Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5  
    • stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return   dx  
    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  Regards  Andy    
    • Hi   Just read your thread and looked at the Docs posted in your PDF.   1. from AST to rent a Car Parking space you need to have signed a Car Parking Agreement for a Space and for visitors you should have asked permission for another space in advance with a fee to pay. (i also assume renting a parking space would be at a cost)   2. You have no signed Car Parking Agreement nor visitor space agreement.   Did you not fully read that AST before you signed it and pick up what is stated about parking and ask them about this Car Parking Agreement and if you need one to park in the car park?   You could formally complain to them about what was verbally said to you but unless you have evidence of this it may be hard to prove.   You should also contact them and ask how you go about renting a Car Parking space/costs and about the Car Parking Agreement also what the process is for a visitor car parking space/costs.   You need to be aware that they could class you and your visitor as illegally parking in there car park without consent nor a signed car parking agreement which they could use as a Breach of your Tenancy Agreement so you need to be careful in how you are approaching this and where you are parking.   Just for info on checking Manchester Life website they have numerous buildings/apartments/car parks but you may be in a building where some of the apartments are leasehold and as part of there leasehold they may have purchased a car parking space in that building. (so how do you know you are not parking in a space that someone in the building has legally purchased?)
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 301 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

I ordered a car part from a company called Autodoc.co.uk

 

The part was posted on the 19th of September and was due to be delivered on the 24th of September. As I was going to be out at work I arranged to have the parcel delivered to a local parcel shop so I could collect it later. I used the DPD app on my phone to do this.

 

On the morning of 24th of September I received a notification on my phone from the DPD app that stated I had changed my delivery date to the 30th of September. I used the live chat on the app to ask why this had changed and I was told that a shift manager at the local depot had changed it and that I would get a call back within the hour. I never received a call back. When I got home I telephoned DPD using the app on my phone and was told again I would receive a call back. Again this never happened.

 

I called them back again and explained that I needed the parcel urgently as it was a part for my car. The rep on the phone said he would make sure that my parcel would be delivered the following day to the parcel shop as requested.

 

The next morning I received a notification from the DPD app stating that they could not deliver to the parcel shop as the parcel was oversized. I used the app to rearrange delivery to a friends address for the following day. When I got home DPD had left a card stating they had tried to deliver to my house. This was left 10 minutes before I arrived home.

 

On the morning of Wednesday the 26th of September I contacted DPD on the live chat on the app to ask if they would be able to give me a delivery time. They were unable to do this.

 

My friend waited all day and no parcel arrived. I contacted DPD using the live chat and they then said that it may have been lost.

 

The next morning I telephoned DPD using the app and they admitted that they lost the parcel. I asked them to send me an email confirming this which they did.

 

I have also been in contact with the sender Autodoc who turn out to be based in Germany. They refused to believe that the parcel was lost, even though I forwarded the email from DPD, they told me I had to got to the local depot to collect it.

 

I contacted the bank as Autodoc refused to refund me, Visa have refunded me but told me that Autodoc can refute my claim.

 

Autodoc are being extremely difficult and are telling me to contact DPD, on the other hand DPD are referring me back to Autodoc.

 

In the meantime I have had to order the part from another company who delivered it the following day. My car was off the road longer due to Autodoc and DPD. I would like compensation for the delay.

 

Can anyone give me any help on what I can do?


:cool::cool: Blondmusic :cool::cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a lot you can do I'm afraid. Your contract was with Autodoc, and it is for them to make a claim against DPD. You have already done the right thing in getting Visa to do a refund, but I doubt very much that you'd get anything more in the way of compensation.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

Quote
No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not a lot you can do I'm afraid. Your contract was with Autodoc, and it is for them to make a claim against DPD. You have already done the right thing in getting Visa to do a refund, but I doubt very much that you'd get anything more in the way of compensation.

 

this may not be correct. You may be able to use the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act which confers upon you all the rights that the original contracting party has.

 

This would allow you to sue DPD as a third party. However, it is possible to contract out of the Act and so you need to see the DPD terms and conditions see whether or not they have excluded third-party rights.

 

If that is case and the only other thing you can do would be to sue the supplier and you could do this by using the European small claims process which basically means that you issue the proceedings here. The judgement and then have it transferred to Germany for enforcement. I have no first hand or even second hand experience of this and if you tried it then we will be very interested if you will keep us informed as to how it works. However, try the third parties act first. Let us know.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...