Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I’d add (just in case the DJ says “but if you couldn’t pay, you shouldn’t have parked”): “The situation being compounded by the app appearing to allow payment, with a countdown timer for the period ‘paid for’ appearing”.   Have you offered to pay the fee the app should have taken but didn’t?   If they were stupid enough to take it to court I’d invite the judge to find that they were entitled to that fee, and only that fee, but [contrary to the usual guideline of costs ‘in the case’] you were entitled to the {limited} costs available in the small claims track. They’d ‘win’ : but only for the parking fee, you’d win : by them being the ones an order of judgment was made against!
    • He is correct, though that only a judge can order him to refund the money.   You can’t complain about him saying only a judge can order it: that’s what the County Courts do - adjudicate disputes. You can complain that the guidelines make it clear what the outcome will be, so his behaviour is unreasonable.   ”That, Sir” (or Madam), “is the crux of why we are here. I suggest it is inevitable that you will find the refund must be made, and the Defendant should have seen that, but their intransigence has led to this matter reaching you”.  
    • Always have your door locked, to avoid anyone getting in without your permission.   Enforcement Officers (Bailiffs) are allowed to make peaceful entry into a private address, but they should announce who they are (name, job role and company) and the reason for their attendance at your address.   As soon as they were told that the person they were seeking was not living at the address, they should have asked politely for more information.  Once they were aware they were at the wrong address they should have apologised and left.    The conduct you describe would be professional misconduct and would not involve the Police.  The Enforcement Officer had a legal right to be seeking the debtor, so nothing criminal.  As Marston have appeared to reject your complaint you could contact CIVEA.   https://www.civea.co.uk/complaints
    • important – sometimes a default is good news! Defaults sound bad, right? So getting one removed must be good? This is probably the most confusing thing of all, but No! It can often be better to have a default on your credit record.  If there is a default against a debt, then the whole debt will “drop off” your file after six years, even if you haven’t repaid the debt. With no default, the record will not go away until six years after it is marked as settled/satisfied in some way. So don’t rush into trying to get a default removed… and never try to get a default date changed to a later one because it will wreck your credit record for longer
    • We will of course be informing the Court that we are LIP and the costs we have had to incur due to the unreasonable behaviour of the defendant including forcing us to incur costs and further costs, and refusing to deal with the LBC.   On a more ethical tone the firm of solicitors noted here are correct in the interpretation of the law as it stood since March 2019,   https://www.ellisjones.co.uk/blog/article/what-is-the-current-effect-of-coronavirus-on-my-wedding-contract   Goosedale the defendant has been given all these facts and informed that our daughter was married in a Civil ceremony last year with 15 Guests, hence they are not only wasting Court time but have cost us severe distress, inconvenience and loss of money to date, all which will be dealt with at a Hearing now. where the Defendant stated only a Judge can make the order to make him refund the money, hence his actions have caused immense waste of Court time and is an abuse of the Court Process, shame on Goosedale and equally shame on DWF what a joke !!   CMA have given the correct interpretation of the law - THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO KEEP A SINGLE PENNY THEY HAVE NOT PROVIDED ANYTHING FOR they have known this since March 2019.      
  • Our picks

    • 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
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 975 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 All

Have been paying a small amount to Citroen for a debt from 2007 that now does not appear on my credit file current balance is £2500.

 

Citroen have now sent me a letter saying they have sold the debt to a debt collection company and have closed the account. Interestingly they say i should continue to make payments and should hear from the new debt management company reference payment to them instead. (still waiting after 5 days for letter from debt company)

 

I have still got this debt listed against an address i moved out of 2 years ago and have not been on the electoral role at a rental for the past 2 years. I have now moved in with girlfriend and will eventually end up on the council tax here but address is over 50 miles away.

 

Due to these changes i'm not sure if i should just stop paying Citroen and wait to see if the debt company finds me; any advise would be helpful thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you should never move and not update ALL your creditors including your credit file..

 

you run the serious risk of a backdoor CCJ you'll know nothing about till you get a court bailiff at your door.

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

Can you tell us more about this debt please. Did you actually borrow the money from Citroen? Have you asked for a CCA – if not then you should do so.

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...