Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’. Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time. You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID. You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .. get a CCA Request running to the claimant . https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/ .. Leave the £1 PO unsigned and uncrossed . get a CPR  31:14  request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant] ... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ . .use our other CPR letter if the claim is for an OD or Telecom Debt or Util debt]  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ on BOTH type your name ONLY Do Not sign anything .do not ever use or give an email . you DO NOT await the return of ANY paperwork  you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count] ..............  
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business Centre, Northampton MCOL Northampton N1 ? Manual Claim CCMCC (Salford) ? New beta WWW.MONEYCLAIMS.SERVICE.GOV.UK ? If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. (not the response page or AOS) Name of the Claimant ? CA Auto Finance UK Limited How many defendant's  joint or self ? One (self) Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 02 May 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  Unpaid car loan By an agreement in writing dated 26 November 2015 and made between the Claimant and the Defendant, the Claimant loaned the Defendant a sum of money. The agreement was Regulated. The Defendant failed to make payment of the sums due and the Agreement was terminated by the Claimant. On the 7 February 2019 the balance due from the Defendant was £8,196,38. The Defendant has paid £0.00.                                                             THE CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS  1. £8,196,38 2. Contractual interest to the date hereof £0.00 3. Further interest at 10.70 per annum (£0.00) per day until judgement or sooner payment. 4. Costs to be assessed. CLAIMANTS CLAIM £8,196.38                                                                                                                                            OUR REF HXC/M0052854                                                                                                                                                DIRECT LINE 01293 596922                      What is the total value of the claim? £8751.38 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In Branch Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes 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. Original Creditor was FCA Automotive Services UK Limited Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? No and No Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? No Why did you cease payments? Unaffordable What was the date of your last payment? Feb 28 2018 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Yes (irresponsible lending and they did not supply all documents when CCA sent. The Terms and Conditions they sent as part of the request were different to the original Ts and Cs. Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   PRIVATE.pdf
    • Thank you. You contacted directly with the parcel broker so your best option is to proceed directly against them for breach of contract. I hope you have read enough to understand that you will not be able to rely on the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Do you understand why? Have Parcel to Go giving you a reason for declining reimbursement? Do you have anything in writing from your customer which shows that they did not refuse delivery and which identifies the actual circumstances of the situation?
