Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yep, true to form, they are happy to just save a couple of quid... They invariably lose in court, so to them, that's a win. 😅
    • Your concern regarding the 14 days delivery is a common one. Not been on the forum that long, but I don't think the following thought has ever been challenged. My view is that they should have proof of when it was posted, not when they "issued", or printed it. Of course, they would never show any proof of postage, unless it went to court. Private parking companies are simply after money, and will just keep sending ever more threatening letters to intimidate you into paying up. It's not been mentioned yet, but DO NOT APPEAL! You could inadvertently give up useful legal protection and they will refuse any appeal, because they're just after the cash...  
    • The sign says "Parking conditions apply 24/7". Mind you, that's after a huge wall of text. The whole thing is massively confusing.  Goodness knows what you're meant to do if you spend only a fiver in Iceland or you stay a few minutes over the hour there.
    • Hi and thanks It looks like they ticked all the boxes to me but I'll try and upload the notice. I was wondering if a witness to late delivery might be considered proof - I'm assuming they posted it as normal but Royal Mail stuffed up delivery. If not then they're really saying it just has to be posted within 12 days of the incident, regardless of when it is received. Annoying! edit ok thanks Honeybee here's my 2nd (actually 3rd) attempt at anonymising, copying and uploading the notice! Sorry about the state of it - I sat on it while distracted by my dog 🙃 pcn front.pdf pcn back page.pdf
    • ROFL - dont get upset just because someone (quite a lot of someones) dont want smart meters - well unless you get paid for it .. in which case ...   I assume you haven't been with Octopus long enough to be on one of the very long fixed price tariffs they offered before the prices went bonkers .. and that you dont use your electricity in the evening/lunch time if you think the 'agile type tariffs are good value .. let alone worth installing a smart meter for - high price a good disincentive for an evening cuppa eh? Let alone all your computer/tv etc time in the peak price evening or lunch time. - and boy do those peak prices instantly hammer your bill when those Russian and middle eastern issues kick off.   I would only have considered a smart meter if solar panels had been an option for me - but roof is oriented completely the wrong way. Oh - and My opinion hasn't changed since the smart meter trials 40 years ago, because neither have the issues (well not enough) but I'm happy for you. Be happy for me.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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

Backdoor Erudio CCJ - old Student Loans - Already SB'd - ***Claim Discontinued***


Badgergirl25
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 820 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

try again...

 

dx

  • Haha 1

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

Hi again,

 

More setbacks health wise unfortunately and I am due back into hospital on 5th November for further breast cancer surgery.  I need to file my defence now and get this over to the courts by 27/10/21.

 

I have had a look at the original witness statement and not sure how to change this to word a good defence. Should I remove all of the waffle and just stick with the statute barred defence or leave as is and add more about it being statute barred?

 

The other thing that worries me is the final line on the set aside where it says it is pending the court's determination at a final hearing as to whether I notified the claimant of my change of address. I have no way of proving this and the more I think about it, the more I am now doubting myself as well. I am also presuming that there will be no telephone/court session on 27th October - please correct me if I am wrong.

 

Please could you let me know the best way of writing my defence? I have looked at others on here for guidance but they are either really short and did not win or totally irrelevant to this case. I have uploaded my original statement to save hunting the thread, please feel free to remove if not needed.

 

Thanks in advance

Statement edited.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

just file our std SB defence with an added line at the top.....

 

 

my last written and signed acknowledgement of the debt was by way of a deferment form send date xxxxxx directly  to SLC..

 

 1 The Claimant's claim was issued on (insert date).

 2 The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980. 
.
If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.
.
 3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £[insert figure from their POC]  or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

 

 

see what @Andyorchthings.

 

short and sweet IMHO.

 

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

then this one:

 

my last written and signed acknowledgement of the debt was by way of a deferment form send date xxxxxx directly  to SLC..

 

 The Claimant's claim was issued on dd/mm/yyyy.

 

 2.The date last payment made was the dd/mm/yyyy 

 

 3.The Default Notice was issued dd/mm/yyyy and served several months after the initial breach thus the cause of action delayed by X months and the Limitations period prolonged to 6 years and X months which in effect allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.

 

 4.Therefore the Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980. If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any true cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

 

 5.The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £x or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

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

Hi,

 

Please check my defence - thanks.

 

Should the initial breach say 5½ years or 4½ years (1 year after the deferment was made)?

 

CLAIMANT
ERUDIO STUDENT LOANS LIMITED
– AND –
DEFENDANT
XXX (PREVIOUSLY XXX)
DEFENCE OF XXX
I, xxx of, xxx, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;


1. My last written and signed acknowledgement of the debt was by way of a deferment form [approximately and probably no later than] send date of 18/02/2011 directly to Student Loans Company Ltd. 2. The Claimant's claim was issued on 09/11/2020.


3. The Default Notice was issued 13/10/2016 and served over 5½ years after the initial breach thus the cause of action delayed by 5½ years and the Limitations period prolonged to 6 years + 5½ years which in effect allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.


