Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for your response.    Is there a way for me to find out if he has assets?    I looked at small claims court and dividing the issues, but I read somewhere (maybe citizens advice or GOV. website?!) that you cannot claim against the same person twice for matters arising from the same incident so I'm not sure that it would work out as surely it would be seen that these issues have all arisen from the same incident (his original work)? 
    • Hi,   So the company is capital recoveries,sending in my wife's name and yes for a short fall. They don't seem to have sent mine yet..lol.. As insaid it is a long story which I did post at the time on here when going through the repossession,basically Kensington claiming they only had fax and not email etc and just making things difficult so when we moved away I made things awkward for them explaining I won't be able to forward anything as I don't have fax..yes I know I should have but they put us through a difficult  time and didn't make things easy.   Why would it have been removed from the credit reports within 5 years though,this is what I don't understand.And to collect on it now would they need to re-apply for anything. I don't deny I must owe something....    
    • On the basis of what you say, you will have no difficulty bringing a successful claim against him. The problem is that first of all, bringing a claim of this size – even if you win will incur costs for yourself and it seems to me that you may have problems enforcing the judgement. It is never worth beginning a claim unless you know that you can identify assets belonging to the defendant so that you can enforce the judgement. If you can't enforce judgement then bring any claim is simply a waste of money. The second problem here is that your claim exceeds the £10,000 small claims limit and this means that costs will be even greater. Also, in the event that he starts to cause problem and resists the claim, you could find that your costs are escalating and once again even if you win, you will not be able to enforce the judgement and you will lose everything. If you happen to lose, then it would be catastrophic because you would have to pay a substantial part of his cost as well. If you want to proceed with this at all then I think that you are going to have to look at away of dividing the claim up into smaller parts so that you can identify a particular aspect of it which is less than £10,000 to deal with. A claim of £2000 or £3000 would be much easier and much cheaper and then if you won that, you could attempt the enforcement and see where that got you. On the basis of that, you could decide to proceed with further claims – attempting each time to keep the value of the claim to less than £10,000. At least if you had a successful claim for £2000 and you are unable to enforce it, you would have kept your costs to a minimum. Also, it would have the effect of impacting on his credit file which he might find rather difficult to deal with. You can even bring a number of smaller claims if you simply wanted to hit is credit file and causing a great deal of difficulty over a long period of time. That might persuade him to start dealing with you. He says that he is insured – but you aren't able to get hold of his insurance details. If you got a judgement against him then you might find some way of persuading him/forcing him to supply you with his insurance details – if they exist. However, I can imagine that his insurance will not cover him for bad work. It will only cover him for accidents.  
    • whos the fleecers thats trying to scam you? i will gather you mean there was a shortfall debt?  
    • We believe this firm has been providing financial services or products in the UK without our authorisation. Find out why to be especially wary of dealing with this unauthorised firm and how to protect yourself from scammers. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

VCS/BW PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - no permit - Woodside Business Park, Peel Investments, Birkenhead


Recommended Posts

£60 Abuse of Process at Paragraph 66  -68  of the  OPS case at Lewes County Court by DDJ harvey

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 OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 242
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Go as per DX use what EB suggests as a guide, along the lines of you had no legitimate claim 3 years ago, i haven't and you, I and BW legal know this, and I haven't forgotten, sure EB will call in and

not being funny dave you've been here since 2016   more than enough time to realise cag is also a self help forum and we have a very good custom google search box on the left after clic

How about tis- Dear sirs, I am surprised that Simple Simon is wasting his money hiring the parking world's second worst solicitors to chase up a claim that both you and he knows is spurious.. Sho

In addition, the new Code of Conduct to be issued soon by the Government to prevent the issuing of unfair charges by the rogue parking companies includes preventing them fro charging motorists who have a valid permit but failed to display it.

 

And of course when no permit is displayed in any event that motorist is then classed as a trespasser and only the land owner can sue for trespass.

 

And of course having not only lost in Court at least once on the added £60 as well as a host of other cases being refused on the same grounds you will be asking for all of your costs to be paid and exemplary damages as well as a breach of your GDPR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks LFI and BN, I appreciate all this extra information and support, it goes such a long way in terms of detail I can offer, and confidence it brings me on the day.

 

I will take a good look at the link you provided which I am sure backs up further the abuse of process like you say.

 

Wrt to costs, how would that be expressed? Is that something I offer verbally on the day, or something I chase up afterwards once the verdict has been given?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they do turn up in Court and it is quite a big if. then when they lose you ask for your costs- day off work, cost of travel, parking and £19? per hour for litigants work. 

