Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY 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.
  • 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

Lowell claimform - Vodafone mobile debt


roland60
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1783 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

  • 4 months later...

Did you submit your directions questionnaire ?

How do you know the hearing date ?

 

Andy

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

so hearsay evidence.
all information is from the claimants cms systen NOT from the vodaphone.

5. b. you have not said that the agreement existed between voda and yourself.

12...oh how nice of them..but there is no interest on mobile account as they are not regulated credit and there is no remit, lawfully, for anyone, let alone a debt buyer to add any penalty charges.

17 b. the defendant has not admitted entering into the agreement subject to this speculative claim.

18.j thats not what OFCOM said.
early termination charges may well be 'common place' and standard in T&C's but that doesnt mean they are enforceable nor unlawful.

k the defendant did not benefit from the service. the resultant charges till end of contract were added after the phone was was disconnected by vodafone.

 

we need all the exhibits to please

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

Hi Andy, yes i submitted the directions questionnaire, the hearing date was mentioned by Lowell in their cover letter, I've not received anything from the court regarding any hearing date.....

 

i will call court tomorrow to check.

 

Thanks DX for this info, please see attached all Exhibits as requested.

Exhibit_Docs.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

They must of had their N157 Notice of Allocation...have you prepared your statement and disclosures ?

 

Not much time now till 14th June and parties normally file submit and exchange statements and evidence 7/14 days pre hearing ?

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

Best get on to your local CC in the morning and advise them you have not had your Notice of Allocation...I would start on your statement now because  Lowell normally serve very late (you got theirs Friday 31st)

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

Hi, I spoke with the court, apparently they had sent me the N157 Notice of Allocation back in April, which i have never received.....

 

I was also informed that they paid their trial fee on the last day before the claim would have been struck out, 17th May 2019.

 

The hearing is 14th June 2019 at 10am.

 

I have not done a witness statement before so would really appreciate help with putting one together especially with the time constraints, thanks.

 

Roland

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will have to look at other similar threads and make a start...I have intermittent internet access until Thurs evening.

 

Andy

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

Hi Andy

 

I have attempted to put a Witness Statement together after reading similar threads,  if you could please check it over and advise of changes. Thanks Roland

 

 

IN THE COUNTY COURT

 

LOWELL PORTFOLIO I LTD
(VODAFONE)

-and-
ROLAND
(DEFENDANT)
_____________________________

WITNESS STATEMENT OF ROLAND

_____________________________

 

 

INTRODUCTION 

 

1. I, Roland, the Defendant in this case, make this statement in support of my defence against the Claimant, Lowell Portfolio I Ltd.  The matters set out below are within my own knowledge, except where I indicate to the contrary. 

 

THE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT 

 

2. The Claimant states in Paragraph 5.a-d inclusive that they do not have the original alleged Agreement on which this claim is based on and have failed to provide such a copy including the Default Notice despite a CPR 31.14 request made 8thJanuary 2019 (Exibit A).

The Defendant claims that his CPR 31.14 request, of which the Claimant has confirmed receipt, for the disclosure and production of a verified and legible copy of the Agreement has not been adhered to, by way of the fact that a Service Contract is entirely missing from the Claimant’s evidence. 

 

3. Under Paragraph 9 of the Claimant’s Witness Statement, the Claimant states that the debt “was subject to a legal assignment dated 28 February 2018 pursuant to Section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 from the Assignor to the Claimant”. The Defendant argues that the cause of action has absolutely nothing to do with assignment nor the Law of Property Act 1925.  

 

4. The Claimant states in Paragraph 10 and continued in Paragragh 17f that they continued to attempt to make contact with the Defendant and have provided ‘sample’ evidence of these letters under their Exhibit “SR3”, which they deem as meeting the requirements of Pre-Action Protocol. The Defendant categorically states that no letters have ever been received from the Claimant, with the first contact from them being this claim. Therefore, the Claimant is to put strict proof to their claim by providing proof of delivery for these letters. If the Claimant cannot provide this, then the Defendant invites the Court to strike the claim out based upon a failure to adhere to Paragraph 6 of the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Practice and Protocols. 

