Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks dx 100uk,   Just so I’m clear,   1. I should first send email to bailiff saying x2 previous PCNs for same street went to tribunal & I won , this one I never received any correspondence so could not defend it else I would have & will now be defending it?   2. email the council tell them similar thing , send them tribunal decision of other two?   I need to get confirmation alleged contravention fir this PCN . How should I do that in terms of getting the council to release those details to me?   thanks
    • DX,   I've just noticed something, if you look at the uploaded documents relating to the CCA #6   You see the 2nd and 3rd page are contracts the first one is a blank contract the 2nd one is a digitally signed contract for Very. I can only assume the originally creditor sent the contracts digitally to the DCA and it looks like one of them has either been printed out as a blank page or they have removed the information from 2nd contract and made it look like 2 seperate contracts?   It looks like they only have information relating to Very and not Littlewoods? surley a none signed contract with no name detailing no amount of credit is not legally binding in court?   It looks like if it gets to court they'll go for the Very account but not have a case to argue the Littlewoods one?   Shop direct own both companies so assuming regardless of one signed contract for one company name would still need a seperate contract for another? and one signed contract doesn't work for both?   If this does go to court at what point do I ask for the hearing to be done local to me?
    • For Chrissake simeon!!!   Of course you cannot find para 18(d) that I referred to in #120!!!  That is because - if you had bothered to read #120 post correctly - you would have seen that para 18(d) is in FTMDave's post #105.   One of the improvements that FTMDave had made in #105 to my earlier draft was to replace my paras 13 and 14 with a single combined para 13.  This reduced the total number of paragraphs by one.  That was a good thing to do.   YOU in #121 then reverted to my earlier draft, thus wrongly reinstating para 14 from my draft which FTMDave had removed .  This meant that the para 18(d) that I referred to in #120 had become 19(d) in your version in #121!!!    So when I referred in #120 to FTMDave's draft in #105 and to para 18(d), I was referring to para 18(d) in #105, and not to any draft that I produced days earlier or that anyone else had produced.   And then, now that the para 18(d) confusion that YOU have created is sorted out, you must surely understand my references to para 19 after para 18(d), and to adding a new paragraph 20   Do you understand now?  (You must stop reverting to ealier draft versions and stick with the latest - otherwise it becomes incredibly confusing for all of us and you won't get this counterclaim completed in time!!!)   ========================================================================   All I can really advise you to do now is to read FTMDave's suggestions in #131, and follow them!   (You might find it helpful if you read again all our posts from #120 onwards to help you understand FTMDave's advice.)   You need to sort out your attachments (or exhibits if you prefer).  You've got them in front of you - we haven't - and you understand them better than we do.  Just make sure they are numbered and ordered correctly and are cross-referenced correctly to the Particulars of counterclaim.   Add in interest as per FTMDave's instructions.   And that is it.  From here it's not rocket science, it's just common sense.  If you don't understand by now we can't help.  You just need to polish it off.    
    • Hi there. To answer your questions. The Assessment of the car I got was by the DVSA. The 3 Dangerous faults. Seatbelt webbing significantly weakened offside front. Seatbelt webbing significantly weakened nearside front. Passengers seat insecure Nearside.   The Seven Dangerous Faults. Headlamp aim obviously incorrect. Supplementary restraint system indicates a fault Drivers door hinge insecure Fuel cap sealing device missing (cap seal missing) Fuel Cap Sealing device ineffective (filler neck sealing face damaged) Battery insecure and likely to cause a short circuit Power steering malfunctioning (limited power assistance, power steering pump noisy)   2 advisories  no spare wheel fitted Tyre worn close to legal limit.   The link to Companies House https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08471137   The MOT was obtained on the 8th of October after I had paid a deposit and two days before I took possession of the vehicle. The Garage the MOT was obtained from is in Bristol as is the dealer. I live around 130 miles from the dealer.   I have engaged with the thread as far as possible with other commitments and did not notice the set of questions I did not reply to in my first post which was responded to at 1 in the morning. Any help is gratefully received.      
    • ok. well you could try appealing using the forms you used before i will guess these: you dealt with the others so why not this one? they at the time should have equally been aware there was another PCN outstanding and dealt with that too or atleast told you.   not really sure but worth a try.   im sure a brief likewise note to the bailiff will halt things for now, once he know forms have gone in/history.   dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

hire purchase agreements & the law


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5530 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Bought a 2nd hand caravan from a dealer in feb06,after 2 months the whole van flooded out. After 2-3 weeks the dealer offerred a replacement as we were shortly going on holiday.

during the holiday, found major damp in the van. got dealer to pick it up and they admitted that it should not have been sold like that.they refused to cancel the hp agreement although i told them that the van was not fit for the purpose for which it was bought.

The hp company(Black Horse Ltd) were informed and told of the request to cancel the agreement. they refused due to the dealer repairing the van, although they were informed in writing not to do so.

Black Horse deny they have any responsibility regarding the actions of the dealer,trading standards say that the revised law relating to goods bought, within 6 months it is the supplier who has to prove the goods were not faulty, does not apply to hire purchase agreements i.e. there are no laws to protect the consumer with regard to hire purchase agreements.

Black Horse and other finance companies know if the goods are above a certain amount and faulty, you cannot take them to the small claims court and will cost you a arm and a leg the other route.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes this is correct.You can of course launch a small claims court claim for compensation up to 5k to right the damages that you have suffered/need to rectify the problem.

I would certainly consider going down this route.

Before this though you would need to be able to show that you have exhausted avenues to resolve the situation ammicably without a fair conclusion.

The supplier has the opportunity to exercise some discretion and goodwill,and may be able to offeset a payment to you from their insurers.

You should put some things in writing to them and make it clear that you want something done.

Although going down the other road for complete refund could cost you up to 750 quid,on the other hand the supplier could equally feel it uneconomical to him to defend in the small claims.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the information.

Trading Standards have been in communication with Black Horse since July 2006 and have been informed by them that they have no responsibilities for the actions of the dealer. Trading Standards have informed them otherwise.

Trading Standards now say that if i cannot find a independent inspector to disclaim the dealers statement that the goods are not repaired to a satisfactory level then the only 2 options left are either go to court or contact the regulator.

No Independant local repairers will look at the van as they sometimes obtain work from the dealer and do not wish to risk their own financial position, which is understandable.

I am unclear as to what my next step should be as i have undertaken this through advice from Trading Standards.

Black Horse have refused my request for a damp report as well as a breakdown of repairs, only saying that it has been repaired and has no damp.

I have reported the dealer to the National Caravan Council regarding the quality of the repair work but unsure as to what my next step should be with Black Horse.

I am still making payments to the agreement so that my credit rating would not be affected.

Does it cost up to £750.00 to take someone to the small claims court?

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...