Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi welcome to the Forum.  If a PCN is sent out late ie after the 12th day of the alleged offence, the charge cannot then be transferred from the driver to the keeper.T he PCN is deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch so in your case, unless you can prove that Nexus sent the PCN several days after they claim you have very little chance of winning that argument. All is not lost since the majority of PCNs sent out are very poorly worded so that yet again the keeper is not liable to pay the charge, only the driver is now liable. If you post up the PCN, front and back we will be able to confirm whether it is compliant or not. Even if it is ok, there are lots of other reasons why it is not necessary to pay those rogues. 
    • Hi I received a Parking Charge letter to keeper on Monday 15/04/24, the 17th day after the alleged incident. My understanding is that this is outside the window for notifying. The issue date was 08/04/2024 which should have been in good time for it to have arrived within the notice period but in fact it actually arrived at lunchtime on the 15th. Do I have to prove when it arrived  (and if so how can I do that?) or is the onus on them to prove it was delivered in time? All I can find is that delivery is assumed to be on the second working day after issue which would have been Weds 10//04/24 but it was actually delivered 5 days later than that (thank you Royal Mail!). My husband was present when it arrived - is a family member witness considered sufficient proof? 1 Date of the infringement  arr 28/03/24 21:00, dep 29/03/24 01.27 2 Date on the NTK  08/04/2024 (Date of Issue) 3 Date received Monday 15/04/24 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012?  Yes 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No    Have you had a response?  n/a 7 Who is the parking company? GroupNexus 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Petrol Station Roadchef Tibshelf South DE55 5T 'operating in accordance with the BPA's Code of Practice'  
    • lookinforinfo - many thanks for your reply. It would be very interesting to get the letter of discontinuance. The court receptionist said that the county court was in Gloucester 'today' so that makes me think that some days it is in Gloucester and some days its in Cheltenham, it was maybe changed by the courts and i was never informed, who knows if DCBL were or not. My costs were a gallon of petrol and £3.40 for parking. I certainly don't want to end up in court again that's for sure but never say never lol. Its utterly disgusting the way these crooks can legally treat motorists but that's the uk for you. I'm originally from Scotland so it's good that they are not enforceable there but they certainly still try to get money out of you. I have to admit i have lost count of the pcn's i have received in the last 2 yr and 4 months since coming to England for work, most of them stop bothering you on their own eventually, it was just this one that they took it all the way. Like i mentioned in my WS the the likes of Aldi and other companies can get them cancelled but Mcdonalds refused to help me despite me being a very good customer.   brassednecked - many thanks   honeybee - many thanks   nicky boy - many thanks    
    • Huh? This is nothing about paying just for what I use - I currently prefer the averaged monthly payment - else i wouldn't be in credit month after month - which I am comfortable with - else I wold simply request a part refund - which I  would have done if they hadn't reduced my monthly dd after the complaint I raised (handled slowly and rather badly) highlighted the errors in their systems (one of which they do seem to have fixed) Are you not aware DD is always potentially variable? ah well, look it up - but my deal is a supposed to average the payments over a year, and i dont expect them to change payments (up or down) without my informed agreement ESPECIALLY when I'm in credit over winter.   You are happy with your smart meter - jolly for you I dont want one, dont have to have one  - so wont   I have a box that tells me my electricity usage - was free donkeys years ago and shows me everything I need to know just like a smart meter but doesnt need a smart meter,  and i can manually set my charges - so as a side effect - would show me if the charges from the supplier were mismatched. Doesn't tell me if the meters actually calibrated correctly - but neither does your smart meter. That all relies on a label and the competence of the testers - and the competence of any remote fiddling with the settings. You seem happy with that - thats fine. I'm not.    
    • Evening all,   So today, I was sent an updated offer that includes the £12.60 I spent on letters, but they have declined to add the interest at £7.40. They have stating 'We acknowledge your request to claim interest to date, however, this would be at the discretion of a trial judge if the claim did proceed to a trial hearing.' I think I am content with this outcome, and pushing this to a trial for a total interest of £15.30 throughout the claim does not make sense to me.   What are people's thoughts? I am sure our courts have better things to concentrate on?
  • 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

Erudio/drydens claimform - old slc loan - stayed now N244


Recommended Posts

  • 2 years later...

