Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Okay do it that way then. But still email the letter plus attachments, send the letter with the documents and take a copy along also with a copy of the documents. Don't forget the V5 and any keys et cetera Take photographs of the car when you leave it and record all conversations
    • There is other option to Return vehicle tomorrow? Next week I will be super busy at work. I can manage to send letter by post tomorrow and return the car before bigmotor is closed 
    • Both. If you send an email then attached both documents to the email. Send exactly the same to the dealership and also to the finance company. I would suggest that you do it straightaway – tomorrow and then plan to return the car on Tuesday to give them a day to register what is going to happen. Send the letters by post together with copies of the evidence to the dealership and to the finance company. Then when you take the car in on Tuesday, take a paper copy of the letter and also copies of the evidence on paper and leave them with the car and the V5. I suggest that you use a voice recording app on your telephone and record all conversations. In other would switch it on as you go into the dealership. Keep it in a pocket where it can easily hear the conversations. Don't switch off until you leave so you have got a full recording of exactly everything that happened. Don't get into an argument that tell them that you are returning the car with the keys with the V5 with the letter with the evidence and you want your money back Tell them that you will be putting up on trust pilot and Google that you have been sold a car for £31,000 which is an MOT failure. Ask them where your old car is at the moment? If they say that they have sold it then tell them that you want to know how much they sold it for. Keep us updated
    • They'll just deduct the costs from the proceeds, if they ever actually manage to sell. Given that you found it impossible to sell, and so far the lender hasn't managed either, I guess they'll claim the refurbishment was needed to make the place saleable. A bit of a gamble on their part, I would have expected them to just auction it with no reserve to get shot.
  • 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 
        • I agree
      • 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

CEL ANPR PCN - POPLA unsuccessful -PAPLOC - Now Claimform - Morrisons, Butterfly Walk Car Park, London SE5 8RW - paid have receipt too! ***Claim Discontinued***


Recommended Posts

It is the same PCN number as the original PCNs issued back in 2021 when this first happened. 

Last time DBCL issued the Letter Before Claim and acted on behalf of CEL. 

Yesterday I have received a Letter Before Claim from CEL directly saying they will take me to court if I do not respond within 30 days. 

It is for the same case that was issued a N279. 

It is either an error on CEL side or they are just trying to still make me pay and hoping I do not live here anymore? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats weird.

send them a copy of the notice of discontinuance then.

attach a copy of the 1st page of their new PAPLOC too just so they dont get confused.

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

Thanks, will do. 

I was hoping to ignore them so they can waste their time but i guess it also wastes my time to go through the whole process again. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

CEL are idiots, you'll be on a list of non-payers and they'll just automatically have sent out the LBC without bothering to check that the matter has already been dealt with by the courts.

It depends what you want to achieve.

1.  If you want to get rid of them do as dx says and also add a blistering letter warning them that'll you'll smash them for costs galore if they're so damn thick as to take the same matter to court twice. 

2.  If you want to annoy them and waste their time then ignore the LBC in the hope that they really will start a new court claim - that would lead to humiliation galore for them but also of course eat up your own spare time.

  • 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

i suspect one letter and it will end

they wont want to get sanctioned nor get court costs awarded against them.

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

I have decided I will ignore them. I don't want to waste my time even responding to them. They can waste their time and money on getting the case to court again. 

I will respond to the court if it gets to that point. It shouldn't take much more of my time as I have all the evidence and writing saved on my laptop already and can just use it again and also i can let the court know that this case has already been discontinued. CEL can find out from the court that their case has been discontinued previously.  

It will be interesting to see what happens. Nothing might even happen, they may just be trying their luck. 

Will keep you posted 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind if they do issue a Claimform the AOS should put as defence the fact they have already been unsuccessful with this claimand provide the Notice Of Discontinuance at the opportune time.

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

My first inclination was that as the case had been discontinued, CEL should have destroyed your details bur I was wrong. Discontinuance does allow them to return to Court. As , I think, you had submitted a defence, that will mean the Court will have to approve their second claim. 

You  have the right to appeal to appeal against their second claim on the grounds of estoppel and abuse of process.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 A Discontinued Claim is regarded as never being adjudged. As a defence was submitted the claimant would require the courts permission to reissue on the same particulars.

3 hours ago, lookinforinfo said:

You  have the right to appeal to appeal against their second claim on the grounds of estoppel and abuse of process.

Incorrect I'm afraid and a defence would be Res Judicata not estoppel on a previously struck out claim.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part38#38.7

 

.

  • 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

the court will need to give them permission to take me to court again? 

This is ridiculous. 

I do not want to waste too much time on this but I will keep an eye on the court letters. 

I will keep this thread posted. 

Thank you everyone. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

well no.

it would be the same process, they simply write to northants bulk requesting they raise a claim.

and you'd get a claimform like at the start here.

very very remote speculation that would ever happen

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

Andy thank you for correcting me and thank you again for posting the Court Procedure rules.

It makes interesting reading- 38.4 (1) Where the claimant discontinues under rule 38.2(1) the defendant may apply to have the notice of discontinuance set aside(GL).

(2) The defendant may not make an application under this rule more than 28 days after the date when the notice of discontinuance was served on them.

Was the delay in sending the Discontinuance notice deliberately held up to prevent Annabooo  from asking for a set aside.? It was well over the 28 days after the Discontinuance notice was received. I know that the 28 days applies after the Notice was served but could that be part of a reason to refuse CEL permission . I assume they haven't paid the Court  fee to initiate  proceedings again ?

 

38.7 [3]  3) The defendant shall inform the court in writing as soon as practicable whether the defendant asserts that permission is needed and, if so, whether the defendant consents to permission being granted.

Has Annaboo been informed that she has the right to refuse consent ? Does she even have the right to refuse consent in this instance.

I am assuming that Annaboo would prefer to refuse this resurrection on many grounds not only because she does have the right to enjoy a peaceful life.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I would like a peaceful life without the feeling that the claimant can threaten me when they want and discontinued the claim whenever they want and this goes on and on. 

This is all so confusing. 

Let's see what happens. CEL might just be trying their luck and nothing happens. 

  • Like 2
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...