Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OK, you made a bad mistake by outing yourself as the driver. But that's not fatal.  It's a case of one argument unfortunately down, but lots of other arguments still standing.  Chiefly that this is a scam site with an invisible line separating two car parks in order to entrap motorists. 1.  As LFI says, send a SAR to MET so you can get your hands on their original invoice.  Invest in a 2nd class stamp and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office. 2.  About six months ago, when the tsunami of cases at this site started, lots of Caggers contacted the CEO of Starbucks  https://www.ceoemail.com/s.php?id=ceo-82463&c=Starbucks UK-General Manager  Starbucks then contacted EuroGarages which seems to be another company in their group, and which runs the Stansted branch, and which got the invoice withdrawn.  However, after one, two, 10, 20 of these cases Starbucks seemed to get fed up.  However, it's only an e-mail, and surely worth a shot.  Lay it on thick about being a regular Starbucks customer but on this occasion you found the branch closed, and it is completely unfair to be charged £100 for briefly stopping in a car park while trying to use Starbucks. The main point here though is that MET are very, very wary of starting court cases for this site.  If they don't do court there's no reason to pay them.
    • Thanks jk2054, you were indeed correct. I've received the court order requesting documents and the witness statement etc. which I will read through and begin to compile shortly.
    • Find out what these WhatsApp scams are and what to do if you receive a message from a scammerView the full article
    • You need to send Met an SAR and they will send you the original PCN .. However all their PCNs appear to be the same and as the car parks are on airport land the keeper is not liable for the debt. Only the driver is responsible. But there are other considerations which can be enough for you to win. Poorly lit signage; scam site, it's a penalty; as well as problems with the contract. So you have a lot of things going for you as well as Met are not keen to take well defended cases to Court.  
    • The brand, which runs 216 shops as well as franchised stores, is looking at ways to save cash.View the full article
  • 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

Omg!!! It's In My Account **i Won**


Katel30uk
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6346 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 there! Got the exact same defense from Lloyds. Even though I did provide details same as you, if you follow Diane Harris thread you will see the replies I got, basically ignore it! There is some useful information posted in my replies as to what to put on the allocation questionaire. Good luck. I was in a right panic till I got some replies but feeling more confident again now. I did forget to put the bank account number on the online claim but this shouldnt make any difference as it was on the schedule of charges I sent to the court and to the bank previously. Let me know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The correct information for making a solid claim is on this site, you will need to do a lot of reading and self help.

It will cost you £35 to adjust your claims.

There is enough information on this site to have completed your claims accurately to be accepted by the defendant.

The wording is supplied on here for the POC for MCOL or An N11 form. Both pieces fit in to each section and all you needed to do was adjust your own details.

 

Have a good read of this site before considering starting action against any other claims.

BL:)

Reading through the link below is a good start.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you did'nt use the correct MCOL template which states the statutory and common law basis of the claim, you need an amendment.

 

If you used the template but did'nt send a schedule to MCOL, send a schedule to the court and SC&M ASAP, then use the AQ response below, but take out the bit that says you previously sent your schedule to MCOL.

 

If you used the template and sent a schedule to the MCOL court (Northampton) I would suggest responding in your AQ with this;

 

ALLOCATION QUESTIONNAIRE N149 / N150

 

 

 

 

Section G / J Other information

 

The defendant in its defence contends that this claim is not suitably particularised and the statement of claim is “embarrassing” and shows no reasonable grounds for the claim to be brought. The Claimant disagrees with this contention entirely. The claims particulars clearly state the statutory and common law provisions on which this claim relies, and the claimant will of course elaborate upon the claim particulars at such time as is required upon the direction of the court. Further, contrary to the contention of the defendant, the relevant numbers of the account in question were clearly identified in the claimant’s particulars of claim, and a full schedule of the charges which form the sum claimed from the defendant was sent to Northampton bulk court on the day of issue for inclusion alongside the claims particulars. Additionally, the defendant was served with this information on two occasions previously within a 28 day period allowed by the claimant to attempt to resolve the issue prior to the commencement of this litigation. In the interest of expediency, I have attached another copy of the schedule to this allocation questionnaire.

 

As is known to the defendant, I am a litigant in person in this case. It is respectfully submitted that the contentions of the defendant are highly likely to be an attempt to distress and intimidate, rather than presenting any valid or reasonable objections to the clarity of the Particulars of claim.

 

Follow the above with the guide notes from the templates library, ie, the request for allocation to the small claims track and for an order of standard disclosure.

 

There will not be enough room for all this on the form, so attach a seperate sheet, ensuring that your claim details are marked at the top. Also, make sure you attach a schedule too, and send a copy of the AQ and the attached sheets to SC&M.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

ive had the same defence from lloyds and i suspect im feeling just as they wanted me to, panicky and unsure that ive done the right thing. i dont feel my claim needs to be ammended so i will send the aq back and enter the above, thanks gary, i feel much better knowing other people are getting the same response

karen

cap one - prelim letter sent 23/8 £460 owed

partial refund, now sod off letter received 6/9

lba 5/10, claim served 30th jan,

CAP ONE SETTLED IN FULL 15thTH FEB!!!