Hi,

I previously posted a topic

which the conclusion became that because I have been defaulted already on my student loan several years ago there is nothing that they can do to chase the money.

I have now received a Claim form from Erudio and Drydens via the County Court this morning claiming that I owe the original amount.

And a letter from Drydens 

I will edit scans of the documents and upload them if required

I should like to know how to proceed please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

don't need to see the docs

when did you last defer or pay anyone?

 

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 Drydens/Erudio claimform - old slc loan

merged threads again!

now retitled and moved to legals

re read your thread now please..

you said you deferred in 2014 earlier??

so what is now correct 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

Please accept my apologies.

My memory of the situation was wrong.

 I have just been through my paperwork and I did indeed last defer in February 2014 until February 2015 with the Student Loans Company.

The loan was then taken up by Erudio. 

I haven't paid anything or deferred since, partly because as I understood it having been defaulted already I could not be defaulted again,

Should I still be applying for deferment each year?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have been using the blank old slc forums in the slc forum

 

Now before you deferred in 2014

When was the one before than please??

 

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

Ok clear now not sb'd

thank you

 

Please complete this

 

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

your last deferment was in 2014, this is an acknowledgement of the debt for the purpose of the 6 year limitation period and extends the limitation period within the meaning of s.30 of the 1980 Act and therefore, unfortunately, this debt is not statute barred.

In Bradford and Bingley plc v Rashid (FC) [2006] UKHL 37, the House considered the limitation period under the 1980 Act and ss.29 & 30 and held that a debtor’s acknowledgment of the debt claimed means that the debt is not statute barred.

Here are a few relevant paragraphs on the point from this key authority:

 [21] I have no difficulty in regarding the letter of 26 September 2001 as an acknowledgment of the appellants' claim within the meaning of section 29(5) of the Limitation Act 1980. In Surrendra Overseas Ltd v Government of Sri Lanka [1977] 1 WLR 565, 575E-F Kerr J said that the debtor can only be held to have acknowledged the claim if he has in effect admitted his legal liability to pay that which the plaintiff seeks to recover. But his acknowledgment need not identify the amount of the debt. 

[44]A debtor's written acknowledgment of his debt or other liquidated pecuniary claim starts time running afresh under the Limitation Act 1980 (the 1980 Act). Such is the effect of sections 29 (5) and 30.

 [79]The first issue is whether either or both of the Advice Centre's letters of 26th September and 4th October 2001, if admissible in evidence, constituted an acknowledgement of the appellant bank's claim for the purposes of sections 29(5) and 30 of the Limitation Act 1980.

On this issue, I agree with Lord Brown's reasoning and conclusions in paragraphs 53-60. The letters acknowledged the existence of "the outstanding balance, owed to you" or "the outstanding amount".

The appellant bank is entitled to prove the unstated quantum of that admitted balance or amount by any admissible means, including oral evidence, in accordance with the Court of Appeal's decision in Dungate v. Dungate [1965] 1 WLR 1477.

By the first letter, written in response to the appellant bank's insistence on proposals for repayment, Mr Rashid was simply requesting time to "start to repay" the outstanding balance.

By the second letter, written in response to the bank's reiteration of its insistence and its indication that it would consider writing off a substantial sum if Mr Rashid raised a lump sum payment "in full and final settlement", Mr Rashid was simply offering "approximately £500 towards the outstanding amount as a final settlement". In each case, he was clearly acknowledging the outstanding debt without question.

The above authority on this point clarifies the issue on the meaning of statute barred raised here by Billywilder and Cruet, and for any consumer for that matter.

Dorytime

Link to post
Share on other sites

Name of the Claimant ?Erudio Student Loans Limited

Date of issue – 03 Jun 2019

Date to aos = 21.6.19 

date to submit defence = 5.7.19

Particulars of Claim

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?

