Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 1.     The Claimant claims £9,240.52 for monies due from the Defendant.   2.     This debt was pursuant to a regulated agreement(s) between the Defendant and The Student Loans Company Limited.  Each agreement had an individual account number as follows: 01xxxxxxxx, 00xxxxxxx, 97xxxxxxx, 96xxxxxxx.   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 xxxxxxxxxxxxx was also applied upon assignment.   5.     The Claimant has complied with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims   DEFENCE ……………...   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.  The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR 16.5(3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1.     Paragraph 1 2 is noted and denied accepted . I have had financial dealings with The Student Loans company in the past.  I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant who has not complied with my requests for further information.   2.     Paragraph 2 is noted and accepted.  I did take out 4 student loans with the Student Loans Company.   2.     Paragraph 3 is noted and denied.  The Defendant never agreed to make payments to the Claimant, terms of the original Student Loans Agreement have been adhered to and thus repayments of loans are not due.  The Claimant is put to strict proof that an agreement(s) to make payments was made and a breach of agreement(s) occurred.   Paragraph 3 is denied as The Defendant maintains that a default notices were never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof that default notices were issued to, and received by the Defendant    3. Paragraphs1 & 4 are denied.The annual income of the Defendant has never exceeded the published limits for deferral since graduating in XXXX. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly provided by the Claimant pursuant to the LoP Act 1925.   4.      On receipt of this claim I requested (Royal Mail signed for) on 14/02/2020 a CPR 31.14 from the Claimant's solicitor and a section 77 CCA from the Claimant, to which both have failed to respond to,  It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant;  the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of credit agreement/assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31.14, and remains in default of my section 77 CCA Request, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a)   Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement(s) (b)  Show how the Defendant is in breach of agreement(s) (c)   Show why the Claimant has terminated agreement(s) show the nature of breach and service of Default Notices and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer  Credit Act (d)  Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and (e)   Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.     5. On receipt of this claim I requested (Royal Mail signed for) on 14/02/2020 a CPR 31.14 from the Claimant's solicitor and a section 77 CCA from the Claimant,  for copies of the documents referred to within the Claimant’s particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date the Claimant has failed to comply to my section 77 requests and their solicitors, Drydens Limited, have refused my CPR 31.14 request.    6.     The Defendant has supplied the Claimant with a deferment letter and evidence every year that their income is below the threshold for repayments, by way of Royal Mail signed for and proof of postage has been kept. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.      7.     The Defendant has done everything required of them to qualify for deferment as per the original agreement(s) with The Student Loans company.  The Claimant has only once acknowledged a deferment letter on 16 September 2014 whereupon they granted their request to defer repayments for that year. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82 A of the consumer credit Act 1974.    8.The Defendant therefore fails to see how they are in breach of any agreement(s) and deny the Claimant's claim of £9,240.52 or any other sum, or relief of any kind. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief        ……………………………...   delete the red add the blue.    
    • Is this better?   In the Bristol Civic Justice Centre   Claimant name and address xxxxxxxx xxxxxx xx xxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxx   Defendants name and address Nissan Motor (GB) Limited, The Rivers Office Park, Denham Way, Maple Cross, Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire, WD3 9YS.   Brief details of claim Damages   Value £225   Particulars of claim 1. The Defendant is a Data Controller within the meaning of the Data Protection Act 2018 and is responsible for the processing of data of which the Claimant is a Subject.     2. This claim is in relation to three breaches of the Data Protection Act (2018) by the Defendant. (a) Failure to comply with the statutory time limit. (b) The Defendants data disclosure was incomplete. (c) The Defendant sent the data to an address which was not the address of the      Claimant data Subject.    3. The Defendant has failed to comply with the statutory time limit and is therefore in breach of the Data Protection Act (2018). (a) On 09 January 2020, the Claimant made a request for to the Defendant for a statutory data disclosure.  The statutory timeframe for compliance was 10 February 2020.    4. The Defendants data disclosure is incomplete.  (a) The Defendant has provided data disclosure on 25 February 2020.  However, the data disclosure that has been provided by the Defendant is incomplete.    5. The Defendant sent the disclosure to an address that was not the Claimant’s. (a) The Claimant provided the Defendant with the correct address to send the Subject Access Request to on 10 January 2020 and again on 19 February 2020.      6. The Claimant has made a complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) asking for a statutory assessment to be carried out.  The ICO has offered a preliminary view that the Defendant has breached their statutory duty in failing to comply with the statutory time limit.    7. By virtue of the Defendant’s failure to comply with the Subject Access Request the Claimant has suffered distress.
    • They must have had something to hide as they have been pulled up on these deaths before.   This seems a typical case   https://welfareweekly.com/family-of-jodey-whiting-seek-fresh-inquest-into-her-death-to-examine-role-played-by-dwp/
    • You haven't taken up all the points I made my previous post
    • Well thank you - it ain't over yet! Actually it's been an incredible learning experience and maybe in my next life I'd like to be a lawyer! I just hope all the chat on this forum is of some help to others in the same boat. Unbelievably, my son in London has just told me he's had a PCN for £170 from Parking Eye, which he claims is not justified. And so it goes on! The sooner they get the government Code of Practice up and running the better. 
  • Our picks

