Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I suggested consideration of bankruptcy some years ago. It was not well received.
    • That is a superb WS. However, I have a few tweaks to suggest. In (2) "indicating" not "indication". I think to be consistent with your numbering, in (6) the Beavis case should be EXHIBIT 2. Do you really need to include over 100 pages of Beavis?  I think that would be likely to annoy the judge.  Just try and find the bit where they decide it was not a penalty due to having an interest in limiting the time that vehicles can stay. I'll have a look myself for this bit later as it's highly likely to be in WSs from PPCs who think that that paragraph means all their charges are valid always on every occasion. After your current (7) add this.  It's always useful to refer to a judgment when making a legal point - 8.  In the case PCM vs Bull, Claim No. B4GF26K6, where the Defendant was issued parking tickets for parking on private roads with signage stating “No parking at any time”, District Judge Glen in his final statement mentioned that: “the notice was prohibitive and didn’t communicate any offer of parking and that landowners may have claim in trespass, but that was not under consideration”.   In (14) if my maths are right the CPR request should be "EXHIBIT 3".  it is missing from your list of exhibits. In (16) the two figures should be £100 and £170.  They are entitled to increase fro,m £60 to £100, they are not entitled to increase to £170.  To make it clear for the judge I would write - 16. The Claimant has artificially inflated their claim for a £100 invoice to £170. This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims. 17. The Claimant has also invented a second fictitious charge, for legal representative's costs, when they have no legal representative. You also need ot number your exhibits. The rest is excellent - well done.
    • Did you ever think of walking away? Become bankrupt and in 12 months it'll all be behind you. My feeling is that you may well get nothing from the sale of the property anyway. Going by the date this thread started it looks like eight years of arrears, lender's costs and receiver’s fees on top.
    • Just to clarify - I make use of evening legal clinics. It is not always possible to see a lawyer (they have limited time and days/week).  This means questions one has may never get answered or there's weeks between follow-ups.   To be really clear - I am representing myself; I am playing at being lawyer/ barrister - which means I take help wherever I can get it (and then research it thoroughly). Ae - a judge in a recent hearing pointed out the receiver is not part of my current proceedings - and suggested I have a separate claim v the receiver. Disclosure has presented damning evidence v the receiver  The receiver against whom I have a complaint is not part of the receiver governing body.   The receivership is in 2 names - a joint one.  My complaint is directed at whom I was told is the lead receiver.  The other named receiver IS a member of the governing body.  But he has now left the company.  And the lead receiver has retired - but is still a working consultant on my case.   All the evidence shows it was the 'lead' receiver who was doing all the  work/ the misbehaviour.   But if the appointment was 'joint' would I make a complaint against them both?    I am sure that wouldn't go down well with the other receiver who is at the beginning of his career. The law is very much against borrowers.   But the evidence against this receivership is crystal clear.   I just don't know how and to whom to complain.   The places I've tried so far don't offer much transparency       
  • 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 - Argos Card - defence was Argos T+Cs doesnt allow sell on? now waiting


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1882 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

Lowell took me to the county court my defence was that Argos terms and conditions did not allow them to do it due to item 14.1 below that as Lowell is not a financial services provider, Lowell also brought the debt at their own risk

Argos card from2007

14 Assignment

14.1. We may transfer to any person any or all of our rights and duties under this agreement (including our duty to lend to you).

This means that we can pass on our rights and duties to another financial services provider, such as a bank or other credit card provider, who may take over the running of your account.

We will tell you if we do this.

Your rights under this agreement will not be affected if we do so.

The new provider might then issue you with a different credit card design or even send you a different type of credit card - a Visa orMasterCard for example.

However, you always have the right to terminate this agreement (see Condition 10 above).

 

2018

 

Missing payments

If you fail to pay any amounts when due under this agreement, we will have the right to end this agreement as described in further

condition 7, and/or to take action to recover all outstanding amounts under this agreement, or to instruct a third party to take such

action on our behalf.

Missing payments could have severe consequences including making credit more difficult to obtain in the future. We may take legal

action against you if payments are not made. If that action is successful, we may apply to the courts to enforce that judgment.

 

7.2 If we end this agreement, your credit records may also be affected in a way that makes it more difficult or expensive to get

further credit. After we have sent you the notices which the law requires, we may start legal proceedings against you to recover

what you owe to us or will ask your executor or trustees to pay the full amount you owe us. If we obtain a judgment, we may

apply to the Court to enforce payment of it, for example, out of your income or by securing a charging order against your home.

We may also sell the debt and the buyer may follow a similar process to recover the debt.

 

14 Assignment

14.1 You may not transfer any of your rights or duties under this agreement.

14.2 We may transfer any or all of our rights or duties under this agreement to another organisation (including organisations

outside the European Economic Area). If we do this, we may let them have any information about you and any additional

cardholder. We may also arrange for any other person to carry out our rights or duties under this agreement. Your rights under

this agreement and your legal rights (including under the Consumer Credit Act 1974) will not be affected.

 

And the best one of all Data Protection

We (Home Retail Group Card Services Limited) are owned by Sainsbury’s Bank and both companies are part of the Sainsbury’s

Group, which also includes Argos and Nectar. We will keep any information you have provided to us confidential but you agree

that we may share this information with the Sainsbury’s Group.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello

you posted on an old thread

so I've made you your own one.

 

what question are you actually asking please??

 

tell us more ?

 

have they got judgement or this claim is on going?

 

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

you should now be able to respond charliot.

 

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

  • 1 month later...

Lowell by their own admission is a specialist debt purchaser.

Argos Card services sold my debt to Lowell and after all the letters the one from the county court arrived

I disputed it.

With the information above as Lowell could not be the legal owner of the debt as it was against the agreement terms and conditions and they brought it at their own risk.

Lowell never took it any further.

Last week Lowell went through the county court with my wife's card from 2007 sold to Lowell in 2017.

The same dispute was sent back to the court with the additions that Argos also breached their own data policy by passing data to a 3rd party outside of the Sainsburys group.

The defence acknowledgement came back from the court and now waiting to see what they do next 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Urm..sounds like you are following and using Freeman of the land twaddle here..sadly always on to a loser using that.

 

Did you cca/CPR them?

What date is your defence recorded as registered on MCOL?

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Lowell claimform - Argos Card - defence was Argos T+Cs doesnt allow sell on? now waiting

thread title updated

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

 

The date on MCOL is 25/02/19

I had to look up freeman of the land and no nothing of the sort.

What started it 2 years ago with my case was on the court form was the word Assigned not brought or purchased.

I had a run in with a firm that the SRA shut down and they told me I should have read the terms and conditions so with Argos I did.

When Lowell contacted my wife with the same thing I advised them 2 years ago they did the same with me and after the defence, I used the same would be the same defence used again.

but they still sent it to the county court  Argos actually changed their terms and conditions after that 

Charlie

Link to post
Share on other sites

assigned means the same thing.

so lowells have 28 days from 25th feb to do 'something'

did you send them CCA/CPR?

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

Pers I'd send them both then

Cca request

CPR 31:14 request

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...