Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The card number at the top right of the Advanced Application Form and Agreement does not reflect the same card number the number is 546780 and ends 5931 (however that card was taken out in 2005) the card number on the POC - there isn't one it is just the reference number that they use or they call the 'original account number'.   As for the statement (excel spreadsheet type) that has the same reference number but not credit card number.  However this is different to the spreadsheet paperwork they have sent previously to me. Which looks like it comes from Lloyds and shows the debt being written off by them. I've attached that here.   I wrote to Lowell asking for the deed of assignment and they haven't furnished us with it either. They did state that they don't have it as it is too old or something in the offer letter.      new doc 2021-02-25 08.15.42.pdf
    • Hello All   Update   As per post #83, I had mentioned that for some unusual  reason, there had been two deadlines from the court for responding, namely the 18th of January 2021 and 1st of Feb 2021.   With everyones great help I filed in the response by the18th of Jan 2021. I think I was bit concerned that the claimant, Mike Ashley may use the second deadline as a chance to add a supplementary statement in response to my defence.    Well, Mike Ashely has in fact does exactly this. He has responded and filed a supplementary witness statement and has responded to all the defence points. He has addressed most the issues I had raised in my defence.     His Supplementary WS is dated 30 January 2021 and his solicitors emailed it to me on the 17th of February 2021.   Not sure what to do, but he seems to have amended everything which i could have used as a loophole leaving me with the thought of , should we have waited till the 2nd deadline ie 1ist Feb2021 and submitted the defence rather than the 18th January 2021. this would have deprived him of the chance to response with a supplementary WS. Thats what really had a worried me and I raised it a few times on this platform.     Not sure now because he has kind of amended a few things, removed the incorrect exhibit ( where the signages had belonged to a different site, and called it a clerical error).   Will post his redacted supplementary WS later as at work now.   Thanks all
    • An eye-opening new report from the payment processor Worldpay found so-called 'mobile wallet' payments were used for just under a third of all online transactions in 2020. View the full article
    • Adding to all the other difficulties (address for service, proving an agreement, obtaining enforcement even if you succeeded) that have been raised: Has the obligation to repay yet arisen?   You say the agreement was repayment once the divorce settlement occurred, but then point out settlement has yet to occur!.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

found SIP/Gladstones CCJ on credit file re 2 PCNs - CLIPPERS QUAY SALFORD


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1036 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I've read a few threads today and found the advice very useful. Just wanted to share my specific case to see what advice can be given.

 

I noticed a CCJ on my credit file through clear score registered at Northampton County Court.

Today I rang the court and was advised that it was in relation to a PCN from SIP and Gladstones have taken me to court.

 

The case is regarding 2xPCNs at the start of January 2017 outside of my address in privately rented apartments.

On at least 1 of the days in question the ticket machine was out of use (I have a photo showing this - although it probably isn't the greatest as it doesn't clearly show where the machine is just the "NOT IN USE" message).

 

A couple of weeks after these dates I moved from my apartment and didn't receive anything from the claimant regarding the claim or subsequently anything from the court. The first time I realised there was an issue was looking at my credit file and finding the CCJ.

 

The CCJ amount is in excess of £400 (inc court fees etc) which is quite frankly extortionate for 2 days parking.

 

I don't have allocated parking in my tenancy agreement.

 

I would like to remove the CCJ from my credit file and have received the N244 application notice from the county court. Any help and advice would be greatly appreciated before I pay the £255.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you got a copy of the claiming and the judgement?

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

Yes ring and ask for them BOTH by email PDF

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

thoughts on what.....

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

no leave figures in please and all dates

just remove pers details.