1.The Claimant claims 4540 for monies due from the defendant

2. This debt was pursuant to a regulated agreement(s) between the Defendant and The Student Loans Company.

Each agreement had an individual account number as follows

3. The defendant failed to make payments as per the terms resulting in the agreement(s) being terminated.

Notice of such is served by a Default or Termination Notice subject to the terms of the agreement(s).

4.The debt was assigned to the Claimant on 22/11/2013 with a notice provided to the Defendant.

A new master reference number xxxj was also applied upon assignment.

The Claimant has complied with the Pre Action Protocol for Debt Claims

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) ?

I can find no record of it but could not say that it has not been sent 

I have all paperwork relating to the student loan together and cannot find it in there but have also been ignoring them for the past few years so couldn'rt say that conclusively I have not received it.

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?No

Did you inform the claimant of your change of address?NA

What is the total value of the claim?£4544

Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Student Loan

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ?Before

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/ Equifax /Etc...) ?No

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Debt purchaser

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Yes

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? I have a Notice of Default from 2016 from Erudio which they appear to have not acted on but not any "Notice of Default Sums"

I have "Notice of Sums in Arrears " from 2016. I may have received them for more recent years but don't have the records

Why did you cease payments? I think I misunderstood my position. I thought that having been defaulted for the debt already I could not be defaulted again and so have had no contact with Erudio since. This means that I have made no payments nor have I deferred. 

What was the date of your last payment?NA

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? I was defaulted whilst receiving Incapacity Benefit but that has now left my file so is resolved as such

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan?No 

the answer to this is actually No from Noddle(Credit Karma) and Experian

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/ Equifax /Etc...) ?  No And Equifax

Link to post
Share on other sites

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.
.
 register as an individual
 note the long gateway number given
 then log in
.
 select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.
.
 then using the details required from the claimform
.
 defend all
 leave jurisdiction unticked.
 click thru to the end
 confirm and exit MCOL.
.
 get a CCA Request running to the claimant
https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/
 leave the £1PO blank and uncrossed
.
 get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant]
https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/
.
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 [1 in the count]
 

 

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. that looks good. 

I just started responding on mcol and have stupidly signed in using my company registration rather than my individual gateway id.

 

Is there a way to remedy that? 

It wont let me login to the using my individual account because it is now linked to my company account.

 

Can I assume that the claim is statute barred because it doesn't show up on my credit file?

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is no link between credit files and statute barring.

 

you last deferred feb 2014 

claim issued 6/19

so its not SB'd.

 

did you get the log-in sorted.

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

I have to fill out and email my aos and defence now.

The Aos is done, the defence was filled out as per your last message regarding it being statute barred but it looks like I need to change that now.

 

I haven't sent the defence yet. How should I proceed?

 

I have CCA'd them previously so seems little point doing that again.

 

I am just filing the CPR 31:14

Link to post
Share on other sites

you don't email anything use MCOL website

see my post of 2 posts back..its all there

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

Because I messed up I cannot use the MCOL website to submit my AOS so have to download form N9B and fill it out manually and then email it to moneyclaim online at [email protected].

 

I rang them and it seems to be the only way round it as I have used the password for this claim in error and moneyclaim online said that they couldn't remedy it for me.

 

What is my defence now?

 

Previously from your post I had 

1 The Claimants Claim was issued on 03 Jun 2019

2 The Claimant contends that the claimants claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitations Act 1980.

If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the claimant.

3 The Claimants claim to be entitled to payment of £4544.03 or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

 

I assume that this is not a valid defence now as the debt is not statute barred

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry yes shame that happened.

 

defence is not due till 5th july.

 

probably  a holding defence.

 

 

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

Why is it not statute barred....what have you found to change this ?

 

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

you last deferred feb 2014 

claim issued 6/19

so its not SB'd.

 

have you earned over the threshold since the end of the last deferred period

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

but ofcourse no-one knows this bar HMRC..

 

so we cant use never earned over the threshold either in your defence...uhmmmm

 

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

oh god no.

its a long way to run before that ever needs consideration if at all.

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

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...