Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you!    It was bought on my debit card    
    • Hi. Welcome to CAG. How was the car purchased?  
    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

NPE/BW ANPR PCN PAPLOC now claimform - wrong reg - MJB Winelodge, Bridge Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR32 3LR


Recommended Posts

No doubt in response to the Government coming out with new regulations that will scrap  the kangaroo courts and appeals set up by BPA and IPC . Under the new regs minor things like your mistake in keying will automatically be quashed. 

I doubt that they will take this to Court since it would be thrown out by any Judge so why pay anything when you don't owe anything.

Edited by lookinforinfo
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, let's hope so.  Not just for me but for anyone else who gets harassed and threatened with court action for an entry error.  Everyone's input and advice on this thread has been really appreciated and it has given me the confidence to fight this all the way should it come to a civil court action, albeit unlikely. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi,

As FTM Dave requested earlier, I have attached photos in the PDF of the the parking meter at different distances, the official parking notice and the distance between the street lights on both sides.  Next time I'm in Oulton Broad at night when this happened, I'll take photos of how dark the machine is without dedicated machine lighting and poor street lights.

 

Many thanks

Parking Meter Images.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever the signage says incorrect entry is de-minimis, and anyway many cheapo ANPR fleecers use has a hissy fit with O and 0, and I and 1 5 and S

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

Thanks and interesting to know that some machines have problems with certain letters and numbers.  As mentioned, photos were asked for earlier so I thought I would post them just out of interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi lookinforinfo,

 

No problem, regarding the 'Pay on Foot car park' sign there are two, one on the inside at the front of the carpark approximately 5-10 meters from the entrance and another one on the inside at the back of the car park roughly in the middle.  There isn't one at the main entrance to the car park.  Both are situated inside the car park front and back.

Edited by SCDH
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping it wouldn't be too near the entrance so that there was no contract on offer when motorists entered. I would have thought that 5 metres at least inside would not constitute an offer at the entrance. Therefore there is only an invitation to treat.

Edited by lookinforinfo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks lookinforinfo. The sign's text at the font is facing internally so it can't read until you are inside the carpark looking outwards several meters to the right of the entrance.  Therefore, the wording isn't visible until you are actually inside the carpark. I don't know if that makes any difference but I would have thought the point about incorrect entry being de-minimis would be the bigger issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It means that their signage, if that is the first sign when arriving at the car park, that the signage is not capable of offering a contract only an invitation to treat. This may help-

WWW.LAWTEACHER.NET

Offers and invitation to treat are the primary examples of transactions and they have certain procedures to secure interchange between people. This essay will focus on some human rights in the contract law. However, in...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

wording of the sign is wrong 

it should read entering AND remaining.

 

ignore them until/unless they issue a letter of claim.

 

there is also the issue of wrong reg is soon to not be a reason to issue a speculative invoice

 

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

They would be ill advised to try a claim, given what we now  know about the site and signage, but they are blinded by greed .

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

Thanks gents.  No sign is visible to read until you have entered the carpark, certainly not on entry so on the face of it it's not possible to offer a contract or invitation to treat prior to entering.  I'll try and get carpark area photos next time so you can see the positioning of the signs. 

 

Interesting point about the wording.  Yes, I fully intend to ignore them until a Letter Of Claim or LBC is received.  I've had an email from BW Legal last week enticing me to call them for a possible reduced fine.  Of course, if I were to do that they would then badger me with calls and texts as well as emails and letters so I've got no intention of calling them.  They even stated that we will continue to call and text me if I do not respond, so why would I? The email from last week is attached as a PDF, of course minus personal details.

 

Agree, greed is what drives them and of course by trying to wear people down with constant letters and threats, some people will give in and pay just to get them off their backs!

 

  Appreciate your help.

BW Legal 2nd Email.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

FINE ...where does it say that?

 

They will do what they like to try and intimidate you by whatever method. Until you get a PAPLOC by royal mail...block and ignore

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

thread tidied

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

  • 1 month later...

For all the contributors on this thread, many thanks for all your help so far.

 

I have just received a Letter of Claim from BW Legal. along with several other documents including...

 

(1) ANNEX 1 INFORMATION SHEET - Which starts: You have received this notice because a business intends to take you to court in relation to a debt.

 

(2) Pre-Action Protocol For Debt Claims - Particulars of debt - Statement of Account - Warning of court proceedings

 

(3) REPLY FORM - YOU HAVE 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE AT THE TOP O FTHIS ENCLOSED LETTER TO FILL IN AND RETURN THIS FORM.  IF YOU DON'T, IT COULD END UP IN COURT PROCEEDINGS. 

SECTION 1: Do you owe the debt? BOX A - I agree I won the debt,  BOX B - I owe some debt but not all of it, BOX C - I don't know whether I owe the debt, BOX D - I dispute the debt.  SECTION 2: How will you pay? BOX E - I will pay what I owe now, BOX F - I will pay but I need time to pay BOX G - I am getting or intend to get debt advice, BOX H - I have provided documents, BOX I - I need more documents or information.  Reverse side - Income & Expenditure Form.

 

Do I complete the REPLY FORM and tick (BOX D - I dispute the debt) with a covering letter and if so, advice on how that letter should be worded would be really appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its "snotty letter" time, use the Google search box at the top of the pege to search on Snotty Letter, to see what its all about , and you do not use their included forms, to reply.  The idea is to let the Fleecer's know that you know their case is likely pants as wrong registration number is de minimis, so not enough to ground a claim, whatever POPLA might say, and so  they would be better to leave you alone and move on to a more willing mug.

  • 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 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

Thanks Honeybee,

 

I did post the details from the sticky on the first page but here they are again unless you mean something else?

 

As requested, my answers are as follows:

 

Please answer the following questions for ANPR.

 

1 Date of the infringement 23rd February 2018

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 28th February 2018

 

3 Date received Can't remember - approximately within a week.
 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Yes it does.
 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes, a photos of my car entering and leaving and the registration number
 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No
 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A
 

7 Who is the parking company? National Parking Enforcement

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] MJB Winelodge, Bridge Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR32 3LR
 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Independent Appeals Service www.theias.org

Letter of Claim.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a Claimform  is a PAPLOC, so it's send a snotty letter to the PPC and BW legal, others will be along soon to give more input on the hows and whys of a Snotty Letter.

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

Thanks Brassnecked,

 

I did set the search box at the top of the page to Google but couldn't make too much sense out of the results?  I'm sure I'll get the gist in due course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

use our enhanced google search box on this page

if you use our search in the top red banner you need to put a + sign between the words so

 

snotty+letter.

 

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

There are examples you could adapt in drew57's and munksey2001's threads.

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

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...