Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Merligen/Moriarty Claimform - 4xSunny PDL's ***Claim Struck Out***


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 365 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

Ok thanks for that jotty.
 

I will email a reply to court referrals stating not enough information for mediation and wait for local court date confirmation? 

 

I will upload the redacted docs sent with the settlement letter see if there are some bones to be picked out of them!!

 

thanks G

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok will do 👍

 

thank G

 

Hi

 

I have attached the latest letter and documents sent to me. Not sure what im looking for as iv been sent them many letters in response to the claim?

 

I have notice that within the documents is something that is supposed to be from Sunny Loans but is not on letterheaded paper ( looks like something that has been made up?

 

Any advise would be welcomed

 

Thank G

Settlement letter and documents for defence reply.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

might be an idea to follow upload

there it only asks you to remove ref' no's and your details. so they cant ID you here on CAG

 

youve removed all dates and figures but left a few ref no's showing too remove them! put dates and figures back please.

 

are there any tickboxes with your typed name and an IP address by them? there should be 4? as you say this was for 4 loans

assuming you signed up online there must be?
 

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 dx

 

I have Redacted and amended the documents and re attached.

Only other documents sent to me are attached in #67.

 

12 hours ago, dx100uk said:

are there any tickboxes with your typed name and an IP address by them? there should be 4? as you say this was for 4 loans

Only the name is typed on page 12 with no IP address in situe.

 

I have had no default notice or letter stating the selling of the debt from Sunny Loans to SLL Capital Ltd produced would this not be a required document from Sunny and would the need to produce documents for each loan in default? Default notice from SSL Capital was for the accumulation of debt and not for each loan!!

 

Thanks G

asking for settlement letter.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

go back and re read from about post 86.

 

4 loans

no agreements

no default notices

 

stuffed!

 

 

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

Sorry dx trying to get my head around it, 

 

no agreements - is that not an agreement attached above or are you saying “no” cuz it’s just a name with no IP address on the document?

 

no default - because the default is from SLL Capital and not from Sunny loans (Elevate) ? 

Stuffed - claimant because of the lack of above ?

 

thanks G 

Link to post
Share on other sites

SSL are a debt buyer, they cannot issue a default notice.

and ofcourse there should be 4 DN's

and 

4 loan agreements each with tick boxes and an IP address of what device was used and where and what time.

 

and also  dont forget SSL have sold these loans on to another DCA and they are the claimant.

now going by SSL and their claims in the past, they usually push through court themselves and not sell it on again.

IMHO as they have done this, these debts stink!! quick get rid of 'em as we can't enforce anything. merligen have got done over here.

 

 

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

IMHO i don't think you have enough concrete information there to even consider mediation.

 

see what @andyorch advises too

 

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

Sorry dx im a bit confused now?

 

8 hours ago, dx100uk said:

 

IMHO i don't think you have enough concrete information there to even consider mediation.

 

see what @andyorch advises too

 

 

thought there was not enough information for them to take this to claims court ?  
 

now I think your saying I’m not in a good place here or am I reading this wrong!

 

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should not enter into mediation , which is basically compromising that you owe something, if you dont have all the info to decide that, their position is very weak inho.

 

As ive said

They need

4 signed agreements

4 default notices from the original creditor

 

None of which they have.

 

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

As I advised, based on my own experience, let the mediator ring you but explain that you don't have the necessary documents to enter into any discussions. They will try and get you to agree as its just a tick in the box but politely refuse.

It will then be returned to the court and based on the fact you dont have any of the originals forms it will test the resolve of Merlingen. They will hope you crack at some point and agree a deal, they will not want to go to court unless they have the right evidence.

 

Hold your resolve and play their game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dx/jotty thank you for the advice and clarifying the situation I feel much better now,

I think i was meeting myself going backwards trying to work everything out 🙃

 

Ok, no mediation and wait for local court date and see where we are at.

 

Thanks G

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi everyone hope you are all well.

 

MCOL update is that now been transferred to local court I am just awaiting the court confirmation letter. Will the letter have details of next steps to proceed?

