Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • LL and HA cannot go around willy nilly just changing locks.   The Son needs to find out did the HA have a valid possession order to change the the locks, ask the HA or contact the county court.   1977 The mum and son been living there, the Son may have had Succession rights  to mums tenancy, which the HA sounds like they taken away unlawfully   https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/council_housing_association/can_you_inherit_a_housing_association_tenancy   If there was No valid possession order, Son may be able to sue HA for illegal eviction, this would need to checked with  CAB, Shelter or Solicitor  1st
    • Hi guys, Wondering if you can help me. I received a claim form from County Court Business Centre, Northampton for Private parking fine I received back in June 2018. I wasn’t wise in responding to any letters to date hoping it will go away which is my bad hence landed on this site for help.   Here are all the info you may need:   Name of the Claimant – UK Car Park Management Claimants Solicitors – Gladstones Date of issue – 10/06/2019 (Deadlines - 29th June for AOS & 12th July for Defence) Particulars of claim: ‘The driver of the vehicle with registration xxxxxx (the vehicle) parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the contract) at 93-101 GREENFIELD ROAD – LONDON GREATER LONDON E1 1EJ, on 11/06/2018 thus incurring the parking charge (the PCN). The driver of the vehicle agreed to pay the PCN with in 28 days of issue yet failed to do so. The claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the defendant as the driver/keeper of the vehicle. Despite demands being made, the defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £100 for the PCN, £60 contractual costs pursuant to the Contract and PCN terms and conditions, together with statutory interest of £11.69 pursuant to s69 of the County Court Act 1984 at 8.00% per annum, continuing at £0.4 per day.’ Value of the claim - £246.69 The claim has been issued by the Private parking Company Date of the infringement - 11/06/2018 Date on the NTK – 14/06/2018 They took two pictures of my car and printed them in the letter  As mentioned, I did not respond to any communications. I received, NTK, Formal Demand letter in July 18, two DRP letters on Aug 17 and one in Sept 18, and three Gladstones letter in Oct 18 and then ‘letter before claim’ in March and April 19.   I will do the AOS asap and send a SAR to UK CPM.   Please help me with a writing a defence, I have already read through many, but they are a bit overwhelming as I am not sure what my grounds are. I am sure the driver did not agree to pay anything as they have stated in the particulars of the claim. This was a Camera PCN so whoever was driving the car would have not known that they received a PCN. Also, I have visited the car park to see the signage and they are appalling. They are affixed high, with tiny fonts and the signages are blocked with bins and other materials so you can’t get close to it. There are no signage at the entrance of the car park.   I look forward to your response.   Thank you
    • Hi dx,   Latest info is:   "The court has received an Incidental Application from the respondant". That will be my letter from Cabot advising that they cannot legally proceed with the case. "The Sheriff has received an objection from the claiment to the Incidental Application".   I have now received notification that the sheriff has ordered the case to be restarted.    
    • you should have been reading up on charges reclaiming in the down time.     CISHEET enter every charge on the date it was levied put their avg int rate in D15.      
    • get your finger out. you must reply to the letter of claim as stated in every PAP letter thread here regarding drydens/erudio and old SLC stuff.   go ring slc and ask the date of your last deferment.   if they refuse, quote them the two acts prevention of fraud and  data protection act. that they MUST hold data for 6yrs under both and if they wont give the data you will be immediately phoning the ICO and raising a serious complaint against them. now if they don't hold the data, as its over 6yrs old i'd say its safe to say the debt is statute barred reply to drydens PAP as per the other threads here send our SB letter DO NOT USE THEIR REPLY PACK.   use our in our PAP thread.
  • Our picks

Sign in to follow this  
NewsBot

Seven out of 10 water firms fail test

Recommended Posts

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...