Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Peter McCormack says "ambition is big" and Real Bedford's attendances are increasing with promotions.View the full article
    • How does one obtain the permit? The permit team number is only open between the hours of 9am to 3pm Mon - Fri. It says on the website, To obtain an additional 2 hours, the driver must pay a tariff of £3.00 + booking fees in person at our Security Hut, is that how you get the permit also, from the security hut? What a rigmaroll that would be but maybe just another step to take to try and catch people out?
    • Anotheruser0000 bear in mind that not all Judges are equally versed in the PoFA regulations. Fortunately now most of them are but sometimes a Judge from a higher Court sits in who is well experienced  in Law but not PoFA. and so they sometimes go "offkey" because their knowledge can raise a different set of arguments and solutions. It does seem particularly unfair  when the decision is so  bad . it can also be that in some situations the motorist being a lay person is not sufficiently know ledgeable to be able to counter a Judge's decisions in a way that a barrister could.
    • The argument about the date of receipt is now dead because the PCN  does not comply with the wording  of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  First reason Section 9 [2] [e]  "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges;" Second Reason Section 9 [2][a] "specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;" All your PCN does is mark the time you entered and left the car park. It does not include all the myriad things you do in between-driving into the car park, looking for a parking space-perhaps a disabled space or  parent and Child place@ getting the children or disabled person out of the car then going shopping. Coming back; loading the car with shopping [, getting the children or disabled into the car, taking the trolley back to the store; driving to the exit perhaps stopping to let vehicles/pedestrians cross in front of you etc. so subtracting the driving times from before and after parking can make quite a difference from their time to the actual period parking time. So the upshot is now that only the driver is responsible for paying the PCN and the keeper is not liable at all even if the name of the driver is never known by Nexus so well done for not appealing. You obviously want to keep it that way to make it very difficult for them to win in Court if it ever goes that far. Although your question is now moot since  the same objective has been achieved by the non compliant PCN [ie no keeper liability] just  about the only way to dispute the timing of the PCN would be if one kept the envelope and there was a discernible date stamp on it that did not match the date on the PCN. There is a new Act coming out [and it cannot come quickly enough ] and one of the things required is that parking companies will have to prove the date of sending out their PCNs. We are not the only ones who sometimes doubt the veracity of their dates particularly as the later it is sent [unlawfully] the shorter the period motorists have to benefit [?] from the reduced payment. I haven't seen it on your posts but do you know how long you are permitted to park for free?
    • I was so annoyed and frustrated about the fact this case was lost it's been floating around my head all night. Dave962, are you sure that's what the Judge said? .... It doesn't make sense. Did the judge in fact dismiss the case on the grounds that the defendant did not make an appeal within 28 days? Effectively telling the PPC about the error entering the registration number and providing proof of payment at that time? To me, that's an important point.  
  • 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

Hoist Claimform - old EGG Loan debt *** Claim Discontinued***


Kurds wife
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 724 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

Then that's their response...they have failed to comply and are in default of your CCA request. Until they comply they cant enforce the agreement.

  • 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

god no and ideally you should have blocked, bounced all email AD's long ago. wonder where they got it from.

don't invite pointless letter tennis and dont pay anything.

  • 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

6 hours ago, Kurds wife said:

Thank you Andyorch, should i respond to the para legals email?

 

Save it for your witness statement...dont give them any help.

  • 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

  • 2 months later...

Just the Notice of Transfer...not your Notice of Allocation ?

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

i have had a email with an mediation time/date. however it clearly states that meditation is only suitable if all 3 conditions can be met, one of these i can't answer yes to...".I have enough information about the claim to enter into negotiations and do not require any further evidence from the other party"   given i can't say yes should i be informing them and cancelling the appointment 

Link to post
Share on other sites

whats the time and date?

 

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 a fortnight away.

you can either let it run then ensure when q3 is asked again before the mediation commences you say no as above

or do it now.  

 

they dont have a chance in hell of getting the agreement, i will guess this was p'haps an online sign up by you for the loan?

