Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Moneybarn - Return of Goods Order Suspended By Consent Order


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1353 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

Hi I have just received this letter this morning, not sure how they can instruct and agent and has me very concerned. The last thing I need are recovery agents attending my home or work even if they are not legally allowed to do so, the obviously will be wrongly informed by MB so believe they are correct to attend.

 

Any suggestions?

MB - Instruct Agents.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sit tight DX will likely be along soon, but looking at your thread MB are on a sticky wicket, and hoping to get a quick sbatch and hope it all goes away once they get the car.

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

instruct...I do that to my dog.. will it sit.

 

the vehicle is subject to a suspended return of goods order and regardless to the agreement being terminated (how many times is that? now) the only people that can snatch the car are court bailiffs, MB will have to return to court to instruct them.

 

As you have paid more than 1/3rd under the agreement, terminated or not, they are protected goods under the consumer credit act so a repo guy taking the vehicle without your written consent (which ofcouse you will not give) in my mind endangers their whole situation regarding them voiding the agreement under the act, giving you the power to demand certain redress as earlier posted.

 

this whole story is very complex and difficult to unravel 

the bottom line is they appear to have originally defaulted and terminated on the back of an invalid DN (contained £18 DN fee in its total)

 

im wondering if it might be worthy to write to MB pointing these things out and CC the powerless repo agent or let things run, as it appears the repo guys have to contact you 1st if they do do anything...and ofcourse have already been cancelled once by MB regarding this situation so should be well aware of the complications of the whole case.

 

just musings

 

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

So Its Inevitable the appointed agents for MB will come knocking (judging by other posts, I am of the opinion there wont be prior contact to the attendance) so when this situation does arise I don’t want to be caught off guard! 
Any suggestions as to what I do and don’t do as well as what to say or not say? The obvious one being not allow them to take the vehicle! 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so you've not read my above?

 

if they do..simply tell them to go do one, they have zero legal powers as already explained above.

to be fair to them

I doubt very much they know its subject to a suspended return of goods order etc etc and will run a mile

not kept on the public road is it.

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

No I did read your post and understand they have no powers etc, but to be honest Im just dreading their arrival  its not something Ive dealt with before so every knock turns my stomach at the minute. I also have the same opinion they wont have been given the whole truth when appointed, as MB did incorrectly inform the previous agents and twisted the truth, although they were eventually cancelled. 

 

So it will be ok for me to inform them of the court order?

 

The vehicle will be back on a drive with gates tomorrow, it is unfortunately parked on road tonight though as I had a delivery of sand yesterday and its getting moved tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

to be frank I doubt even MB realise what they have done.

that's a std mailmerge letter seen here before doesn't even ack the fact of the suspended ROG/CO

 

if you read the court judgement

neither does it say they are allowed to repo either!

nothing about the failure of the CO

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

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

Well events have taken place, I have just been blocked in by two guys from Anglia recovery.

I informed them the vehicle was subjected to a court order, suspended judgement and they informed me they had a warrant, (these people have no scrupples).

 

I asked to see the warrant and he produced paperwork, this included, their instructions to attend plus a copy of the court oder.

I asked him were they court appointed bailiffs, they replied if the paperwork had reference to a section 62, they would just take the vehicle no questions asked! but as its not they will go back to MB and get them to fast track the court action along with a section 62 and if needs be attend back with court bailiffs. Im still shaking now!! 

 

Obviously MB in my opinion are well aware of their failures and will stop at nothing to pull a fast one. 

So my question is simply, what happens now?

 

If they enforce the judgement doesnt that automatically allow the court bailiffs to attend or am I contacted and a date is given to surrender the vehicle by which time I can hopefully stop enforcement and attend a hearing?

 

Do you think Anglia will re-attend without further action being implemented, that being obtaining enforcement on the judgement.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

well done 

see they can be fronted away.

 

bit busy today but i'll pop in later.

 

I believe yes there would be a hearing.

 

 

  • Like 1

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

My consent order states 
Money claim adjourned generally with liberty to restore

 

I’ve been reading up a little bit on court terminology used at hearings and placed on court documents (namely the consent order terms written by MB). I want to be able to understand things a bit better as It can all be daunting. 


I came across;
Adjourned generally with liberty to restore - This order is made where the judge makes no final decision about the claim.

 

However, unlike a normal adjournment, the case is not automatically listed for another hearing.

Instead, the case is held in suspension unless either party to the claim asks for it to be re-listed - or restored - for another hearing.

 

The word "liberty" in this phrase is considered to be old-fashioned and, in the spirit of making the law easier to understand, the word permission is often used instead. Many judges will now add the stipulation that the claim will be struck out or dismissed if neither party asks for it to be restored within a set period - usually a year.

