Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The case against the US-based ride-hailing giant is being brought on behalf of over 10,800 drivers.View the full article
    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
  • 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

Lowell Claim form - RBS Credit Card ***Claim Dismissed***


VitSea
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1965 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

needs work.

 

The agreement provided is nothing more than an illegible computer print which is missing several pages of key terms and conditions.

 

The statements again, look to be poor quality print outs and fail to show any agreement or anything valid that shows there was an agreement in the first place.

 

 

and default notice under section 87etc..explain why its important

 

t&c's ..expand on why they are incomplete..they mention 18.2 etc..these are not provided

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

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

WS in not due to be sent until/by Monday week 8th oct..

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

2nd draft, not 100% sure on amendments but here it is:

 

Background

 

1. I am the defendant and state that the facts contained in this statement are true to the best of my knowledge.

 

2. There are several documents attached with this statement. (paginated)

 

3. It is my understanding the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct, disputed or bad debts, which are bought in masses as portfolios at a much-reduced cost of the amount claimed….10p to 15p in the pound and which are already written off as capital loss and claimed against taxable income by the original creditor. The claimant then issues claims on masses with little or no evidence or documentation as a ‘fishing exercise’ claiming the full amount of alleged debt to maximise profit.

 

4. 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 debt (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including 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.

 

5. On xxxxxxx I made a written CPR 31:14 request to the Claimants solicitors, Lowell Solicitors of PO Box 1419 Northampton NN2 1BU requesting that the Claimant/And Claimants Solicitors provide copies of all documents mentioned in the statement of case. Exhibit 1

 

A copy of the original agreement

A copy of the Default Notice/termination notice

A copy of the Notice of Assignment showing the claimants legal right to act.

 

6. Having made the claim, the above date should have been immediately and fully available from the claimant and as per the above formal requests duly sent to the defendant to allow a swift conclusion.

 

Disclosures

 

7. The claimant did not fully respond to my requests made on xxxxxx and has not provided all the documentation that was requested on the court order. Exhibit 2

 

8. The agreement provided is nothing more than an illegible computer print which is missing several pages of prescribed terms and conditions including 18.2 which relates to the transfer of the rights of the agreement, without which casts doubt over the authenticity and enforceability of the claim.

 

9. The claimant has also failed to supply a Default Notice as laid out in Section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Section 87 makes it clear that a Default Notice must be served before a creditor can seek to terminate the agreement or demand repayment of sums due to a breach of the agreement, therefore without a valid Default Notice; I suggest the claimant’s case falls flat and cannot proceed. To do so would clearly be contrary to the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

10. The claimant has yet to supply me with a Notice of Assignment.

 

Conclusion

 

11. The claimant has failed to show a valid agreement showing that the defendant owes any money to the claimant/assignor. The claimant has failed to comply with my formal requests on the xxxxxxx. I can only presume that the claimant does not have the legally required original agreement with terms and conditions, Notice of Assignment or Default Notice and has merely tried to obtain an undefended default judgement.

 

13. Notwithstanding the above the claimant remains in breach of the 12 day response period under Section 78.6, therefore the claimant is unable to request any relief until such time they can comply.

 

14. It is therefore averred that there is no outstanding balance nor as the claimant been able to produce any documentation to prove otherwise and I therefore respectfully request that the court dismiss this claim and award costs it feel fit in defending this matter.

 

Exhibit 1 : Copy of defendants CPR 31:14 request dated xxxxxx

Exhibit 2 : Copy of claimant’s response to CPR 31:14 request dated xxxxxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your happy with the contents...thats all that matters and it particularises and supports your defence.

 

Try to hang on until the very last and see if they serve you their copy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

you are a LiP [litigant in person]

certain leeway is given as long as its not say a week behind when the court got theirs

just make sure the court get their one on time

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

what they are claiming nothing more

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

yep cant get blood out of a stone

and if its forthwith or set at a too higher sum monthly you simply vary it with an N245.

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

  • 2 weeks later...

WS from Lowlife attached.

I have not included their evidence DH2 which is pages of statements

DH3 is a fake letter. I received a very similar letter but the dates are different. This letter refers to Lloyds whereas the letter thay sent me only mentions BOS.

I was never in receipt of DH4, I believe this to also be a forgery.

 

How does this affect my hearing?

Document001.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

you were due that on the 10th?

its now the 16th!

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 where is the default notice and where is the rest of the T&c's e'e 18.2 and 3?

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

then bar sending a clearer copy of the agreement and the NOA, the rest is meaningless really trying to divert attention away from the fact they don't have/cant prove a DN was sent and that it was correct.

and that they don't hold all the T&C's

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

What about their Notice of assignment (DH3)?

As this has completely different dates and the letter is laid out differently to the one they actually sent me, then surely this can be classed as a forgery?

Link to post
Share on other sites

just noticed you name on the unrotated page

I've hidden you upload

 

well there are certainly slight differences with the dates and layouts, I wouldn't use the word forgery in court no, more like copy and paste.

but it adds to the fact that they have in all honesty got little to back up their claim and does bring into question how reliable the rest of the documents they have produce support the signed agreement, which I think is the only bit of untouched truth in the whole bundle that's at all relevant to their claim.

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

what I will also say is this all points to your use of that stupid Freeman of the land site twaddle.

if you'd not sent that, you wouldn't be here now in this position.

 

as soon as they see those letters they know a mug knows little about what they are talking about and can see an easy win coming with little effort upon their part.

thankfully you came to cag and got the correct info upon how to deal with things.

next time don't use FMoTl twaddle!!

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

An extremely good one!!

 

No dn alone has been fatal in numerous cases here already

and you've more amiss than that..

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

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...