are progressing and nothing gets lost)

 

 

A simple defence will be the 2 sentence I put in post #34. This goes to the court and copy to the parking co solicitors.

 

 

 

If you send this after the deadline for them responding to your CPR31.14 request you add the third point

" the claimant has failed by way of a CPR31.14 request for documents to show any assignment of authority from the landlord to enter into contracts and to make civil claims in their own name. The defendant does not believe the claimant has locus standi in this matter".

 

That last point will force them at some point to either produce a proper contract ( unlikely, it will be with the managing agents) or lose the action so they often discontinue

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATED VERSION-

 

Name of claimant: Parking Control Management (UK) Limited

Claimants Solicitors: Gladstones Solicitors Limited

Date of Issue: 3/10/18

 

What is the claim for: the driver of the vehicle incurred the parking charges on 31/01/2018 for breaching terms of parking on the land at Sailsbury village. The Defendant was driving the vehicle and/or is the keeper of the vehicle. And the claimant claims £160 for parking charges /damages and indemnity costs if applicable, together with interest of £7.58 pursuant to s69 of the county courts act 1984 at 8%pa, continuing to judgement at £0.04 per day.

 

What is the value of the claim: £242.58

Amount claimed: £167.58

Court fee: £25

Legal representatives: £50

 

Claim has been issued by Parking control management- the parking company.

The Debt collectors Trace had sent me a few letters and I was sent a letter saying it is going to be assigned to the solicitors, Gladstones.

 

Also another point, when i received the charge, the letter wasn't sent to where the car is registered, my car is registered at home however all the letters was sent to my Uni address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

defence by by 4pm 2nd November do not miss it whatever does or does not happen

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

so ive tried to post my defence letter as today is the last day for the claimant to reply to the 31.14 letter

 

however i cant log into the claim,

ive used the claim number and password from the letter and it is coming up as incorrect,

when i did my acknowledgement form i had no issues,

i plan on calling the help desk tomorrow,

i was wondering if they had withdrawn the claim.

 

Thanks for all of your help so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just means MCOL is having a hissy fit..quite usual.

 

ring the morning.

if it doesn't work they'll give you an email to use.

 

 

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

you can fax them, the fax is normally quiet these days as technology marches on. A day late wont be punished, they usually dont allow the claimant to do anything for 5 days after the defence submission date as they need the time to put stuff on the system anyway. I am involved in a case that has taken from the 16th sept until yesterday to get punched into the computer and that was supposed to be done by the 19th sept

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have received a letter from Gladstones saying they are going to carry on with the claim, and intend to request the case be dealt with on papers rather than a oral hearing. They have elected not to mediate and have said they are happy to listen to any genuine payment plan. They have also attached the clients completed directions questionnaire which they have said they will file to the court upon request.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send them this-

Dear Gladdys

Do you think I would agree to dealing with this case on the papers considering who I am dealing with. A company that has lost time and again in Court over permits and who lied to become a member of the IPC. Then are so stupid they cannot get the name of their AOS correct and compound their stupidity by employing a second rate solicitor to carry out their work.

I am looking forward to my day in Court with you where I will show the Judge cases which you have already lost in Court [and you do have a lot of them] where permits are involved. I will of course be going for exemplary damages. Should you continue to press ahead not only will I be delighted but a strong complaint will also be made to the SRA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Inform the court that you insist on an oral hearing, Gladstones always try to fool a defendant to allowing "On The Papers" it's an easy win for them then as their lies and insufficient evidence will be believed. On The Papers is always a no no.

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you write that letter above to Gladstones they shou!d drop the case.

They know In a defended case they will lose where the motorist has supremacy of their permit Against some stupid notice that is probably illegal anyway.

 

Do you really think they would want their disgraceful Court record dragged out In front of a Judge?

They are as bad as the crooks that run the car parks.

 

Of course if you want to go to Court just tell Gladdys that you want a Court hearing And then you will have to work hard on your defence and learn enough to be able to challenge them in Court.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest copying the letter to Parking Control Management as well and make it clear to Gladdys that you are doing so.

 

Gladdys get paid if they win or lose so love to egg on the companies to take court action, even when they know the case has no merit.

 

If Parking Control Management have even a modicum of intelligence (unlikely I know!) they won't want to go to court knowing they will lose.

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

you tell the court you want the case to be in open court in person, dont have to let the bandits know this because it isnt necessary as part of the procedure, the only reason it wouldnt be at your local court is if you agree to their terms , which you aret going to do. Letting court know this is a belt and braces exercise.

As for lookingforinfo's letter? Change it slightly and send it to the parking co, not Gladdys. They are paying Will and John twice over for rubbish advice so let them know that it will cost them when they lose and that you are well aware of their solicitors habits and they would be advised to drop the matter now rather than risking a claim against them in the aftermath of their drubbing for this misadventure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gladdys wont care if you insult them, they are used to it but they like to look tough in front of their IPC members.

 

By letting the parking co know directly that you are not impressed and will cost them more than they could ever hope to win they may well cut their losses and save themselves atleast £100 for the poor advice they would otherwise get to continue

Edited by dx100uk
Spell space
Link to post
Share on other sites

Best to not use search engines but the search cag box of the top redtoolbar

Numerous examples here

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

So do I just draft a letter addressed to the court, saying that I want an oral hearing or should I have got an N180 form?

 

If I do have to draft a letter for the court, who do I address it to? How do I know the right court official will receive it? I assume it will look something like:

 

Dear Court official (?),

 

My name is ### and my case number is ###. The claimant has directly written to me asking for the case to be dealt with on paper. However, I disagree and wish to have an oral hearing.

 

Yours Sincerely,

###

 

 

Also for @lookinforinfo 's letter:

 

Dear PCM Parking,

Do you think I would agree to dealing with this case on the papers considering who I am dealing with? A company that has lost time and again in Court over permits and who lied to become a member of the IPC. Then are so stupid they cannot get the name of their AOS correct and compound their stupidity by employing a second rate solicitor to carry out their work. I am looking forward to my day in Court with you where I will show the Judge cases which you have already lost in Court [and you do have a lot of them] where permits are involved. I will of course be going for exemplary damages. Should you continue to press ahead not only will I be delighted but a strong complaint will also be made to the SRA.

 

This letter sounds a bit informal and a tad aggressive :| - is that OK?

 

Edit: Just wanted to add that even though it is aggressive, I was worried that it might disadvantage me or that PCM/Gladdys would just ignore it (or maybe I'm just scared :D)Also, I have been reading through various posts on the forum regarding gladdys and in many of them, they had an N180 as well - hence my questions. Apologies if it seems like I'm being lazy.

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

No it's not too aggressive and it won't disadvantage you, it does illustrate to the PPC that you are ahead of their game, so they might well decide to drop the case.

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...