sparkeyrjp

Kennel cancelled booking for dog ***Resolved***

Recommended Posts

Understood , so my next step is to consider LBA , then MCOL .

Apart from court fees , it looks like , if I loose , I could be stung for defendants expenses .

So I have to be 100% sure of success , and it is looking like my success is hanging on the whim of a judge .

And me being accurate with the relevant sections. , which should be this , Which I have now read through .

Consumer Rights Act 2015 UK Public General Acts2015 c. 15PART 2 ,paragraphs 61/76 excluding para 75.

I assume my claim would be phrased thus

"Return of half of monies paid for Kennel boarding fees ,in contravention of Consumer Rights Act 2015 UK Public General Acts2015 c. 15PART 2 when defendant refused to accept dog due to suspected illness , half claimed as half settled by insurance  "

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just looked through this whole thread again and I have some questions to ask.

To begin with I suddenly realise that you have never mentioned any figures here. So how much are we talking about? How much did you give them? And presumably they are saying you can't have any of it back.

What do you do with the dog as this can also were prepared to take it?

I'm reading it again and I may have a couple more questions


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The total amount was around £450 and I paid in full

I think you asking what we did with the dog , we are lucky to have a daughter ( a single mum with son )who jumped in to help straight away .

She moved back home with our grandson and dog sat

 

Edited by sparkeyrjp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. You shouldn't be claiming for the return of half the money. If you are claiming on the basis that this is an unenforceable penalty or an unenforceable unfair term, then the entire term of the contract. The void and unenforceable and there is no power in the courts to make an apportionment.  Therefore your claim must be for the entire £450. Personally I wouldn't allow them to get away with any unfairness. I'm extremely dubious about the other term which apparently allows them to take ownership of the dog if it is not collected within 14 days.

They are only entitled to recover any administrative expenses caused by any breach – assuming that the breach is yours. Have you asked them to account for the £450 and to explain why this might amount to their administrative expenses? Of course it can't possibly do because as that is the full cost of keeping the dog then there must be a margin included in the £450 which represents their profit – otherwise there would be no point in them running the business.
Of course, if the breach is theirs then they would have to return the £450 to you plus any other losses that they had caused you. For instance, if your daughter had been put to any loss which you had to reimburse her for then it might be reasonable for you to claim that as well. Let us know.

Have you send them a letter of claim yet? If you want to be super-nice then you might offer them a small sum by way of administrative expenses as an alternative to forcing you into legal action. I would suggest no more than 70 quid – but I think first of all I would invite them to account for the £450 and explain why they say it equals their administrative expenses.

I don't expect that you will get any reasonable answer and they will simply say that it is in their terms and conditions – but at least you will have something in writing from yourself – and then from them to show firstly that you have tried to be reasonable about your approaches to them and secondly that they are merely relying on terms and conditions and it has nothing to do with administrative losses
 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will try to break down the answers to individual points

Thanks for taking the time to offer considered replies

 

RE admin fee offer I addressed this in post no 4, and was questioned as why I was offering , confused !