4. The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980. If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.


5. The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £4707.84 or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.
Statement of Truth


I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.


Signed: xxx
Dated: 27/10/2021

 

 

Edited by dx100uk
pdf place as txt in post so as to highlight errors..
Link to post
Share on other sites

the 1 yrs deferment period is immaterial.

i would remove 

 [approximately and probably no later than] 

 

have you not ordered by the judge to file a defence not a witness statement?

 

no need for the extra bits top/bottom.?

 

 

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

It s a manual defence submission DX it must contain the headers and statement of truth.

  • Like 1

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure of actual date of completion and return. Is this ok?

 

Claimant
ERUDIO STUDENT LOANS LIMITED

– and –
Defendant
xxx (previously xxx)

 DEFENCE OF xxx

 

I, xxx of, xxx, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

 

1.     My last written and signed acknowledgement of the debt was by way of a deferment form send date of February 2011 directly to Student Loans Company Ltd.

 

2.     The Claimant's claim was issued on 09/11/2020.

 

3.     The Default Notice was issued 13/10/2016 and served over 5½ years after the initial breach thus the cause of action delayed by 5½ years and the Limitations period prolonged to 6 years + 5½ years which in effect allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.

 

4.     The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980. 

If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant. 

 

5.     The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £4707.84 or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

 

 Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

 

Signed: xxx

 

Dated: 27/10/2021

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amend your statement of truth as its not a witness statement at this stage...finish it simply with  .....

 

“I believe the that the facts stated in this defence are true.

 

Sign 

 

Date

  • Like 1

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, done.

 

On the judgment at 3. it says

 

...pending the Court's determination at a final hearing as to whether the Defendant had notified the Claimant of her change of address as alleged at paragraph 11 of her statement of 8th September 2021, costs of the application are reserved. 

 

What does this mean? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Subject to that one point if its proved that the claimant was notified of a change of address...then the court will allow your claim for costs of your application .....assuming you have success.....IE the court dismissed their claim.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why its so important to maintain a paper trail of all correspondence. Like wise they have to prove that you didn't inform them so the burden of proof should not fall completely on the defendant.

 

As for adding the fact that the claim was initially issued on 08/03/2017 and a stay was imposed and lifted then that should be stated at your point 2.I don't know why you have stated "  2.  The Claimant's claim was issued on 09/11/2020. "  ??

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

My bad then from our SB Def txt.

 

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

5 hours ago, Andyorch said:

 

 

As for adding the fact that the claim was initially issued on 08/03/2017 and a stay was imposed and lifted then that should be stated at your point 2.I don't know why you have stated "  2.  The Claimant's claim was issued on 09/11/2020. "  ??

 

Because that claim was the one that the set aside was for. The one that was lifted and stayed only came about when Drydens included it in the paperwork. Apparently it was thrown out and I knew nothing about this until just before the set aside hearing for the backdoor CCJ on 09/11/20. It was mentioned that this could be a 'bugbear'. Is it? I'm really confused now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 17/10/2021 at 15:43, Badgergirl25 said:

1. My last written and signed acknowledgement of the debt was by way of a deferment form [approximately and probably no later than] send date of 18/02/2011 directly to Student Loans Company Ltd. 2. The Claimant's claim was issued on 09/11/2020.

 

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

Okay well I'm still not really following it.....as long as the second claim has a different claim number.

 

So first claim, number xxxxxxxxx was issued 08/03/2017  and the defence you are submitting now is claim number xxxxxxx issued on 09/11/20 ?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

why ofcourse its sb'd!!

 

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

It is sb'd what are you going on about...

 

You sent last deferment 11/02/2011.

Claim issued 08/03/2017......more than 6yrs apart 

 

Dx

  • Like 1

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

Not sure of the actual date in February it was sent, probably the 18th as would have been the friday after receiving it.

Please check amended defence below...

 

Claimant
ERUDIO STUDENT LOANS LIMITED
– and –
Defendant
xxx (previously xxx)

DEFENCE OF xxx

 

I, xxx of xxx, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

 

1.     My last written and signed acknowledgement of the debt was by way of a deferment form send date of February 2011 directly to Student Loans Company Ltd.

 

2.     The Claimant's first claim was served over 6 years from the last written acknowledgment of the debt on 08/03/2017. This was lifted and stayed as it didn’t meet compliance guidelines within the Consumer Credit Act (1974).

 

3.     The stay was lifted on 09/11/2020 resulting in a County Court Judgment, which I became aware of on 22nd January 2021.

 

4.     The Default Notice was issued 13/10/2016 and served over 5½ years after the initial breach thus the cause of action delayed by 5½ years and the Limitations period prolonged to 1 year + 5½ years and then 6 years + 5½ years which in effect allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.

 

5.     The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980. 

If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant. 

 

6.     The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £4707.84 or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.

 

Signed: xxx

 

Dated: 27/10/2021

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...