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

  • 2 weeks later...

I've received a court letter today.  hearing will take place at 2pm on 31st March 2022.  witness statements must be filed by 4pm on 10th January  😟    i have tried to find some similar witness statements but struggling, if anyone can point me in the right direction I would be very grateful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Hoist Claimform - old EGG Loan debt

just use our enhanced google search box.

 

claimform loan witness statement.

 

clickme^^

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

Had mediation this morning.   I advised the mediator that i didn't feel i have enough information to discuss this.  she asked me what information i needed, told her i needed the credit agreement.

she went back to the claimant, then called me back.  the claimaint had given her details (Basically everything from a statement they have obtained from the previous DMC)  they then offered me a reduced settlement of £1500,   I again said that i didn't feel informed to make a decision based on the lack of information. she said shall i tell them you are happy to go to court.  i said yes!

 

I have started working on my witness statement this morning. 

couple of queries:

  • the pre action protocol document came from  Robinson Way, but the claim is in the name of Hoist Finance, is this normal to have two different names?  
  • The "statement of Transactions" that the solicitor sent by email states that i requested it, and it was also addressed to me at an old address.....should i ring IDEM and challenge them on giving information out to someone not authorised by me to obtain my information or are they allowed to do this?
  • The witness statements have to be submitted in early Jan but they dont have to pay the court fee till March?  i thought the fee was paid before you submitted anything further
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoist are robbersway, just a trading name.

the statement s arent headed on paper from bc but dont mean anything

look at the threads i pointed too and their ws's

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

  • 2 weeks later...

going away over Xmas and not back till 4th january so want to get this tied up before i go if possible.

 

here is my first draft, i would greatly appreciate any feedback/amendments etc.

 

 I, ******************************************* WILL SAY as follows: I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence to this claim.

 

 INTRODUCTION

 1. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed 10p to 15p in the £1 and to which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. Lowell Portfolio I Ltd issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt with costs to maximise profit.

 

 2. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.

 

 

BACKGROUND

4. The Claimants claim relates to an alleged Loan Agreement between the defendant and IDEM Capital Securities Ltd (EX EGG PLC).

 

5. Whilst it is accepted that the defendant has in the past had financial dealings with Egg PLC, the defendant cannot recall with precision the alleged debt the claimant refers to and has no knowledge of IDEM Capital Securities Ltd.

 

6. On 2nd November 2020 ,  the defendant received a letter from Robinson Way (1), claiming the alleged owed sum of £xxxx.   The defendant completed the pre legal paperwork which was included with this letter,  stating they had no knowledge of this debt and  requested additional information, specifically, any default notice, a notice of assignment and a copy of the finance agreement. 

 

7. On 8th January 2021 the defendant received a letter from Hoist finance; (2).  The defendant has no knowledge of who Hoist finance are; the pre legal assessment paperwork  received was from Robinson Way.  The letter acknowledged the return of the pre protocol paperwork and the request for additional information.  Paragraph 3 of the letter, states “the account will remain on hold until the documents have been provided”; to date none of the requested documents have been provided.

 

8. On 8th February 2021 the defendant received a further letter from Hoist Finance (3) stating that they had not received a response from the original creditor and again the recovery against the account had been temporarily stopped.

 

9. On 8th April 2021 the defendant received a letter from Hoist finance (4) stating that they were unable to provide the requested documents; any default notice, a notice of assignment and a copy of the finance agreement. 

 

9. On 18th May 2021, I received a claim form issued by the County Court Business Centre, Northampton, for the amount of £xxx. The claimant contends that the claim for the sum of £xxx in respect of monies owing under an alleged regulated consumer credit agreement with the account no xxx  Contained within the claimant’s particulars the claimant states that the account was subject to assignment from IDEM Capital Securities Ltd (EX EGG PLC) and a default notice was issued.

