Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Probably to do with the Creditor accepting the reduced payments claim as part of the IVA. - Thats my guess anyway.  As for the mount outstanding... 60k is incredible and im pretty sure a DRO wouldnt cover that much even after the new legislation.    For you @Alfy - Please stay headstrong and stop worrying. My viewpoint on debt with debt collectors is simple. You are a figure on a spreadsheet loaded into a database for them to run a collection cycle through.  They dont care about emotions or your situation, they just care about paying off their shareholders and trying to turn a profit.  They use varying tactics to increase the pressure on you to the point where you will break. People then fall for this an either cave in to DCAs before doing their own due diligence on the debts that are purchased or turn to IVAs like you have.    They are better ways to handle this and Im glad you feel better after a good nights sleep - I hope you can keep it up. 
    • Good afternoon,    I am writing in reference to the retail dispute number ****, between myself and Newton Autos concerning the sale of a Toyota Avensis which has been found to have serious mechanical faults.    As explained previously the car was found to be faulty just six days after purchase. The car had numerous fault codes that appeared on the dash board and went into limp mode. This required assistance from the AA and this evidence has already been provided. The car continues to exhibit these faults and has been diagnosed as having faults with the fuel injectors which will require major mechanical investigation and repairs.    Newton Autos did not make me aware of any faults upon purchase of the vehicle and sold it as being in good condition.    Newton Autos have also refused to honour their responsibilities under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires them to refund the customer if the goods are found to be faulty and not fit for purpose within 30 days of purchase.    Newton Autos also refused to accept my rejection of the vehicle and refused to refund the car and accept the return of the vehicle.    It is clear to me that the car is not fit for purpose as these mechanical faults occurred so soon after purchase and have been shown to be present by both the AA and an independent mechanic.   Kind regards
    • Commercial Landlords are legally allowed to sue for early cancellation of the lease. You can only surrender your lease if your landlord agrees to your doing so. They are under no obligation even to consider your request and are entitled to refuse. You cannot use this as an excuse not to pay your rent. Your landlord is most likely to agree to your surrendering the lease if they want the property back in order to redevelop it, or if they wants to rent it to what they regards as a better tenant or at a higher rent. There are two types of surrender: Express surrender in writing. This is a written document which sets out the terms of the surrender. Implied surrender by conduct. (applies to your position) You can move out of the property you leased, simply hand your keys back and the lease will come to an end, but only if the landlord agrees to accept your surrender. Many tenants have thought they can simply post the keys through the landlord's letter box and the lease is ended. This is not true and without a document from the landlord, not only do you not know if the landlord has accepted the surrender, you also do not know on what basis they have accepted and could find they sue you for rent arrears, service charge arrears, damage to the property and compensation for your attempt to leave the property without the landlord's agreement. Unless you are absolutely certain that the landlord is agreeable to your departure, you should not attempt to imply a surrender by relying on your and the landlord's conduct.  
    • I had to deal with these last year worst DCA I have ever dealt with. Just wait for the constant threats of CCJ and how you'll lose in court and how they won't do mediation and they want the judge to question you with a load of "BIG" words to boot with the letter. My case was struck out in the end, stupidity on their part as I admitted to owing the debt in the end going through the court process was just a formality as they wouldn't let it drop despite me admitting the debt regardless. They didn't send the last part of the court paper work in so it ended up being struck out     .
    • Well, that's it then. Clear proof of the rubbish cameras. Clear proof of double dipping. G24 won't be getting a penny. Belt & braces, I would write to the address LFI has found, include the evidence of double dipping, and ask Fraser Group to call their dogs off.
  • 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...