 

the only bit we really need is the particulars of claim.

type that out here too EXACTLY as it is typed please

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

Claimant; SIP PARKING LTD

 

Claimant sols; GLADSTONES SOLICITORS LIMITED

Sols address; THE TERRACE, HIGH LEGH PARK GOLF CLUB, WARRINGTON, CHESHIRE, WA16 6AA

Sols number; 0333 0230 049

Sols reference; *******/SIP PARKING

 

Particulars Of Claim;

 

1.THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE REGISTRATION ****** (THE 'VEHICLE') INCURRED THE PARKING CHARGE(S) ON **/01/2017, **/01/2017 FOR BREACHING THE TERMS OF PARKING ON THE LAND AT CLIPPERS QUAY SALFORD

 

2. THE DEFENDANT WAS DRIVING THE VEHICLE AND/OR IS THE KEEPER OF THE VEHICLE.

 

3. AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £320 FOR PARKING CHARGES / DAMAGES AND INDEMNITY COSTS IF APPLICABLE,

TOGETHER WITH INTEREST OF £12.60 PURSUANT TO S69 OF THE COUNTY COURTS ACT 1984 AT 8% PA, CONTINUING TO JUDGMENT AT £0.07 PER DAY.

CCJ.pdf

Edited by dx100uk
merge format
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Just having a look at some of those previous cases ie "SIP/Gladstone claimform - PCN Clippers Quay in Salford **WON+COSTS** not paid bailiffs afoot!"

 

Looking at the signage, it states there will be a "parking charge" of £100 for "parking or remaining at this site otherwise than in accordance with the above", however they have charged me £320 + interest for 2 days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well I wouldn't worry about that

its the invisible unicorn food because they filled to an old address on purpose so can charge what they like.

no human ever looks at anything.

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

certainly the machine being out of order

they would know that but have simply been pig-headed and greedy.

 

everything is here now for the experts

and theres a huge amount of others threads detailing everything else they need

 

they'll pop in soon i'm sure

 

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

the first step will be to get a set aside for the judgement. This is done via the court form N244 and will cost you £255. Now, this is cheaper than paying the bandits anyway but you are likely to get your costs back if it is decided their claim is without real merit or they have behaved unreasonably.

 

They lose on that point with their badly worded claim and also the actual events will damn them as well so unless they decide to tell the court they are happy to drop the matter in exchange for not having to pay coats they are not only going to lose the money spent pursuing the claim but they will be paying out more than they could even win in costs as well.

 

If you are minded to you can also sue them for breach of the DPA but that is best considered after you get through this.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your reply ericsbrother.

 

So am I correct in assuming they don’t legally have the right to access the DVLA database regarding registered keeper of a vehicle? If that’s the case I’m definitely going to peruse for breach of DPA.

 

I am going to get the ball rolling with the N244 but maybe have to wait until the end of the month with it being £255.

 

What will I need to write in my statement of case and evidence box?

Link to post
Share on other sites

firstly that the claim was sent to an old address and then that there was no cause for action against the defendant in any capacity and lastly you say that the particulars of claim are so appalingly written it would have been impossible to work out what the claim was about and how the amount claimed was arrived out contrary to CPR 16.4

 

Now, you need to get images of the signage at the site if it is local to you as you will need this later. Also, as you have found another thread on the same subject read it carefully and use that decision as a persuasive argument so quote it if you can.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at CPR 16.4 - let me know if I’m correct enough this point below.

 

On the claiming it states this;

“INDEMNITY COSTS IF APPLICABLE, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST OF £12.60 PURSUANT TO S69 OF THE COUNTY COURTS ACT 1984 AT 8% PA, CONTINUING TO JUDGMENT AT £0.07 PER DAY.”

 

The bit I’m focusing on is the interest “continuing too judgment {sic}” not only awful grammar, but also legally incorrect as per the CPR 16.4 which states;

 

(b) if the claim is for a specified amount of money, state –

(i) the percentage rate at which interest is claimed;

(ii) the date from which it is claimed;

(iii) the date to which it is calculated, which must not be later than the date on which the claim form is issued;

 

Am I correct in my assumption that they can’t claim interest to the date of judgement only until the claim form has been raised?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no its till judgement

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

there are plenty of cases where this prohibitive signage has been shown to be not a contract but an unlawful penalty designed to deter. Read up on it.

likewise focus on what is important as you thoughts on interest are completely wrong and are distracting from what is important.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...