 

10. On 21st May a formal CPR  31.14 request for documentation relating to the particulars of the claim was sent by the defendant to Howard Cohen & Co Solicitor; the claimants solicitors.   A reply was received on 25th May (5) acknowledging the request and advising me that they would retrieve the documents.   No documents have been received to date in respect of this request.

 

11. On 2nd June 2021, a formal section 78 request was sent to the Claimant in respect of this alleged debt.   No response to date has been received in response to this request.

 

12.  Following the submission of my defence statement, I received a email from  a paralegal for the claimants solicitor (6).   Attached to the email was a letter outlining a list of transactions (7).  This document was allegedly requested by myself from IDEM, I did not request this letter from IDEM as I have no knowledge of who IDEM are. 

 

13.  On Thursday 2nd December, mediation took place between the claimant and the defendant.    The defendant advised the mediator that due to lack of documentation in respect of this claim the defendant is not suitably informed to be able to mediate.  The claimant offered a reduced settlement of £1500 and stated they could not provide me with any further documentation requested.

 

CONCLUSION

11. To date no valid full true copy of the executed credit agreement or the terms and conditions have been disclosed. 

 

12. To date no copy of a Default Notice has been disclosed.

 

13. To date no copy of the legal assignment of the agreement from IDEM Capital Securities Ltd or EGG Plc has been disclosed.

 

14. Therefore the claimant remains in default of my section 78 request and pursuant to section 78 6a of the CCA1974 the claimant is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.

 

15. The claim bought by the claimant is spurious and speculative. The claimant does not have possession of the correct valid paperwork and this is an attempt to mislead and convince the court that the claimant can disclose the legal valid documents on which its claim relies on. It is therefore requested that the Claimants Claim is struck out for the above reasons.

Edited by dx100uk
block of text spaced to paragraphs
Link to post
Share on other sites

check your numbering!!

 

with relation to your No.4.

nothing to do with an agreement with IDEM, it's EGG. just resold by IDEM to Hoist.

 

their poc says:

 

1. The claim is for the sum of £1771 arising from the defendants breach of a regulated consumer credit agreement reference under no XXX  

 

2.The defendant has failed to remedy the breach in accordance with a Default Notice issued pursuant to ss. 87(1) and 88 of the CCA. 

 

3.The claimant claims the sums due from the defendant following the legal assignment of the agreement from IDEM Capital securities Ltd (EX EGG PLC).  Written notice of the assignment has been given.

 

4.The Claimant claims

1.     The sum of £1771

2.     Costs.

  • 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

numbering checked and amended.

what was no 4, now no 3 amended

 

I, ******************************************* WILL SAY as follows: I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence to this claim.

 

 

 INTRODUCTION

 

 1. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed 10p to 15p in the £1 and to which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. Lowell Portfolio I Ltd issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt with costs to maximise profit.

 

 2. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.

 

BACKGROUND

 

3. The Claimants claim relates to an alleged Loan Agreement between the defendant and EGG PLC.

 

4. Whilst it is accepted that the defendant has in the past had financial dealings with Egg PLC, the defendant cannot recall with precision the alleged debt the claimant refers to and has no knowledge of IDEM Capital Securities Ltd.

 

5. On 2nd November 2020 ,  the defendant received a letter from Robinson Way (1), claiming the alleged owed sum of £xxxx.   The defendant completed the pre legal paperwork which was included with this letter,  stating they had no knowledge of this debt and  requested additional information, specifically, any default notice, a notice of assignment and a copy of the finance agreement. 

 

6. On 8th January 2021 the defendant received a letter from Hoist finance; (2).  The defendant has no knowledge of who Hoist finance are; the pre legal assessment paperwork  received was from Robinson Way.  The letter acknowledged the return of the pre protocol paperwork and the request for additional information.  Paragraph 3 of the letter, states “the account will remain on hold until the documents have been provided”; to date none of the requested documents have been provided.

 

7. On 8th February 2021 the defendant received a further letter from Hoist Finance (3) stating that they had not received a response from the original creditor and again the recovery against the account had been temporarily stopped.

