Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Acenden Solicitors want hearing adjournment


flower2
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1711 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

Rooftop Mortgages have been around for a long time - they're probably administered by the same lot as SPML.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well been back to court.

 

The good news is we still have our home, thank god.

 

The court has left the charges up to the FOS to sort. However the warrant has been set aside & the SPO is to continue.

 

It has now been left if either of us want to go back to court we can.

 

The other bit of Good News is THERE IS NO COSTS added the provision is that if it ever goes back to court then they can apply. That won't go down too well.

 

So a bit of result & just goes to prove that fighting can save your home.

 

A big Thank You to everyone for the help given over the past few months, I couldn't have done it without your help, especially Ellen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The court has left the charges up to the FOS to sort.

 

Good luck with that but in my case the FOS said charges are fair as the bank had given them an estimate of costs (£35). They wouldn't ask for an actual breakdown of each charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Well all seem to have calmed down until I recently received a letter from Southern Pacific Mortgages solicitors quoting the following:

 

"at the above mentioned hearing the judge ordered the costs be reserved. We now write to inform you that these costs will be added to your mortgage account, should the court order that these costs not be added to the security at a later stage, these will be removed" they do not tell me how much they are adding.

 

The court order states the costs to be reserved.

 

I clearly remember from the hearing when I asked about costs the judge asked SPML's representative what the costs would be & his reply was " my cost is £75 per hour but not sure how much SPML charge, the judge replied I can not award you any costs if we don't know how much.

 

Surely they can not apply the costs without going back to court.

 

I have contacted the court who told me I need to go back to SPML, and that the judges hand written notes have been destroyed.

 

Any help please, don't know where to go now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Received a response to my statement, very curious it says our clients: Rooftop Mortgages Limited }}} Southern Pacifice Mortgages Limited.

 

Can anyone enlighten me, have SPML been taken over?

Rooftops have not been taking on new mortgages for a long time, in fact I have just found out that they have sold our Mortgage in 2007 to Farringdon Mortgages No1 PLC - something which they have failed to tell us. Yet our Land Registry shows Rooftop as the owner of the mortgage.

 

I am slowly opening a can of worms and it appears that all these companies are intertwined somehow and the Crown Mortgages has also cropped up in my travels.

 

If anyone needs any help with Rooftop or advice please PM me especially if you have been either been threatened or been repossessed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Hi

 

Has anyone ever managed to get a detailed breakdown of what the £115 Litigation Management Fee or the £95 Late Stage Management Fee involves.

 

I have asked on several occasions but they always seem to avoid quoting that Eurosail-uk fees are regularly reviewed to ensure they are not unfair or excessive. I disagree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Flower

 

I would reply saying that even though they are saying that they review their fees this is not what you are asking for. Re-state that you want a full breakdown of what the fees involve.

 

Hope this helps

 

jasperpad

Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently also asked to change my payment date from the 1st to the 25th & the reply I got was

 

the latest we are able to agree for your payment is the 21st monthly. Payments made on 25th would be considered an advance payment

 

any comments on the above statement please

Link to post
Share on other sites

I threatened them with court and they "decided" to "allow me to make my payments on the last day of the month with no suggestion of it being an advance payment! Strange that!

 

jasperpad

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi I have recently paid for a SAR to London Personal Loans & received some but not all info back from Lightfoots Solicitors, who are acting on behalf of Matlock London.

 

The cheque has been cashed, but they are telling Matlock London ( t/a London Personal Loans) sold out to SPML on 2nd May 2006 and they are telling me if I require further info after the 2nd May 2006 I need to contact SPML via Acenden (this loan was repaid in full on the 1st July 2006). My question is do I have to pay another £10 for 2 months info and wait another 40 days?

 

Seems strange the solicitors are the same as SMPL solicitors and there is also no letter to notify me of the change in ownership in my SAR, am I being conned?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Well replied as jasperpad suggested and have jusr received a reply saying "we are under no obligation to provide you with such information as it is considered commercially sensitive and as such will be unable to action the stated request"

 

Anyone else received a breakdown or similar reply

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does nobody have any comment on this we are under no obligation to provide you with such information as it is considered commercially sensitive and as such will be unable to action the stated request"

 

I would really appreciate any help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you made a complaint to the FOS?

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't want to answer it because it is plainly an excessive charge. There are nothing but bad complaints about them all over the net. As has been suggested if they fail to refund the charges, or epxlain the breakdown then you can either complain to the FOS, (and the FSA) for good measure or you can challenge it in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...