But I can revisit that with an offer ,

Not sent a LBA or formal letter as opposed to email as yet , which I can do

 

I have addressed the question of their losses in a roundabout way , they bleat on about it being , unfair that they kept a booking open for me , and would lose money by refunding me

 

 Yet  in another message they tell me they had to turn down many requests for bookings , to which I have suggested they would have to prove they were not able to fill the vacant place at short notice ,so having  minimal losses  . I have covered losses indirectly .I will though ask directly for them to quantify their losses in this specific instance .

 

My daughter moving back home incurred  us or her no additional expenditure ,in fact for her , she would have had less outlay , think “bank of mum and dad “😘

With regard to claiming the whole amount , I take it I should address this in any CC action, then  indicating I will be  refunding the insurance company , as the kennel are already aware the insurance company have settled on half of the amount in question

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, you're not in any particular hurry so I suggest that you write to them and ask them if they will account in detail as to why they consider they are entitled to retain the entire £450 and whether they believe this reflects their administrative losses and if so you believe that you are entitled to a detailed breakdown of those losses.

I would be careful about the letter not to couch it in terms which might be interpreted as an admission by you of any breach of contract.

You can post a draft here if you want.

I think that you can look forward to issuing a claim in January. I think it's very important to send the letter which I have suggested here and so I can't really see that you will be in a position to issue any claim until the New Year.
It will of course have to be preceded by a letter of claim which you will probably send a few days after having received their reply to your enquiry – or in any event in the first week of January.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for your reply , and recommendations.

I will start composing and refining a draft letter , and get back with it for your comments .

It will take a day or so , in order I can write , think and refine .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it takes that long then it's too complicated and too long


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First draft

 

"In order to lay this matter to rest , I ask you to account in detail why you consider you are entitled to retain the full amount of fees, and if this fully reflects your administration  losses by refusing to accept out dog .If this retention of fees reflect your costs , please supply a breakdown of those costs. Also evidence you were not able to fill the vacated place .

To be clear , do not refer back to your terms and conditions , I have explained previously that Consumer Rights Act ,Part 2  Unfair Terms over rules them .

I await your considered reply within 14 days . If I receive no reply or unsatisfactory reply . My next communication will be a letter before action , followed by action in the  County Court  ."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

First draft

 

"I do not accept that it is we who breached the contract but in the event that that is the case, I ask you to account in detail why you consider you are entitled to retain the full amount of fees, and whether this fully reflects your administration  losses by refusing to accept our dog .

If this retention of fees reflect your costs , please supply a breakdown of those costs. Also evidence you were not able to fill the vacated place .

To be clear , do not refer back to your terms and conditions , I have explained previously that Consumer Rights Act ,Part 2  Unfair Terms over rules them .

I await your considered reply within 14 days . If I receive no reply or unsatisfactory reply . My next communication will be a letter before action , followed by action in the  County Court  ."

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you

Although I am sure their fall back will still be T&Cs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure you're right but there is no point in prompting them. Simply send the minimum


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you , will get it on headed notepaper and send signed for .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why headed note paper? Are you a business?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry , just meant as a formal letter with my address , and addressing the owner by name and business name and address

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matter resolved !!

I finally received a response to my email sent  to the kennel  28th November .

In that mail  I had pointed out that their T&Cs are over ruled by CRA , and it was on that basis I would be proceeding , they had previously written that they had legal liability insurance , and were happy to defend , I suggested they contact their advisors to explain CRA .

My guess is that they did and were advised to settle which they have done .

It was only due to their lack of response that I came here for advice on how to proceed .

And I am grateful for your time spent in considering the problem and advice given.

They are settling on the remaining  half of the fees  ( remember the insurance co have already paid me half of the fees )

I am contented to accept this , even though they still end up with a healthy profit on the transaction , there was always a chance I might not be successful in court .and end up with egg on my face . With the insurance pay out I now have no financial loss .

I know this will not be entirely satisfactory from your point of view. But for me ……..

If anyone asks me to recommend a kennel , I know one I will not recommend

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done and thanks for the update and conclusion.

Thread title amended

 

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 OTHERS

 

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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was quick! Excellent news, sparkey, well done.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done. Don't worry about us not being pleased. We are very pleased for you and the most important thing is that you stood up to this kind of thing and you have a better sense of your rights in the future as will anyone else who follows the thread


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donation made

Now on to my ongoing tussle with BT/Lowell , read elsewhere

 

Rod

Edited by sparkeyrjp

Share this post


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...