 

8. On 8th April 2021 the defendant received a letter from Hoist finance (4) stating that they were unable to provide the requested documents; any default notice, a notice of assignment and a copy of the finance agreement. 

 

9. On 18th May 2021, I received a claim form issued by the County Court Business Centre, Northampton, for the amount of £xxx. The claimant contends that the claim for the sum of £xxx in respect of monies owing under an alleged regulated consumer credit agreement with the account no xxx  Contained within the claimant’s particulars the claimant states that the account was subject to assignment from IDEM Capital Securities Ltd (EX EGG PLC) and a default notice was issued.

 

10. On 21st May a formal CPR  31.14 request for documentation relating to the particulars of the claim was sent by the defendant to Howard Cohen & Co Solicitor; the claimants solicitors.   A reply was received on 25th May (5) acknowledging the request and advising me that they would retrieve the documents.   No documents have been received to date in respect of this request.

 

11. On 2nd June 2021, a formal section 78 request was sent to the Claimant in respect of this alleged debt.   No response to date has been received in response to this request.

 

12.  Following the submission of my defence statement, I received a email from  a paralegal for the claimants solicitor (6).   Attached to the email was a letter outlining a list of transactions (7).  This document was allegedly requested by myself from IDEM, I did not request this letter from IDEM as I have no knowledge of who IDEM are. 

 

13.  On Thursday 2nd December, mediation took place between the claimant and the defendant.    The defendant advised the mediator that due to lack of documentation in respect of this claim the defendant is not suitably informed to be able to mediate.  The claimant offered a reduced settlement of £1500 and stated they could not provide me with any further documentation requested.

 

CONCLUSION

 

14. To date no valid full true copy of the executed credit agreement or the terms and conditions have been disclosed. 

 

15. To date no copy of a Default Notice has been disclosed.

 

16. To date no copy of the legal assignment of the agreement from IDEM Capital Securities Ltd or EGG Plc has been disclosed.

 

17. Therefore the claimant remains in default of my section 78 request and pursuant to section 78 6a of the CCA1974 the claimant is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.

 

18. The claim bought by the claimant is spurious and speculative. The claimant does not have in its possession or been able to disclose the correct valid paperwork and is my understanding that this is an attempt to mislead the court that they can disclose the legal valid documents on which its claim relies on. It is therefore requested that the Claimants Claim is struck out for the above reasons

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a few tweaks...read over and check your happy.

  • 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

  • 3 weeks later...

Happy new year. I have returned from holiday to a letter:

we refer to the above legal proceedings and your defence

upon seeking further instructions from our client regarding your defence we are now instructed to withdraw these legal proceedings on the basis that each party meets their own costs.

please can you confirm that you agree with proposal either in writing by post or by email

 

do I just reply and say thanks and yep? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they want to issue a notice of discontinuance then let them, seems they might be scared of your costs.

 

you've won by the sound of it.

 

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

See what @Andyorch says. Not sure we've ever seen a claimant ask if a defendant agrees to disc and how to react.

 

 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

3 hours ago, Kurds wife said:

Happy new year. I have returned from holiday to a letter:

we refer to the above legal proceedings and your defence

upon seeking further instructions from our client regarding your defence we are now instructed to withdraw these legal proceedings on the basis that each party meets their own costs.

please can you confirm that you agree with proposal either in writing by post or by email

 

do I just reply and say thanks and yep? 

 

Yes providing they send you the Notice of Discontinuance by return email with evidence that the N279 has been filed with the court. If you have not had a satisfactory response by say Fri 7th Jan inform them that you still intend to submit your statement and evidence by the 10th Jan pursuant to the courts directions dated xxxxx.

 

It is standard practice that the claimant inform the defendant of this intention as you have the option to set it a side...so if both parties are in agreement .then there is no question to possible costs...not that there are in Small Claims Track as CPR 38 Discontinuance and costs are not applicable.

 

Well done.

 

Andy

  • 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...