And yes do read the whole article as it will give you other reasons to shoot them down if they do turn up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Morning all

 

I had my case this morning and subsequently lost it. 

 

The main focus of the Judge seemed to be on the contract, which he deemed legitimate, in that it was still valid as it had a rollover clause in it.

 

He also said the missing signage was irrelevant as I'd been working there previously, so therefore it should be assumed I was well aware of the T's & C's.

 

He never seemed bothered by the fact I had a valid permit, and gave this very little consideration, due to the above.

 

In my defence, he seemed keen to reject the extra £60. But then after VCS gave £50 of extra costs verbally to the Judge, I was then told I needed to pay £150 in total.

 

Thanks everyone for all your help, I'm a bit disappointed, but at least that is the end of these parasites on my back now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds like a case of judge lottery to me, or who pays for his golf club membership and then plays a round with him.

was there proof produced that the rolling contract with VCS signed in [year] had received annual payments to date, so was valid?

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 HB.

 

Tbh, once he rejected the £60, I was fairly pleased with that as a result of sorts, so it was an unbelievably gutting twist at the end when the Judge allowed the extra £50 to be included, as he seemed so staunchly anti additional charges in his closing speech about 1 minute prior!

 

Thanks LFI. Yes, he was a different Judge to last time. This Judge seemed really keen to wrap it up, so we were finished in under 1 hour. The previous Judge wanted to allow 3.5 hrs, 30m for 'reading'. Well we didn't go anywhere near reading, as all he kept reiterating was that he had gone through all the evidence, so all we needed to do was add any extra bits. 

 

It's weird the way I can't cross examine the representative today because he never wrote it. Although I raised loads of points, I just felt like they fell on deaf ears. However the VCS guy could cross examine me. He went to town on me because I had worked there prior, so I should therefore be aware of the conditions.

 

Everything centred on the three bullet points from the Defence I sent a few months ago. To which the Judge allowed VCS to effectively blow it apart.

 

Thanks DX, you are very right indeed, and I should have raised this. Tbh, by this stage I was feeling disillusioned by the Judge as it was clear he didn't want to go over any of my details or evidence, and was absolutely fixated on the contract and signage.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember I'm sorry. It was 2 x £25, each for something different.

 

It absolutely blew me away, because like you said, 1 minute prior to that the Judge was not entertaining for a second any extra charge.

 

One min it was like £100, no more. The next it was £150. Just like that.

 

I wanted to ask why, but the Judge had pretty much said that once he started his final speech, we cold make no further comment. Plus, once he agreed to it, I thought it was pointless to question anyway as it was not negotiable. Yeah this is without doubt that bit that has left the nasty taste in the mouth. I'm absolutely bewildered by it. Unless this is some sort of basic standard charge that can simply be added without question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes it is judge lottery, and not logical, sorry it went the wrong way.

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 OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear the news Dave.

 

As for sums on top of the £100, maybe the judge ruled against the £60 Unicorn Food Tax but allowed £25 claimform fee + £25 legal costs.  Just a guess.

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dave

 

that absolutely rings a bell, thanks for that.

 

Do you think that ultimately they will have been left out of pocket by this episode? I’m guessing they would have had to pay a barrister 4.5 hours in total for their work alone?

 

It’s for some crumbs of comfort I am looking to take!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes, certainly.

 

So they'll get £150 out of you, £25 will have been the cost of starting the claim, leaving £125 which will go nowhere near paying for legal representation for four and a half hours.

 

That's why these companies are so reluctant to do court, and kill half the Amazon first.  They do however have to do court sometimes, otherwise they'd become known as paper tigers.

 

That's also why they make up the Unicorn Food Tax to try to get extra money to pay their lawyer.  Well done on batting away that part of their claim.

 

 

 

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will have left them out of pocket, shame the judge didn't take HHJ Harveys response to Unicorn Feed tax in the OPS case at lewes.  and kick it out, but that's judge lorttery.

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 OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Dave and BN

 

Thats right, it just goes to show it depends on what Judge turns up on the day.

 

As you say, I supposed it could have been worse, it could have been with an additional £60 thrown on top, so at least my defence counted for something.

 

It is at least satisfying knowing that they have been left out of pocket by the episode, seems mad that they or anyone would do that, but I understand they probably see it as a necessary loss etc.

 

Thanks to everybody though for all your help and support over the five years, it's been really appreciated. You really are an amazing helpful bunch. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...