Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. 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 debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the 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. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
    • Read these 6 things you can do to be empathetic to other people’s views and perspectives.View the full article
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Cpm/BW windscreen pcns - BW PAP LOC Now Claimform - (residential car park) The citrus Building, Maderia road, Bournemouth ***Claim Dismissed with Costs** now another PAPLOC for another same place ticket ***Dismissed again with costs***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 504 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

  • 2 weeks later...

Letters have gone off a while ago to BW Legal CC'ing CPM and i have proof of postage in the ever growing file of paperwork.

Unfortunately i am yet to receive a reply which is a shame because i'm quite enjoying wasting their time now!

 

I have however today had a laugh.

Remember the image i posted a few posts back highlighting the area they "manage"?

Well today guess what i have seen?

 

One of the directors parking blocking the entrance to the flats whilst he walks around ticketing against their own terms and conditions!

I know it seems a little petty but is this something i can use against them if they decide to take this to court?

 

Im going to try and get more evidence of their poor management and take it to the local paper i think.

I know this wont get me anywhere with my case with them (if they even decide to create one) but i just want to make life as hard as possible for them

 

Nice thing is, one of their tickets evidence includes an image of my vehicle with guess what?

This car parked in the background.

I do also have closer images with the reg number in

 

Sorry, seems a little petty but ive got the bit between my teeth with this now!

 

One of the directors parking blocking the entrance to the flats whilst he walks around ticketing against their own terms and conditions!.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Up to them. Sometimes they reply fast with a bunch of rubbish. Others they dont reply at all for months. Or longer.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

or not at all

there nothing that says they must.

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

they often just slink away back under their stone once they have been called out as the bandits and shysters they are so you may never hear from them again. BWL just do as they are paid to do so they wont write unless someone pays them to and ther parking co isnt going to spend another £15 on a letter they know will earn them nothing

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

you keep all of your paperwork safe for 6 years though.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras, typos
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

So one of these tickets they issued has been progressing as expected and now BW legal are chasing me. I have noticed though that a few days ago they have carried out a credit check on me. Is there any reason behind this and are they even allowed to do this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes they are they have a CCL

its address checking 

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

all solicitors are so honest they automatically get a CCL regardless that the actual purpose of the search is outside the terms they are aloowed to search under.

expect a letter from them and be prepared to have to respond. You can then be rude to them about this misuse of their position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have been calling me daily and not getting very far

 

”can you confirm your address”

 

”it’s the same as the last one you sent your spam letters to”

 

”so you won’t confirm it”

 

”you have it”

 

”ok we will send another letter”

 

 

more money wasting i can do for them the better!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, love it. Reminds me of when I get the usual dodgy phone calls to the office "Hello ma'am I'm calling from your electricity supplier, can I speak to the business owner" I have 2 favourites.

1) "We haven't got electricity"

     "You must have electricity, I'm speaking to you on the telephone"

      "No, this is a tin can on the end of a piece of string"

2) "I can't put you through to her, she's deaf"

     "Can you pass a message to her?"

     "No I'm sorry, I'm deaf too"

     "But I'm speaking to you!"

     "Pardon?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Name of the Claimant ? Countrywide Parking Management Limited

claimants Solicitors: BW Legal

 

Date of issue –  28th August 2019

 

What is the claim for – 

 

1.The claimants claim is for the sum of £667.19 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of Parking charge notices (PCN) for parking contraventions which occurred between and on private land managed and operated by the claimant, where the defendant was responsible for a vehicle registration mark, seen breaching the terms and conditions in operation at the car park/private land.

 

2.The defendant was allowed 28 days from the PCN issue date to pay each PCN but failed to do so.

Despite demand having been made, the defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. 

 

3.The claim also includes statutory interest pursuant to section 69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum (a daily rate of 0.11 from 20/12/2018 to 27/08/2019 being an amount of £27.19. The claimant also claims £ contractual costs as set out in the terms and conditions. 

 

What is the value of the claim? £667.19, 

 

Has the claim been issued by the Private parking Company or was the PCN assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim ? countrywide parking management

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware BW legal had the account when they started chasing me for the charges.

 

…………………….

 

Throughout a period of about 6 months, i have received several parking charges in the car park at home, some of which i have discussed in threads on this forum.

 

Ultimately the parking company have been very unprofessional.

The space is large enough for 2 cars end to end and their reason for issuing a charge every time has been "double parked".

 

As usual, they have stated that this is against their terms and conditions sign posted and i have made it clear to them every time (including pictures) that their signage does not state this is not allowed (they have now changed it however this is after the date of the last charge issued).

 

Today i have come home to a county court claim form and would like advice on how to proceed bearing in mind i am a tenant in this building and the parking company are employed by the management association

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's time to get reading up on the court process. Lots of threads here cover this - but come back and check that your understanding is correct.

 

The Claimant will be willing to put a bit of effort into this considering there's £700 at stake, but they've got a number of weakness that they'll do well to contend with if you expose them correctly. It's all been mentioned on your original thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Cpm windscreen pcns - BW PAP LOC Now Claimform - (residential car park) The citrus Building, Maderia road, Bournemouth

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.
.
 register as an individual
 note the long gateway number given
 then log in
.
 select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.
.
 then using the details required from the claimform
.
 defend all
 leave jurisdiction unticked.
 click thru to the end
 confirm and exit MCOL.

 get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant]

no need to sign anything
.
you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.
you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count]

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

Thanks guys. 

Im very curious as to how they have come up with the £667.19 owed as all the charges have been £160 each so would the CPR be the time to ask for that detailed breakdown or would I wait until further down the line for that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, they haven't said how many tickets but they have added interest.

 

3.The claim also includes statutory interest pursuant to section 69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum (a daily rate of 0.11 from 20/12/2018 to 27/08/2019 being an amount of £27.19. The claimant also claims £ contractual costs as set out in the terms and conditions. 

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...