Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform. [if mcol is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] .  register as an individual on the Gov't Gateway Site  note down your details inc the long gateway number given, you might need it later.  then log in to the MCOL Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform .  defend all  leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit MCOL. .. get a CCA Request running to the claimant https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/ .. Leave the £1 PO unsigned and uncrossed . get a CPR  31:14  request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant] ... .[use our other CPR letter if the claim is for an OD or Telecom Debt] . https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ . on BOTH type your name ONLY Do Not sign anything . you DO NOT await the return of ANY paperwork  you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count] ..............  
    • The agreement started 11/02/2019  for 47 monthly hire payments   Threat-o-gram : We are instructed on behalf of Hyundai Capital UK Limited T/a Hyundai Finance Contract Hire.  This is inaccurate, as on my hire agreement it says - Owner Santander Consumer (UK) plc trading as Volvo Car Financial Services. Hyundai must be who this other persons agreement is with.   The only will is: Should you fail to make payment of the outstanding bablnce of £5,000, or alternatively provide realistic payment proposals within the next 30 days, we are instructed to issue County Court proceedings against you for the balance outstanding. Such proceedings will also include claim for costs.   Yes I still have my agreement. 
    • Hi M10,   Compared to MANY other cases we see here, a refund of 80% is a decent offer in the circumstances.   Take it and get yourself a new item.   Far better than Very and Apple each denying responsibility and passing the buck, and you being stuck in the middle for months with no help.
    • thanks for all that.... yes interesting. you handed the car back in nov 2020, how long was the lease agreement for and when did it start?   if you read the threat-o-gram carefully it doesn't say WILL anything. who are stated as DWF's client please ? and have you still your copy of this agreement?    
    • A devaluing currency and hard economic conditions make cryptocurrencies attractive despite the risks. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Recommended Posts

so did TEC cancel the PCN as you say 

and before you said you DID pay it...but now you say you didn't?

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

Get everything straight, make suer all your evidence and chronology of events correct.  It is extremely inadvisable to try to sue Marstons, Fraud is Criminal, and the police are unlikely to consider a criminal accusation about a bailiffCo that collects for HMCS as well.  then come back with the list and timings of events for advice as to next possible steps.

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

It was a council PCN right?

 

It can’t hurt to ring the elected head of council and explain the situation. These are the people who have the power to get Marstons of your back.

 

You are wasting your breath trying to reason with Marstons

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
9 hours ago, dx100uk said:

so did TEC cancel the PCN as you say 

and before you said you DID pay it...but now you say you didn't?

The TEC cancelled it - but that was last Wednesday, it clearly hadn't got to the council yet. And of course Marston won't reason with you at all. And when they clamp the car and I need to get to work, not much choice I have!

 

I'm awaiting video evidence, the reply from TEC and the council, and then will confirm my next steps. 

 

Everybody in the council is still working from home all over the country (the parking team are in Scotland!) so tricky to speak to somebody who has any influence. But I dont give up. First thing is video evidence, and if he didn't actually come to my house and got me all stressed for nothing...well...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your head of council will have all their details on Google, with their mobile number.

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
  • 2 weeks later...

Ok, so a quick update - turns out TEC had missed one of the documents I put through, which it was it wasn't actioned. Either way, I continued with the access request, as I did not receive any letter through the door confirming a visit. 

 

I've now received the following back from Marston - which doesn't surprise me, but seriously, what now?!

I want footage proving he actually came to my house, and put a letter through my door, or at least knocked.

This is downright ridiculous.

Any help please!

 

15 September 2020

 

Dear XXXX

Re:      Data Subject Access Request received on 14 September 2020

Our Ref: A810244

 

We are writing regarding your Data Subject Access request received on 14 September 2020, this was received by Email. I confirm your request is for;  

 

BWV Footage from 31st August 2020 at 14.34.

 

On receipt of a subject access request our aim is to locate all personal data outlined in the request in accordance with the data protection act 2018 & GDPR

 

We can confirm that to ensure we have been able to locate the above data you have requested we have searched and cross referenced the details on the account with the details in your response. We complete these checks to ensure that we are providing the correct person with the correct data. 

 

Please be advised, I have located and viewed the footage captured by our Agent upon the visit to your property dated 31st August 2020. Unfortunately, we must advise that as you do not appear within the recording, meaning your personal data is not identifiable, we are unable to release the requested footage on this occasion.

