Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So they have had their five days plus their extra deadline and the only thing to come from Virgin is a deafening silence.  Next step I assume is to send the warrant letter- on MCOL I can just go ahead and issue the warrant there (which will be an extra £70) as they have neither paid the judgment nor provided a good explanation as to why it remains unpaid. Is it worth beginning another claim against them for noncompliance as they have still failed to fulfil their obligations by providing all the data?   Just to keep all bases covered I actually modified the last paragraph of the letter sent on 11/2  to include the second handset details so it stated 'Therefore if I do not receive full disclosure from you(including all notes and correspondence you have regarding telephone number [Second handset line]) by XXX date [original deadline +5 days] I will sue you in the County Court and without any further extensions and without any further notice.'  
    • Hey Bank Fodder - thanks for the response... The BVRLA are the governing body for vehicle rental and leasing. I do think you are right re: the lease company being responsible, but their argument - on the telephone only - they've never responded once in writing or replied to our emails - is that the vehicle is out of warranty. My response is that a modern car, that is only 5 years old, should not have a leaking window - especially when I can prove with photos that it wasn't bonded properly in the first place, and there is a ton of anecdotal evidence in Evoque forums of many owners having had the same faults - both with the leaking windscreen and the flywheel/clutch issue.   The fact that Lex have told the the BVRLA that the clutch failed due to driving style is infuriating - they cannot know that without having inspected the vehicle. But, when our repair centre did the clutch repair they found the flywheel had failed and shredded the clutch - clear parts failure, and at only 32k miles - not fit for purpose. Problem, is Lex are not listening or engaging with us. In total, for 3 months refund of payments, for when we had no use of the car, plus the clutch repair and leaking window repair, and the replacement car seat (plus any additional compensation we may be due) it comes to about £4850. In Scotland we would have to use something called a Simple Procedure - effectively the modern equivalent of the Small Claims Court. But I am not sure we will get anywhere with this either. So, I am looking for advice on how best to sort this out, and perhaps, the best way to word any correspondence/claim.  
    • That’s what I thought tbf Dx. Noticed it’s all just ‘ifs’ and ‘mays’ at the minute.    Will search just now cheers.
    • Letter done & sent, forgot I even had a cheque book!   In the meantime as I said I had 2 a/c's with BC, this one that owes £2600 and another that owes £2800. Both were subject to the same arrangement but only tis one has been transferred, called and asked them why and they do not know!   I'm thinking I am better off with Link as then, if they can prove the debts, I can look to negotiate a final settlement for both all in one or set up a payment plan for both all in one. Any thoughts please?   Also is there any relevance that one of them used to be with Egg?   Thanks again
    • If the car was due back to LEX at the beginning of October, and it had been at "a repair centre" since the end of September, why didn't LEX just collect it from the repair centre when it was due?  Then the clutch would have been their problem - as you say, a non-faulty clutch should not fail after 32K.   Or are you saying that you extended the lease after the clutch went?  (Surely not... ) Sorry but without a timeline and some clarity from you it's difficult to follow what has happened.   Why wait until mid-November to try to sort out?   Too late this time, but my understanding is that Range Rovers and Evoques have an appalling record for unreliability and are very expensive when they invariably go wrong.
  • 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

NPM PCN claimform - overstay Un-adopted Rd entrance to old St Edmunds Hosp Northampton - *** Claim Struck Out+Costs***


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 347 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

if the other peopel are aware that there are previous cases all they need to say is that thiers is the same as the other persuasive cases and the judges will agree. the problem is that not many people know about places like CAG and the past record of the parking co at a court so that is why i would have hoped the papers would have taken the story up

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 280
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

pop up on the MCOL website mentioned on the claimfor,   register as an individual  note the long gateway number given  then log in .  select respond to a claim and select the start A

back to the content of their Particulars of Claim.   they say the claim is for unauthorised parking - now this cant be, it has to be for monies due under a contract for parking or

The BPA and IPC are NOT regulators. They are clubs to which Private Parking Companies belong and pay for the running. They don't have bars to serve drinks, but by pulling the wool over the eyes o

I had hoped so too, especially as most local newspapers are currently running what seem to be topical private parking news stories. Maybe the Northampton Chronicle are friends with Mr Gearey the MD or they use NPM to manage their car park!

 

By the way NPM have not paid my costs yet, so it looks like that might be a long drawn out fight too! I have been advised what are my options, which will cost me money, but this will be added to the debt they owe and if they still don't pay up then this will affect their credit rating. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

there are options open to you depending on how much you are owed.

 

One thing is to go for an order for an oral examination by ther court.

This costs £60 and makes the director of a company stand in front of a judge and explain how he ( the company) stands financially and how it intends to pay its debts.

 

The silly thing about this is that you have to pay his train fare to get there if it is requested but his failure to attend can result in him being done for contempt of court and the company being compulsorily would up

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I was told that was one of my options, but I didn't know I had to pay his train fare.

 

His company is only 0.6 miles from the court, which would take him 13 minutes to walk, so he can forget me paying his train fare. 

 

I was told I could ask him to bring details of all their unpaid PCN's to court, which would be interesting.

if and when he comes to court will he have to pay the original costs plus the £60 unless he has a good excuse why he cannot do so?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes all your costs

  • Like 1

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

obviously he cant ask for his train fare and yes, I knew this before I posted but wanted to point out there are conditions to this method.

yes, he will have t pay the costs -plus ther 360 if he cant provide a lawful reason for not paying and as it is a court order for costs then there isnt a lawful excuse.

as for bringing all fo the unpaid PCN's to court you are past that as far as evidence and process goes but it may have been suggested that they may be considered to be geinune creditors so would prove he has assets he can call on.

he doesnt owe you enough to try bankruptcy so not worth your time asking

Now I would ahve thought this was newsworthy enough for the Chronic echo.

Sign up to lnkedin and similar and see if he is listed. Debt collection is not harassment

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...