Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so.
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • AMEX and TSB the 2 Creditors who you need to worry about the least, ever!  Just stop paying them and forget about it, ignore all their threat o gram letters.  Only if, and with these 2 it's a massive if, you end up with a claim form you need to respond, and there will be plenty of help here.
    • No, nothing from Barclays. Turns out i have 2 accounts on here, and i posted originally on the other one. Sorry about that.  
    • Always send with proof of posting from your Post Office, so there is a trail. Conversations , are designed to intimidate into paying, Emails are designed as another way of bombarding. Only EVER communicate in writing, by post.  
  • 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

Backdoor CCJ OPS/DCB(L) 2017 Windscreen PCN - got set aside - awaiting hearing date- Outside lines - Vantage point , brighton ***Claim Dismissed***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 771 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

Yes it would help if we could see what the friend advised and what you sent, it would be helpful to indicate how to use it at a hearing.

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

no date set for future judgement, am not really sure what happens next. at the set aside judgement , the judge just said make sure you submit your defence within two weeks and she said you say in the defence you were not trying to evade parking right, you unknowingly parked in an unmarked bay, so i used those words in the defence. 

 

my friend had advised me to basically submit the same information as i had done for the set aside, less the circumstances which let me to miss the court paperwork. 

the document i uploaded few days back is that document. 

 

OPS witness statement did include lots of photos/ plans for the car park . i will upload those tomorrow as i need to take out all the personal information on there and its 80 page document!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 01/07/2021 at 12:56, Rmg2020 said:

1. On 11/02/2017 I parked my vehicle at the ground floor level at Vantage Point Cark Park,
Brighton, in what looked like a pay and display area. I paid my parking ticket, enclosed to the
application, Please see Page 1 for evidence.


I parked in an area signposted as additional parking, it looked very messy , with lots of
dumped/ fly tipped rubbish everywhere. The bay markings were either very faint or non
existent, there were no markings to show no parking allowed. I parked in what looked like a
valid parking area , and so I paid. I was not trying to evade parking correctly, I was unaware
that I had parked in an unmarked bay.


2. I came back and found a car parking fine from One parking solution as I had supposedly
parked in an unmarked bay. I was very much confused by this as the marking was very faint.i
thought this was a mistake. I have recently visited the car Park which appears to be unclear
and faint markings as the day I parked my vehicle in the bay. I have enclosed evidence to this
application demonstrating the insufficient bay markings. please see page 2 for evidence .


3. I immediately contacted One parking solution as I genuinely believed this was a mistake. why
would I park somewhere and pay if it wasn't a proper space. I did not receive any response
from the Company.


4. Due to no response from One parking solution, I wrote a further email requesting evidence of
my liability. A copy of this email is enclosed to this application. One parking solution did not
respond to this letter. Please see page 3 for evidence


5. On 19/06/2017 I wrote a further email requesting evidence (a copy is enclosed), whereby I
was told the debt was transferred to ZZPS. I had never heard of ZZPS. However, upon a
google search, I believe it is a debt collection agency. One parking solution did not notify me
of the transfer of debt, nor was I provided with a notice of assignment. According to the Law
of Property Act 1925, I am entitled to be notified, however, One parking solution failed to do
so. Please see page 4 for evidence


6. On 23/06/2017 I received a letter from Wright Hassall Solicitors requesting collection of the
debt. I was confused as I was informed the debt was transferred to ZZPS then few days later I
was told it transferred again to Wright Hassall. I responded to Wright Hassall requesting
evidence of my liability as I still believed this was a mistake. Again, I did not receive a notice
of assignment, nor any evidence I had previously requested multiple times to demonstrate my
liability. Please see page 5 for evidence


7. In September 2020, I changed address, however since I did not hear from Wright Hassall for
over 3 years, I called One parking solution to notify them of my change of address, whereby
they informed me this debt was transferred to DCBL and they had forwarded my current
address to them. A copy of the email response from One parking solution is enclosed. Please
see page 6 for evidence .


8. I was not contacted by DCBL at this point. This matter has been transferred to over three
companies, and it is unlawful to not receive any notice of transfers.


9. I require the notice of assignments and the pre-action protocol letters from each creditor.


10. Additionally, it is noteworthy that the parking fine was obtained over 4 years ago, I believe the
Claimant has not acted promptly in obtaining a CCJ after a substantive amount of time has
elapsed.


