Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

car cash point LBL - Burlington/Marstons wants car _ Live in NI


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1179 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

It has protection s yes - but as yours is not hp but a pers loan, the 1\3rd bit does not apply. The rest does.

 

did you get ahold of step change ni so you have breathing space for things to be investigated.

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

I already am just started a debt management discussions with payplan to try and get my finances on track.

 

The problem being rightly or wrongly I did not make them aware of this loan as I knew the amount they offer other creditors is too little and I was concerned I would lose my car which is why I felt a repayment plan directly with CCP was best.

 

I now am panicking about approaching payplan on Monday to tell them this. The amount they will offer CCP will certainly not be enough to appease them. 

 

As part of my letter of complaint to CCP I stated I have entered discussions with payplan for a debt management plan and can provide you with a reference number going forward.

 

Under the CCTA you must allow me 30 days for them to contact you with repayment proposals as you have failed to accept mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The sad fact is its far better to never involve dmp providers as they do nothing to check if you actually do owe any of your creditors anything esp if the debt is very old or with a DCA.

 

but for the minute needs must you can always cancel it.

 

let things run for now till we have the sar return and results of the complaint.

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

So should I speak to payplan on Monday and have them contact them or am I best to let things sit as they are for now until CCP come back to the complaint as I at least should have until 31st January or am I thinking completely wrong?

Link to post
Share on other sites

it looks that way too to me.

i don't think you are in any danger of the car being snatch until it been addressed by them as well.

just don't do anything silly like leave it overnight on the public highway just to be safe.

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

Yes you are going to have to put payplan in the picture 

Agree with dx that they are unlikely to try anything then whilst the matter is being addressed 

On the bright side here is an outcome of a complaint to the fos that may interest you https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decisions-case-studies/case-studies/my-lender-has-said-itll-take-my-car-because-i-cant-afford-to-repay-my-logbook-loan

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks TOR.

 

Funnily enough I came across that very complaint last night whilst browsing.

I have no doubt that I have a good case for ombudsman.

 

If I was continuing paying this by the time I finish I will have paid 8600 or thereabouts for a loan of 2000.

Absolutely shocking.

 

I know for the most part it is made clear at the start but I was desperate.

My weekly payment is 50 and last week I offered 150 per week as my bf was going to try help me.

 

I told them in the complaint that 150 was not even affordable to me but to try and clear the loan ASAP I was getting other help. They rejected 150 per week which is shocking also. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would help

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

Well they cant charge £300 recovery costs

If they jumped to soon and owe that to burs thats their tough luck!

 

its very revealing they have removed more than 50% of the debt

shows you how much else its inflated by unlawful fees.

 

can you borrow £1500 from family? Might be better to kill it dead.

else i think its time order time but that will be for the whole sum and then argue / sar for these fees.

 

sEE what @theoldrougetheoldr says

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

I don’t think I can borrow that money from anyone unfortunately. They have ignored so much of my complaint. 
what about the fact they won’t give me 30 days due to debt management involvement and also what about the fact no repossessions until 31st January and they have ignored other points on my complaint also. 
I feel so backed into a corner now with no way out unfortunately 😞

Link to post
Share on other sites

They haven't said about those as they are making you an offer, if you accept, they don't need to address them. Wheres the rest of page 1? Bottom missing?

 

Its also worth y to note they havent said what they propose to do they simply want you to reply  so stop panicking ..

 

in effect all the have done is admit the debt is 50% greater than what it should be. And as we normally find thats not all they should be removing.

 

Dx

 

 

 

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 change s nothing good.

 

This sar is going to be revealing.

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

read what you sent sar...they must disclose everything they hold relating to your personal information and dealings with you.

that means ALL the statements, all documents and the manual intervention log ( their account notes) 

 

just imagine if it shows they acted wrongly against regulations...or heaven for bids...£100's of £'s more of unlawful fees they are not entitled too, like what they have already tried on...the unlawfully £300 repo fee...

 

if you bite our carrot we'll still scam you!

wake up at the back please...

 

its also why they have not said what they might do if you don't bite the carrott...  they want to see if you'll bite then you'll never find out.

 

we will respond but in our own time to them.

 

dx

 

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

I was going to go back to them tomorrow and ask them to explain why they have ignored almost all of the points I have made to them. I was also going to advise that I cannot be expected to raise 1800 in 2 days and that Surely that is going against all the ethics they should be promoting as part of CCTA and FCA. Also they say they cannot hold my account due to debt management company as it has already been escalated. Surely that’s nonsense also. 
 

I also made a complaint re the enforcement officer who initially contacted me. I will put up a copy of my complaint to them and their reply. 

 

 

burlington comms.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

they weren't enforcement officer, they were a powerless DCA.

 

the point of only getting 2 days to raise £1500 (not £1800 the £300 repo fee is an unlawful penalty) is one we shall use.

BUT!!!.......

you can't call the kettle back , you've had more then 12mts to sort this out, you haven't, so the other points are pretty much irrelevant, it works both ways .

 

your reply has got to be very very carefully worded in most certainly wont be tonight nor tomorrow you should answer poss by friday, you rush back with a poor reply you play right into their games. don'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

How do I know what to reply though and how to get it right. 


I may have had 12 months to sort it but I simply have not been able to afford to keep it up.

In December I had high hopes but circumstances completely out of my control at that time meant rightly or wrongly my bank account was not on my mind.

 

Bear in mind I have taken out 2000 and paid back 4700 or thereabouts.

So it certainly isn’t the case that I never ever paid them or tried to run away.  

I have made substantial payments throughout these couple of years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You might not owe anything....

 

as i said we'll help with the reply

slow down

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

I felt that also to be honest.

They can’t just decide to say what they like?

 

Surely if both bound by FCA rules they have to abide by them re no repossessions.

How can they say they don’t?

You will see the DCA saying it is incorrect about no repossessions but what they are saying is completely wrong 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...