    • Which Court have you received the claim from? CIVIL NATIONAL BUSINESS CENTRE, NORTHAMPTON Name of the Claimant? LOWELL PORTFOLIO LTD How many defendant's joint or self? SELF Date of issue – 03 MAY 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  1.THE CLAIM IS FOR THE SUM OF £6000 DUE TO THE DEFENDANT UNDER AN AGREEMENT REGULATED BY THE CONSUMER ACT 1974 FOR A LLOYDS BANKING GROUP PLC ACCOUNT WITH AN ACCOUNT REFERENCE OF (ACCOUNT NO. 16 DIGITS LONG). 2.THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO MAINTAIN CONTRACTUAL PAYMENTS REQUIRED BY THE AGREEMENT AND A DEFAULT NOTICE WAS SERVED UNDER S.87(1) OF THE CONSUMER ACT 1974 WHICH HAS NOT BEEN COMPLIED WITH. 3.THE DEBT WAS LEGALLY ASSIGNED TO THE CLAIMANT ON (DATE) NOVEEMBER 2016 NOTICE OF WHICH HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE DEFENDANT. 4. THE CLAIM INCLUDES STATUORY INTEREST UNDER S.69 OF THE COUNTY COURTS ACT 1984 AT A RATE OF 8% PER ANNUM FOR THE DATE PF ASSIGNMENT TO THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS IN THE SUM BE OF £0.00. THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS THE SUM OF £6000. What is the total value of the claim? £6500 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? YES, NOTICES OF CLAIM.  Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? YES  Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? NO Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? CREDIT CARD When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007?  BEFORE  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post? I DONT RECALL 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. DEBT PURCHASER.  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? THE FIRST I RECALL WAS A LETTER FROM LOWELL SAYING THEY NOW OWNED THE DEBT.  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? NOT THAT I RECALL OR BEEN PROVIDED WITH THROUGH CCA REQUESTS.AT LAST REQUEST THEY SAID THEY WERE AWAITING THE DEFAULT NOTICE AND NO ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN UNTIL RESPONDED WHICH TO DATE I'VE NOT HAD OR SEEN.  Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  NO, I RECEIEVED LETTERS OF CLAIMS   Why did you cease payments?  i was under medical care which caused me not to work. around that time lowell had wanted me to increase my payments as it would take too long to clear the debt . i had been paying them what i was paying the bank. i explained my then health & financial position and that i was unable to do so. they put a hold on my account for a few months so i cancelled my direct debit. i made a full and final offer which was rejected. when they wanted payments to resume i explained i was in a worse financial position, still undertaking treatment and now unemployed so could not start payments as they wanted. after sending my financial spreadsheet they kept sending letters asking what i was going to do. i couldn’t see a way forward i felt stressed and under pressure so wrote that i would not be corresponding with them anymore. What was the date of your last payment? NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2018   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? NO   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? I COMMUNICATED MY FINANCIAL PROBLEMS WITH THE CREDIT CARD COMPANY, WE MADE A MONTHLY PAYMENT AGREEMENT WHICH WAS KEPT FOR SEVERAL YEARS UNTIL DEBT WAS SOLD.  
    • Perhaps you would care to read this and reflect on your continuing comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany Jugg    ALEX BRUMMER: How grotesque of pro-Palestine protesters to besmirch Auschwitz, the place where my grandparents died WWW.DAILYMAIL.CO.UK As the son of a refugee from the horrors of the Holocaust, I can feel nothing but contempt for the ignorance, gross... My elderly aunt Sussie and cousin Sheindy had been teenagers at Auschwitz and Belsen but survived and are alive to this day. What they will make of the protesters who waved flags, heckled and chanted as Israelis took part in the March Of The Living – the annual walk from Auschwitz to Birkenau – I cannot imagine. The images now circulating of the protesters are indescribably disturbing. They can only bring back memories of those final moments Sheindy shared with my grandparents when my grandmother Fanya squeezed her hand and told her to lie about her age to avoid the gas chambers. Claiming she was older, and could work, meant that Sheindy lived, not died. The outrage perpetrated by Hamas on October 7 has brought back the most terrifying memories for these two women – memories of pillage, mutilation and starvation. The Holocaust, or Shoah to use the Hebrew word, was the deliberate, industrial-scale killing of Jews.  It is bad enough that pro-Palestinian and pro-Hamas sympathisers have chosen to steal the language of the Holocaust.  Any comparison between Israel's retaliation and the monstrous genocide of the 1940s is odious and anti-Semitic
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Ouch Marstons enforce for debt of £1