 

 

lloyds card services - prelim sent 23/8 £332 owed

sod off rerceived 25/9

lba 26/9

claim issued via mcol 13/10

awaiting papers from SC&M

court date set for 26th March

 

 

nat west - Data Protection Act sent 11/7.. non compliance.. considering court action.

non compliance letter sent 29/8 giving them a further 7 days- gave them loads more days!!

5/10 lba sent for pre action disclosure

settled in full 2.1.07

 

 

 

cahoot - Data Protection Act sent 7/8 on hold for a while

 

Tesco - prelim sent 6/10 £200 owed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, thats a standard defence, they issue that one for every MCOL claim. In some cases where the correct 'Particulars of claim' template is not used, an amendment is necessary. In most cases though, there is no need for an amendment. The MCOL template specifies the common law and statutes relied upon and is perfectly adequate. Lloyds defence is mainly an attempt to put you off, so don't let it!

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi everyone, this is my first post on this forum, wish I'd discovered it sooner as I could've saved my self a bit of hassle, I filled out my claim against Lloyds TSB using Money Claim online. Nothing further has been sent by me. As you are limited to how many lines and words you can use I couldn't make my POC more detailed so would admit with hindsight that they are probably vague. I also didn't put my account number on so thats proably a double boobie on my behalf.

I've got the stock response as detailed on this thread and wonder where I go now. I'm determined not to let the bank of the hook but am finding it hard to find my way around the site. Where for example do I find the MCOL Template? What is SC&M?

 

Any help or pointers would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I've WON! :D

 

My AQ is due back in on Friday so I rang SCM this morning to see if LTSB would be prepared to settle. I was told that he couldn't find my file but that they wouldn't settle and I should just send in the AQ.

 

Ten minutes later a copy of their AQ arrived in the post saying that they were asking for a further month so that they could attempt to settle the claim by informal discussion etc.

 

Cue me ringing back and saying wasn't this rather contradictory as that was precisely what I had just tried to do. He blethered on about how they need time to make sure that the charges are correct and that you haven't tried to claim o/draft interest (which according to him you can't claim). I told him that as an intelligent and well educated woman it was quite obvious that I had researched all my facts before starting the claim and that they had had more than enough time to check the figures.

 

At this point my file miraculously reappeared and lo and behold there was a note on the bottom of it to say they would refuld all charges but that I had to have a review meeting with the branch. I asked "does this mean they are prepared to settle the claim in full?" his answer, "yes!".

 

He said they would send a letter out in the next week but I said that if it hadn't arrived by Thursday then I would be sending the AQ in anyway. He has said they will fax it to me before that so we shall wait and see...

 

Hopefully it will all be sorted soon and a very Merry Christmas shall be had.

 

Thank you all SO MUCH for all the help and advice. If someone can tell me how to go about donating I shall be doing so as soon as I receive my money.

 

 

:D :D :D

 

P.S. here's links to my previous threads

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/23390-katel-lloyds-tsb.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/46765-ltsb-defence-can-anyone.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

congratulations katel30uk you must be chuffed!!

The Journey So Far. . . .

28/08/06 - Data Protection letter sent

03/10/06 - Satements received

03/10/06 - Preliminary letter sent

21/10/06 - Letter Before Action sent

04/11/06 - Claim registered on MCOL

14/11/06 - Claim acknowledged

29/11/06 - Claim defended

30/11/06 - AQ completed and sent

06/12/06 - Settlement letter promised by SC&M Solicitors

08/12/06 - Full settlement offered with terms - deleted these and returned

24/12/06 - Full settlement received in my account!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bookworm, makes is much easier to follow. :D

 

I feel almost sorry for SCM as I am now going to plague them until I receive the letter. If I receive the letter before AQ needs sending back (I would have to post it on Thurs) do I still need to send it back as the money probably won't have been received by then, if you see what I mean???

Link to post
Share on other sites

HOORAY!!!!

 

I've just received the settlement letter from them by fax and they've apparently sent the original in the post. They've settled in full (plus more, further interest I presume). Apparently, once I fax back the signed offer letter they'll action it and the funds should be in my account within 5-7 working days.

 

My only concern is that the AQ is due back in on Friday, should I still go ahead and submit this just in case or are they bound by the terms of their offer letter?

 

A very :D Kate!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They could, of course, renege on the offer and if you don't put in the AQ on time the case would be struck out and you would have to re-file. But in that case they would have a very hard time expalining away the offer letter next time round. On balance you're probably safe not returning the AQ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A question for those who have been succesful with their claims. I received my offer letter from SCM yesterday and have faxed it back to them this morning. They have told me that it will take a couple of days for them to get it back to LTSB and then a further 5-7 working days for funds to be allocated to my account, so in total 7-10 working days or a fortnight today.

 

She did say that this timescale is what they have been advised to say by LTSB but I wondered if anyone had received their money any sooner than this. I can't underatsnd why it takes so long?

 

Thanks K x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...