11. I believe this is an abuse of process – the matter was transferred to over 4 companies; it
remains unclear who owns the debt. Moreover, the original fine was for £60.00, it is
unreasonable for a fine to accumulate to over £300.00 whereby each company have added
their own charges and fees yet failed to notify me of the notice of change to allow me to
dispute the matter. This is not in accordance with the overriding principle under Civil
Procedure Rules.


12. I also note the original fine was for £100 as issued by One Parking solution, when Wright
Hassall contacted me the amount had gone up to £208, and then DCBL £160. This confuses
me further.


13. I was not trying to evade parking correctly, I unknowingly parked in what One Parking
solution have called an unmarked bay , which I disagree with due to the state of the car park.
I have tried to communicate with them and the debt collection agencies I was aware of but
have had no response.

 

 

docs1.pdf

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 Backdoor CCJ OPS/DCB(L) 2017 Windscreen PCN - got set aside - awaiting hearing date- Outside lines - Vantage point , brighton

You didn't need all that info, a simple I paid for parking, bays were not properly marked so no material loss to OPS  might have sufficed for now.  But if that was all submitted for Setaside OPS will likely have it anyway.

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

Your defence does need rewriting and improving. It would also help if you could get their  WS which they would have sent to your address before the case that they got you the CCJ. Seeing what they said could improve your chances of confirming that the PCN was unfair and getting your money back for the set aside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello sorry have had a very unwell child

 

I tried to go through the witness statement to upload but I have to hide 80 pages of personal info, is there a way to extract selected pages from a PDF?

 

I registered an account on mcol but it asks for case password (I think), which I don't have. Just the case reference.  I will call the court on Monday. 

 

@lookinforinfo can I change though I have already submitted? And I didn't know there was still a chance of getting my money back for the set aside!

Link to post
Share on other sites

how did they manage to send you it as a PDF, have they got your email address?

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

That WS is the 80 page pdf you mentioned?

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

plenty of websites listed in upload and by search engines

though its better to convert the whole pdf to JPG pages and redact that way.

most editing by PDF editors can be reversed.

  • 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

Sorry to hear about the unwell child.

 

The reason I've gone on & on about MCOL is because it's essential to find out if you case is defended, otherwise you'll end up with another CCJ.  Try again tomorrow.

 

Once that is settled, we can deal with the issue of the document you sent to the court as a defence.

Edited by FTMDave
Mix-up by me
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 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 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

i have just spoken to the court, my emails has been received and timestamped as received prior to the date set by the judge. phew! 

it has just been allocated to someone to work on. she said the next process was they would send it to the claimant and then we wait to see if the claimant wants to take it to court (or something along those lines)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is very welcome news.

 

It doesn't really matter that your defence was different from what we would have suggested or that you used the word "fine".  The important thing is to get a defence filed.

 

Relax for the moment and see if the fleecers have the gonads for a rematch.

 

On 10/07/2021 at 23:54, Rmg2020 said:

And I didn't know there was still a chance of getting my money back for the set aside!

I doubt very much you can directly get your money back for the set aside.

 

What you can do, if you wish, after seeing the fleecers off, is sue them for misuse of your GDPR.  They knew full well right from the start that they had no right to process your data - how can you park in a marked bay when there aren't any marked bays?!! - and yet have misused your personal data in about the worst way possible.  That could be a way to hit them in the pocket and indirectly cover your set aside costs.  But concentrate on seeing off their rubbish claim first.

  • 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 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

Its £500 or more for GDPR breach, but that is for the future

 

 

  • 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 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

yep 3 copies

 

1 to court 

1 to the sols

1 for your file

 

pers we normally don't recommend giving the fleecers your email/sig/phone as this allows then to file things 1min before any deadline removing your chance to counter their lies or fake paperwork

  • 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

HB is right, don't reply. 

 

They were so anxious "to assist the court" a few weeks ago that they wouldn't accept a set aside by consent and are now pursuing a hopeless case, so stuff them.

  • Haha 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 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

you need to reply.

simply states that if their client wishes to settle, then please inform the court you wish to remove the CCJ and meet my £255 costs for the set aside directly.

Otherwise you are hereby directed to removed my email address from your files totally and NOT to use it for any further purpose, this includes anything whatsoever to do with the impending set aside hearing should you not comply as i've stated above 

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...