Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks BN. I should add, that any Bailiff action is, to my mind unconscionable under the present circumstances, and the point should have been raised by the Master IMO. As usual our problem will not be, what the amendment says.  But more, what some EA will imply it says, on the doorstep.    
    • Yes agree UB it will be unworkable in practice, the issue being that some EA will regard the Virtual CGA as allowing them to physically force entry later if payment not forthcoming.  Or like some bailiffs used to try to imply that phone call a desperate debtor makes at Compliance stage is in effect a Virtual CGA when itn is nothing of the sort. Rule 1 it is known some  bailiffs Lie. Rule 2 Treat all bailiffs as liars until they prove they are not.
    • I cannot see many people agreeing to any virtual webcam review of goods to be controlled.     Many people in debt may not even have the facilities to be able to do this.   And the few that agree may try to have a laugh at the enforcement companies expense.  e.g. this painting is by well known local artist Peter Ist, but he signs his paintings as  P Ist and this other painting is by Brian Roke who signs his paintings as B Roke.     Who would agree to this without understanding the consequences ?      
    • Well poss unenforceable cca both lets see
    • Although I will be submitting another request as DVLA haven't stated when they responded to VCS with the information.  18th was a Friday,  VCS say they posted the letter on Mon 21th.  Seeing how this SAR has taken this long, I doubt the DVLA went all out to clear the request over the weekend, but we'll see.
  • Our picks

    • 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
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Recommended Posts

I woke up this morning to find that an enforcement officer has clamped my car that’s parked on the street leaving a voicemail and text to that effect. I had hoped that the Lockdown would have given me extra time to resolve the dispute I have and get my TE9/10 forms signed once this lockdown has been lifted. 
 

isn’t it unlawful to take this sort of action during a lockdown? What advice would you give me now? The bailiff is sat outside waiting for my return call

 

Thanking you in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it’s not related. 
 

I did get a good outcome by appealing the Newham fine but only in regards to the removal of the vehicle to the pound. This was because the court didn’t hear back from Newham when notified of my appeal for this case. The court ordered the repayment for the equivalents mount  the removal and impounding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TE9/10?

what was the orginal 'offence'?

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

Could you give us the specific timeline of what it is for,,and what correspondence you had, and who is the bailiff Co?

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 11/01/2021 at 08:52, tedd4 said:

I woke up this morning to find that an enforcement officer has clamped my car that’s parked on the street leaving a voicemail and text to that effect. I had hoped that the Lockdown would have given me extra time to resolve the dispute I have and get my TE9/10 forms signed once this lockdown has been lifted. 

 

 

Given the popularity of this forum, for anyone else reading this post could you please note that Out of Time Witness Statement forms (TE7 and TE9) do NOT require a signature to be witnessed. 

 

On the other hand, if an Out of Time Statutory Declaration is required (Forms PE2 and PE3), the forms require that a signature be witnessed (by a solicitor).

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...