 

Marston Holdings Limited considers that your Data Subject Access request is now complete and that we have fulfilled our obligations under the Data Protection Act 2018 and GDPR. If you wish to discuss any element of this response, please contact us in writing as soon as possible at the contact address at the top of our letter.  

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

AXXXX

Data Subject Access Request Administrator

For and on Behalf of Marston Holdings Limited

Link to post
Share on other sites

See my post 29. You are wasting your breath with Marston's, you are wasting your breath with anyone else  Speak to your local head of council..  

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 are looking at this the wrong way, forget being angry at Marstons , there is no point. You will not get any traction whatsoever with them.  Ultimately the head of Council has the power to call Marston's off.

 

My friend last month called me , the bailiffs had clamped his car and they were demanding he pay,  a PCN.  I told him to ring the head of the council and explain that he was a teacher in that Borough, who needed his car to get into work.  HOC referred him to Deputy HOC, referred him to Head of Parking who emailed Marston's telling them to unclamp the car and cancel the visit. 

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 know - but it's the downright lying that gets me. I've paid part of the first fine, it's now been put on hold as TEC have got involved - but for them to say this and not give me proof somebody has been to my property is just wrong. 

 

I think I'll go down the small claims court, as this has really stressed me out - it's causing me a lot of grief. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If TEC accept your version and rule it so, the PCN is rolled back to initial stage so you can pay or challenge, and marston's fees go away.

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

ignore marstons.

stop letting them wind you up.

 

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
20 hours ago, London1971 said:

Ultimately the head of Council has the power to call Marston's off.

 

My friend last month called me , the bailiffs had clamped his car and they were demanding he pay,  a PCN.  I told him to ring the head of the council and explain that he was a teacher in that Borough, who needed his car to get into work.  HOC referred him to Deputy HOC, referred him to Head of Parking who emailed Marston's telling them to unclamp the car and cancel the visit. 

 

You may have missed the OP's post (number 19) on 2nd September where he stated that a bailiff had visited that day,  clamped his car and he had to pay the full amount in order to have the immobilisation device removed.

 

Therefore, there is no need at all to involve the council.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Marstons should be instructed to repay the money if TEC ruled in your favour.

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
On 02/09/2020 at 18:00, JC101 said:

Sorry - fresh visit on Bank Holiday, resulting in the (correct) additional £235 fees. But no evidence of that visit.

 

Car clamped this morning, no extra fees for the clamp.

 

But as I said, fighting the whole thing as it seems TEC didnt get the message back to the Council. 

 

My beef is with a visit on bank holiday, and charging fees for that. (and then nothing left at the visit)

I have to be really honest here and say that your posts are most confusing.

When you initially started this thread in November 2019  you had been complaining at the charging of a fee of £235. 

 

Ten months later (on 2nd September) you state that a FRESH visit had been made that morning and that a clamp had been applied to the vehicle and that you had to pay the amount outstanding  to get the clamp removed. 

 

Even though a clamp had been applied you state this: BUT NO EVIDENCE OF THAT VISIT'. 

As I have said, I am really confused. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/09/2020 at 09:43, JC101 said:

The TEC cancelled it - but that was last Wednesday, it clearly hadn't got to the council yet.

 

I'm awaiting video evidence, the reply from TEC and the council,

.

And then , there is the confusion in your posts regarding the The Traffic Enforcement Centre). 

Over two weeks ago (on 3rd September) you stated that the previous Wednesday, TEC had CANCELLED the PCN. 

 

Yesterday, you state that "TEC had missed one of the documents' and that your Out of Time application had NOT in fact even been processed!! 

 

On what grounds would you be submitting an Out of Time witness statement?

Why have you waited over 10 months to submit such an application?

On what basis were you lead to believe that TEC had CANCELLED the PCN?  Did you receive a letter from them to confirm this?

 

You now state that 'TEC had missed one of the documents'. It is very rare for this to happen. Can you elaborate further?

 

Assuming that your Out of Time witness statement has now been processed, you should expected to receive a decision in around 6 weeks.  If your application is accepted, then you will be entitled to a refund of the bailiff fees. There will be no need at all to issue a Small Claims in court.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, brassnecked said:

Marstons should be instructed to repay the money if TEC ruled in your favour.

 

It would appear that you have also been confused by the OP's posts. The Out of Time application has only just been submitted. A decision will not be known for approx 6 weeks. If accepted, Marston's will repay the money (as they usually do). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Correct BA, if OOT accepted as you say, but it would be in the fullness of time.

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

I am afraid the OP may have been previously misinformed.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

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...