 

5. Paragraph 12 states the Claimant did not apply any additional interest or charges on the account, lawfully there is no interest on mobile accounts as it is not regulated credit and there is no remit to add any penalty charges.

 

6. The defendant has not admitted entering into the agreement subject to this speculative claimas stated by the Claimant in Paragraph 17b.

 

7. The Claimant admits in Paragraph 17d that they are unable to obtain a copy of the agreement, they have also failed to provide a Default Notice. The Defendant again invites the Court to strike the claim out, on this basis. 

 

8. The Claimant refers to a draft Tomlin Order in Paragraph 17e and is also mentioned in their Exhibit “SR7” but no such order is attached.

 

9. The Claimants states in Paragraph 17j that early termination charges will become payable should an agreement end early, however, OFCOM have stated that early termination charges may well be 'common place' and standard in Terms & Condition's but that doesn’t mean they are enforceable nor unlawful.The alleged amount claimed includes an early termination charge amounting to the entire balance of the remaining contract. OFCOM guidance states that any Early Termination Charge, which is made up of the entire balance of the remaining contract, is unlikely to be fair as it fails to take into account the fact that the provider no longer has to provide and pay for their service. 

 

10. Paragraph 17k the defendant did not benefit from the service. the resultant charges till end of contract were added after the phone was disconnected byVodafone. 

 

11. By the reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief and invite the Court to strike out the claim.

 

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. 

Signed: Roland
Dated: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes...well as long as you have covered all the main points of their statement and offered alternative argument..there is no set guidance on drafting a statement.....its your account in your words to support your defence and to point out the errors that the claimant are trying to conceal/mislead  the court.

 

One point.... there is no requirement to issue a default notice on mobile agreements...its not regulated by the CCA1974.Concentrate on the ETCs...you did not benefit as you state and it was charged after termination of the agreement...or in other words its a penalty charge for leaving early.

 

Andy

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

Hi Andy

 

Thank you for getting back to me and thank you for the pointers.

 

I have amended my WS, could you please check it over and please let me know if I have covered my defence and the Claimants WS, many thanks.

 

Roland

 

IN THE County Court AT …..CLAIM NO: BETWEEN: 

 


LOWELL PORTFOLIO I LTD
(VODAFONE)

-and-
ROLAND
(DEFENDANT)
_____________________________

WITNESS STATEMENT OF ROLAND

_____________________________

 

 

INTRODUCTION 

 

1. I, Roland, the Defendant in this case, make this statement in support of my defence against the Claimant, Lowell Portfolio I Ltd.  The matters set out below are within my own knowledge, except where I indicate to the contrary. 

 

THE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT 

 

2. The Claimant states in Paragraph 5.a-d inclusive that they do not have the original alleged Agreement on which this claim is based on and have failed to provide such a copy despite a CPR 31.14 request made 8thJanuary 2019 (Exibit A). The Defendant claims that his CPR 31.14 request, of which the Claimant has confirmed receipt, for the disclosure and production of a verified and legible copy of the Agreement has not been adhered to, by way of the fact that a Service Contract is entirely missing from the Claimant’s evidence. 

 

3. Under Paragraph 9 of the Claimant’s Witness Statement, the Claimant states that the debt “was subject to a legal assignment dated 28 February 2018 pursuant to Section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 from the Assignor to the Claimant”. The Defendant argues that the cause of action has absolutely nothing to do with assignment nor the Law of Property Act 1925.  

 

4. The Claimant states in Paragraph 10 and continued in Paragraph 17.f that they continued to attempt to make contact with the Defendant and have provided ‘sample’ evidence of these letters under their Exhibit “SR3”, which they deem as meeting the requirements of Pre-Action Protocol. The Defendant categorically states that no letters have ever been received from the Claimant, with the first contact from them being this claim. Therefore, the Claimant is to put strict proof to their claim by providing proof of delivery for these letters. If the Claimant cannot provide this, then the Defendant invites the Court to strike the claim out based upon a failure to adhere to Paragraph 6 of the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Practice and Protocols. 

