Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Before you do any of the above – Stop! You need to spend a few days reading up on the stories on this sub- forum so that you understand the principles and you understand how to go about making your claim. We will help you – and you have a better than 95% chance of getting your money back – but you need to be in control of what you are doing. We will help you – but this is a self-help forum and you need to have done the reading so that you are confident of each step and you know your way forward. Please don't do anything at all – in particular don't send a letter of claim – until you have done all the reading and I would suggest that probably you will start drafting your letter of claim over the weekend. Also, you haven't told us anything about what has happened. We don't know dates, items dispatched, value, whether they were properly declared, whether you bought so-called insurance, you have been declined reimbursement but we don't know why. If you want us to help you then you will have to give us this basic information. Also the fact that you are an eBay trader makes this slightly more complicated although it doesn't at all affect your chances of success.  Read the other threads on this sub- forum – and especially the pinned threads at the top in order to understand the principles. You also quickly understand the kind of help that we will give you and you will understand some of the draft documents which have been used in other successful claims.
    • Thanks, I'm finishing up the skeleton and hope to have it done today. Will look at statement of case too and get that done over the next few days.
    • But, but, but... They've already sent you a letter of claim, which said... "Should the outstanding balance not be settled by 20/04/20204 we will commence legal proceedings against you without further notice." 🤣 🤣 🤣
    • Thanks DX, I appreciate that.   I've sent off the change of address to them. They should have that by now...
  • 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

Received £80 request from CCS for no vehicle tax, it was untaxed while i was awaiting a new logbook as id lost it


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1015 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

Are CCS saying they are acting on behalf of DVLA?

 

When untaxed, was as the vehicle

a) used?

b) on a road?,

c) if not a road, a highway maintained at public expense,

d) if not, details of the ownership (and access to the public!) of where it was parked.

 

Additionally, was it insured (or SORN'ed??)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore ccs they are a powerless dca

if you might owe anything the dvla will write.

 

i suspect they are out of time anyway from the date of the 1st missed tax/not sorn'd date. Hence using a dca, they only had 6mts.

 

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

Hi, it was parked on my driveway the whole time, i was using a different car, since maybe jan/feb this year at the earliest

It was then taken from my drive to a mechanic via a flatbed trailer, and taken from the mechanic back home today (when i taxed it)

 

I can attach a pic of the letter?

 

It was insured during the period, its not worth a lot anymore but its still expensive for me if that makes sense haha, i wouldn't have left it uninsured, so was insured and not taxed, i added my cheap runabout to my policy while all this logbook/ mechanic stuff was ongoing and just never SORN'd it

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

forget about it, and ignore CCS.

nothing they can do .

a DCA is not a BAILIFF

and have 

ZERO legal powers on ANY DEBT ..no matter what it's type

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

Check the wording of the letter. £80 is the normal DVLA penalty offer for the offence of being the registered keeper of an unlicensed vehicle, (which they may be using CCS to deal with).  If not paid, it can result in a summons to magistrates court. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no

 

Your details have been passed to CCS because you have not taxed your vehicle or completed a statutory off road notification document or SORN, resulting in a £80 fine which the DVLA has asked CCS to recover.

 

and no you wont get a magistrates summons either.

its not summary offence.

 

 

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

A Summary Offence is one that can be dealt with by summons at Magistrates Court. Perhaps you meant 'its Not a summary offence'

 

Had it been kept or used  on the public road, it would have been a summary offence.

Edited by Gick
  • I agree 1

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. to have an unlicensed vehicle (not SORNed) is an administrative 'offence', to keep or use an unlicensed vehicle on a public road or place, ie subject to public upkeep is a summary offence..

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless exempt, being the user or keeper of an unlicensed vehicle is an offence contrary to s.29(1), Vehicles Excise and Registration Act 1994.

Being the registered keeper of an unlicensed vehicle is an offence contrary to s.31(A) & 31(C) of the same act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so what?
still doesn't mean a DCA has any powers whatsoever

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

For being the registered keeper of an unlicensed vehicle, the DVLA will often offer a Late Licensing Penalty prior to any prosecution. It could be that the DCA are dealing with on their behalf, and return the matter to the DVLA for further action if it is not paid.

Edited by Montego
Link to post
Share on other sites

only the ones that are an administrative 'offence' only or summary ones that are already outside of 6mts are passed to a powerless dca, both of which can never 'then' have further action taken by the DVLA, as there is no further legal action they can take..

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

Montego, you need to read and understand all of the legislation, not just a bit that you find on Google..

 

(2B)Subsection (1) does not apply to a vehicle if—

(a)the vehicle is being neither used nor kept on a public road, and

(b)the particulars and declaration required to be furnished and made by regulations under section 22(1D) have been furnished and made in accordance with the regulations and the terms of the declaration have at no time been breached.

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...