 

with the above in mind and the ongoing issue with MB could it be possible that they may have to start the court process all over again as the consent order was introduced back in 2017.

 

Could the judge by now have dimissed or struck out the original claim from MB due to the time period?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no, but they would have to return to court enforce as said numerous times.

 

either you write as I indicated yesterday and complain 

or hold out till I finish my review of that comms log and put in a formal complaint about the whole issue.

 

 

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 know you have already informed me they would have to attend court to enforce,  I wasnt suggesting anything else.

 

 I was only asking out of pure interest, plus to help me understand the process a bit better so maybe I wouldnt have to keep taking up your time so much, asking question after question.

 

No,  im more than happy to sit and wait for you to advise me, thanks 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont forget the money claim and the return of goods order are two separate entities...if your Consent Order refers to the money claim only then thats what they have Liberty to restore...by way of an application with fee.

 

If the Return of Goods Order is suspended and is not part of the Consent Order...then that turns on its own actions and the notice of judgment wording that was issued at the time of suspension.So if it states that should you default on the agreed payments the claimant can  proceed to recover without notice or it may state otherwise that claimant must seek permission to enforce.

 

Check  your paperwork.

 

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

On 06/01/2020 at 09:12, Foolishly said:

they replied if the paperwork had reference to a section 62, they would just take the vehicle no questions asked! but as its not they will go back to MB

I wonder what that magic bit is that gives a totally powerless repo agent bailiff powers?

 

shame you didn't film them on your mobile!

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

Never thought about filming them, wish I had done now.

 

Dont agree with them pulling in front of me virtually bumper to bumper so I was unable to move obstructing my right of way, claiming he had a warrant, writ of control with him so they had a right to obstruct me, soon changed his tune! I was definately caught totally off guard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Andyorch said:

Dont forget the money claim and the return of goods order are two separate entities...if your Consent Order refers to the money claim only then thats what they have Liberty to restore...by way of an application with fee.

 

If the Return of Goods Order is suspended and is not part of the Consent Order...then that turns on its own actions and the notice of judgment wording that was issued at the time of suspension.So if it states that should you default on the agreed payments the claimant can  proceed to recover without notice or it may state otherwise that claimant must seek permission to enforce.

 

Check  your paperwork.

 

Andy 

As far as I can see on the consent order (uploaded on post 27) there is no conditions allowing them to recover, doesnt seem to stipulate anything about not complying with the conditions of the consent order, it doesnt have anything I can see,  that failing to comply will the order will allow them to repossess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Consent Order states that they are allowed to recover...but the order is suspended providing you comply fully with point 4 payments by dates.

 

I wasn't sure if the Consent Order also covered the Return of Goods Order...which it does along with the money 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 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

On 08/01/2020 at 23:56, dx100uk said:

I wonder what that magic bit is that gives a totally powerless repo agent bailiff powers?

dx

 

 

 

 

 

Section 62 is with regards to Enforcement by taking control of goods

 

(2)The power conferred by a writ or warrant of control to recover a sum of money, and any power conferred by a writ or warrant of possession or delivery to take control of goods and sell them to recover a sum of money, is exercisable only by using that procedure.

 

Which of course they do not have in this claim because its suspended by the Consent Order

  • Like 1

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

Anglia are not certified enforcement agents as far as I can see, which explains the following comment...and if needs be attend back with court bailiffs.

 

and even if he held a section 62, it doesnt magically make them a bailiff.

 

very interesting.

 

dx

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Its been over two weeks since my encounter with Anglia as instructed by MB to pay me a visit.

 

Since that day (6th Jan) I havent heard a peep from MB, no letters, calls, texts or emails.

 

So much for the Anglia representative telling me he'll get MB to fast track the court process.

 

Gets me thinking what have they been deciding on or planning!! 

 

Can I request a second SAR from them to follow on from the previous one received so its an up to date version?

 

I would see what was going on then.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noted you are not forgotten

 

Dx

  • Thanks 1

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Well things have escalated right now,

 

im sat in my vehicle as im typing, freezing cold, in front of me is a recovery vehicle from Anglia again,

they have clamped the car and are telling me they are taking the car.

 

I have called the police who tell me its a civil matter and they cant attend.

They have no court bailiff with them and I have nothing from the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not court bailiffs with a section 62

and they have no authority to clamp the car either

they are NOT COURT BAILIFFS.

 

Section 62 is with regards to Enforcement by taking control of goods

 

(2)The power conferred by a writ or warrant of control to recover a sum of money, and any power conferred by a writ or warrant of possession or delivery to take control of goods and sell them to recover a sum of money, is exercisable only by using that procedure.

 

Which of course they do not have in this claim because its suspended by the Consent Order

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...