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2189 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

Bristol Council are in the doghouse for sending bailiffs and increasing a £1 debt for a mistake to £311 when Marstons called. Technically marstons did no wrong, they applied the correct fees.

 

https://thebristolcable.org/2018/04/i-owed-1-bailiffs-and-the-council-forced-me-to-pay-311/

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

Bristol Council are in the doghouse for sending bailiffs and increasing a £1 debt for a mistake to £311 when Marstons called. Technically Marstons did no wrong, they applied the correct fees.

 

https://thebristolcable.org/2018/04/i-owed-1-bailiffs-and-the-council-forced-me-to-pay-311/

 

I received a google alert on this press article last night and I was suspicious then......and even more so now. The media articles slogan is a clue:

PART OF OUR CAMPAIGN CALLING ON THE COUNCIL TO STOP USING BAILIFFS

I think that I am right in saying that we are not allowed to reproduce a press article in full so hopefully the following will be ok:

 

Jade is a 27-year-old mum of two from Knowle and a full-time carer for her wheelchair-bound nan.

 

Last winter, like thousands of us, Jade got landed with a parking ticket. She duly paid the fine to Bristol City Council and got on with her life. However, a simple and innocent mistake landed Jade in a shocking and expensive situation.

 

“Months and months later, I had a knock at the door in the morning,” Jade tells me sitting in her nan and grandpa’s living room in Kingswood. “I came downstairs to find a letter on the floor. A bailiff’s letter. I opened the door to find a bailiff putting a clamp on my car and blocking it in the drive with his.”

 

Jade was shocked. “I said ‘What’s this about? I paid it’. He just said ‘no, it’s a pound short’.”

 

I must of paid a pound short without realising when doing the bank transfer,” Jade tells me, “but the bailiff was so arrogant. As soon as I approached him he was so rude. I said ‘can I just give you the pound?’ He said ‘No, you have to pay me £311’.”

 

The extra £310 is the fees bailiffs add to the original debt within seven days of receiving orders from Bristol City Council to enforce a debt. In short, the bailiff was demanding fees worth 311 times more than the original debt.

 

The impression that this media article is trying to portray to the public is that a single mother of two children (and a full time Carer to her Nan) received a parking ticket from Bristol City Council and then duly paid the council but by a simple and innocent mistake, paid £1 too little.

 

We are then given to believe that the naughty council then pursued this measly £1 debt by registering it at the Traffic Enforcement Centre (part of Northampton Court) and worse still, requesting that a warrant be issued.

 

And lastly, we have the awful bailiff company 'demanding fees worth 311 times more than the original debt'. And all because; Jade had made 'a simple, innocent mistake'.

 

If only it was true...but it can't possibly be...and the clue, is in the amount owed to the council......of £1.

 

Explanation in the next post....

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was the case that Jade had settled this parking ticket with the Bristol City Council when she should have done and had paid a £1 too little, she would have then received a Charge Certificate. The debt would have increases slightly.

 

Next, would be the Order for Recovery to advise Jade that Bristol City Council would be 'registering the debt' at the Traffic Enforcement Centre. A debt registration fee of £8 would be added to the debt increasing the amount owed to around £10 (not £1).

 

Once the warrant is issued, it would have been passed to Marston's to enforce. They would have sent a Notice of Enforcement to Jade. A compliance fee of £75 would have been added at that stage.

 

It is clear as day, Jade had received a Notice of Enforcement, and PAID THE COUNCIL DIRECT. In doing so, she tried to avoid paying the compliance fee. Her intention was to only pay the amount of the parking ticket (minus the compliance fee). By a simple error, she paid £1 too little.

 

As warrant could never be issued for £1. I would be surprised if the court system allowed registration of a debt for such a low amount. Nonetheless, a court registration fee of £8 would be added to the warrant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The media article is also misleading on the matter of 'vulnerability'. This is what it says:

 

At this point, knowing that Jade was a carer and a mother with a child present, the bailiff should have put a stop to the enforcement and identified Jade as a vulnerable individual.

 

Just because Jade is a mother and her children are in the house does not mean that she is vulnerable. She may well be a full time Carer for her Nan who is wheelchair bound but the Nan lives elsewhere !!!

 

PS: If Jade had visited this forum to seek advice as to whether she could pay the council direct, she would have been informed on the case of Bola v Newlyn. To clarify the position once again, once a warrant has been passed to an enforcement company, a Compliance fee of £75 is added to the debt. From any payment made......whether to the council or the enforcement company, the compliance fee must be deducted first.

 

Unless full payment to include the enforcement agent fees is paid in full, the warrant will not be satisfied and enforcement can continue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you use the above link, and scroll to the bottom of the page, you will find that members of the public may leave comments.

 

It seems that two negative comments criticising my posts on here have been allowed.

 

Oddly, despite my attempt to leave a comment with a link to this thread, it has still not be allowed to be posted.

 

I have tried three times now.

I can only assume that Bristolcastle.org do not want their 'Fake News' exposed.

That is fine.

I will send a copy of the thread to Bristol City Council.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is a true account of any action, it is more likely to be a problem with computers and the issue of them being right or wrong(not nearly one or the other) and A bit of human pig headedness )IMO. It happens in all sorts of transactions.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

they do like to be seen dying on the barricades in the name of the revolution though. With friends like these no wonder the poor girl ended up paying out a fortune for the underpayment.

Shame she went to them and not CAG.

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...