 

thanks G

Link to post
Share on other sites

And read like claimform threads.

so you know what is next

how to respond

at each stage.

 

wont hurt either to look at others witness statements too, as that is what is next for you to do.

 

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

  • 4 months later...

Hi hope you are all well.

 

Sorry its been a while but I have had no correspondence from anyone since my last post not even Merligen and was hoping this had gone away?

I have now received "Notice of allocation to small claims track (hearing) and hope to that I can get some guidance to help me through? (don't think I need to post court letter as this must be standard?)

 

I have been reading up on the next steps and know that I must prepare a witness statement around my defence that needs to be sent to court and claimant 14 days before the hearing date ( 09/11/2022) claimant to pay trail fee before close 12/10.2022. Do I need to contact courts to see if this has been made?

 

I will post up witness statement once I have seen more posts to assist and hopefully I can be pointed in the right direction for the final draft, as always everyone's help and advice is very much appreciated.

 

Thanks G

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Do I need to contact courts to see if this has been made?

 

Not particularly, if they dont the claim will be struck out and you will be informed.

 

 

.

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

Hi

 

I have been around the site for assistance with my witness statement which i have attempted below, hopefully some guidance and assistance will be given as I'm sure there will be, here goes!!

 

WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT XXXXXXXXXXXX CLAIM NO. XXXXXXXX 

 

 

                                                                                                                       Defendant: XXXXXXX

                                                                                                                              Date XX/XXX2022

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT                                                                               CLAIM NO:XXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

 

BETWEEN

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX      CLAIMANT

 

AND

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX     DEFENDANT

 

 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 which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. Idem Capital securities issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt 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.

 

3. XXXXXXXXX the defendant in this claim makes the following statement believing it to be true will state as follows:-

 

It is denied that I have reived a consolidated loan agreement by the claimant for the sum of £xxx.xx

 

 

I accept I have in the past had financial dealings with Sunny Loans formally known as Elevate Credit ITNL Ltd. I do not recall the precise details of the agreements but do recall they were over 40 loan accounts generated over a 2 year period between xxxx & xxxx.

 

After seeking advice this led me to check all paperwork I held with creditors, from this I could not find any Credit Agreement relating to the accounts the claimant is referring to.

 

I have therefore sought clarification and requested copies of the agreements from the claimant by way of a section 77 request 

 

exhibits

 

(DOC 3) I sort clarity of any Default Notice by the way of a CPR 31.14 request, sent via Royal mail signed for on xx/xx/xxxx and shows as received signed for xx/xx/xxxx

 

The claimant has still yet to comply to my CPR 31.14 request with regard to clarity of any valid default notices issued by the original creditor, as yet I have never received an original or seen a copy of a valid default notice from the defendant.

following :

 

1. A copy of all the default notices for the accounts in question served under section 87 of the consumer credit act.

2. Notices of assignments

3. A statement of accounts

 To date NO default notice have been produced by the original creditor. 

 

(DOC 2 ssl defence) A Section 77 request for the 4 loans the claimant is pursuing was sent on xx/xx/xxxx via royal mail signed for and shows as received xx/xx/xxx. The claimant responded to the request on xxxx but to date has failed to comply to my Section 77 request.

 

the defendant has failed to produce a copies of the Default notices issued by the original creditor, as far as I can recall any breach with the original creditor would have been on or around xxxx.

 

The claimant as an assignee would not be able to legally issue Default Notices as the debt would have already been terminated before assignment.

 

 

(DOC 4) The claimant was sent a complaint in relation to irresponsible lending to which I recieved a formal a reply on 10/02/022 to say the complaint would be investigated and a written reply would be made.

To date no reply to the complaint has been received.

 

Conclusion

 

I contest that the documents I have received do not meet the requirements and prescribed terms of a legal binding credit agreement, and that the claimant has acknowledged that they are unable to produce an agreement and are unable to enforce litigation action.

 

 

I also state NO VALID Default has been produced from the claimant.

 

I believe that the that the facts stated in the witness state are true.

 

Thanks G

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Requires work...a lot. What date do you have to file and serve by ?

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...