 

5. Paragraph 12 states the Claimant did not apply any additional interest or charges on the account, lawfully there is no interest on mobile accounts as it is not regulated credit and there is no remit to add any penalty charges.

 

6. The defendant has not admitted entering into the agreement subject to this speculative claim as stated by the Claimant in Paragraph 17b.

 

7. The Claimant admits in Paragraph 17d that they are unable to obtain a copy of the agreement.The Defendant again invites the Court to strike the claim out, on this basis. 

 

8. The Claimant refers to a draft Tomlin Order in Paragraph 17e and is also mentioned in their Exhibit “SR7” but no such order is attached.

 

9. The Claimants states in Paragraph 17j that early termination charges will become payable should an agreement end early, however, OFCOM have stated that early termination charges may well be 'common place' and standard in Terms & Condition's but that doesn’t mean they are enforceable nor unlawful. The alleged amount claimed includes an early termination charge amounting to the entire balance of the remaining contract. OFCOM guidance states that any Early Termination Charge, which is made up of the entire balance of the remaining contract, is unlikely to be fair as it fails to take into account the fact that the provider no longer has to provide and pay for their service. 

 

10. Paragraph 17k the defendant did not benefit from the service. The resultant charges till end of contract were added after the phone was disconnected byVodafone. 

 

11. By the reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief and invite the Court to strike out the claim.

 

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. 

Signed: Roland
Dated: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 should surely say lawful?

 

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

Hi

 

My court hearing is this Friday morning, this is my first time and I’m really nervous, I would really appreciate any advice and what should I be aware of regarding my case.

 

many thanks

Roland

Link to post
Share on other sites

its no big deal

more like a meeting around a table.

speak only when spoken too.

but don't let the opposition railroad things.

stand your ground

dx

 

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

Enjoy...nothing to worry about...stick to the facts...you cannot be charged for a service you have no access to or can use....drum home your point 9.

 

See if the court accepts that its legalised theft.

 

Best of luck.

 

Andy

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

Thanks DX and Andy

 

Yes I will emphasise Para 9 regarding the termination charges etc, and Para 2 regarding no agreement & T&Cs copy being provided.

 

If things don't seem to be going my way, can i mention that there is a big chunk of charges in the claimed amount and the fact that Vodafone were irresponsible as a company to let this spiral and go on for so long even though they were aware of my financial hardship and never gave me the option to reduce the tariff plan etc. 

 

Thanks 

Roland 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

I had my day in court today, Lowell won the case, I was given a judgement for £1296.42

 

I managed to remove the termination fee £90 and the 8% interest was reduced from £80 to £20, the claimants cost for attending were also not allowed. A further £42.44 was reduced as they had stated in their WS that the mobile was dissconected 12th March 2017 but they provided statements with charges til 12th July 2017. 

 

The fixed fees - court fee, hearing fee and commencement costs £265 was added to the account, 

 

The Judge was quite pleasant and tried to be fair to both parties, but he didn't seem knowledgeable in this area as he left the Ofcom and Property Law for me and Claimant to explain, obviously the Claimant's solicitor was more experienced.  I tried to tackle the fact that there was no agreement and T&Cs which the judge was quite surprised about at first but then when the Claimant went on about it not being a credit agreement the judge went along with it.

 

The claimant stated at the end that they wanted attendance costs for for 'unreasonable conduct' by defending the claim.  The judge said it wasn't unreasonable conduct as i had the right to defend a claim that was made and rejected his fee. 

 

The judge has left it open for me to contact the claimant to agree on an instalment plan to suit my financial standing as i have no extra penny to spare, and that's not me exaggerating, I'm on working tax credits as i explained to the judge. 

 

Reflecting back on this I wish I had taken their offer of 50% reduction that was offered sometime last year....

 

Thank you for the help and advice.

 

Roland 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds like judge lottery to me

something you can never protect again..

 

dx

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...