Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • 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

UKPC/DCB Legal Windscreen PCN PAPLOC now Claimform - 1 to 21 The Martletts, Crawley, West Sussex, RH10 1ER **Claim dismissed, counterclaim dismissed**


Recommended Posts

the position is exact

compare it to their photos.

short stumpy silver box car is in exactly the spot you parked in.

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 don't agree I count at least 4 spaces between my vehicle and the wall on the right, possibly even 5. But either way I don't think it is of any significance.

I can also see a lot of flooding in the background of at least two of the pictures. It is very difficult to ascertain markings in a flooded car park.

@lookinforinfo Thank you for the points about the NTD I will include this in the next draft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking on Google Streetview, there looks like a change to the road surface and yellow lines along the right of the road on entry, which could indicate the change of land status - NCP car park to the left, land that is part of the shop's property, controlled by UKPC,  to the right. As in earlier post,  UKPC making their money by not making the difference that obvious.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

open

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

Letter received from DCBL (attached), essentially it is a request pursuant to the CPR to agree to exchange documents electronically. I have seen it written all over this site why that is not a good idea. What is strange is the letter appears to be presented as an offer to maybe make an offer in future.

My options are:

1. Ignore it.
2. Write to them indicating they can send me an offer by post.
3. Send them an offer.

All of these communications are usually designed in some way to make the other party appear unreasonable.

I expect they will be reading this thread, so I think it is worth highlighting the precarious position of being a private parking company staring down the barrel of a court finding it has breached the Data Protection Act after already having its access to the KADOE database suspended twice and once for falsifying evidence.

I think I prefer option 3, it gets out in front of the all the shenanigans and my offer can be open and therefore shown to the judge.

Draft letter is outlined below.

 

Quote

Dear Ms Ensall,

Claim Number: XXXX
Parties: UK Parking Control Limited v XXXX

I write in reference to your letter of 9 January 2024.

On 30 March 2023 you received a letter (a copy of which is enclosed) requesting document inspection pursuant to CPR 31.14. No reply was received.

As you will have seen the Claim has been listed for a small claims hearing at the County Court at XXXX on DD MM YYYY.

It is quite unusual to receive a letter offering to maybe make an offer, but which actually contains no offer.

In response to your reference to proportionality, you have provided no breakdown of your Client’s claimed sum for damages totalling £262.72 which I remind you is in response to my vehicle being in an area where NCP currently charges no more than £1.45 an hour to park and £5.95 for a 24 hour period.

If the true intention of your letter was to highlight your cost concerns you could have of course enclosed a copy of your Client’s offer with your letter. In practice I think the Court will take a dim view of what appears to be your opportunistic attempt to make any forthcoming offer conditional upon you receiving an alternative method of service.

In spite of this, given the respective position of both parties and with a view to unburdening the court, I consider this is an opportune time to attempt to reach a settlement with your Client before further costs in preparation for the hearing are incurred.


Offer

I offer to withdraw my Counterclaim upon the following terms:

 

1.       Your Client discontinues their Claim;

2.       I receive payment of £1070; and

3.       Your Client provides me with a personal written apology for having unlawfully processed my personal data and the subsequent distress it has caused me.

Next Steps

Please confirm, whether you accept the offer in principle which will remain open for acceptance until 12:00 pm on DD MM YYYY, after which point it will be automatically withdrawn.

Your response can be sent to me at the address of this letter.

This is an open letter, a copy of which will be provided to the Judge.

Yours sincerely,

 


 

UKPC - DCBL - Letter 09.01.24 - Redacted.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

is there a hearing date coming up?

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 is absolutely nothing in 1.1 of the CPR that anywhere near mentions a requirement to provide fourth rate solicitors with your phone number or email address.

In fact the worst thing possible to do would be to provide those details. From past experience  we have found that some solicitors leave important details from a defendant until the night before a hearing to make it difficult for defendants to come back with a response or make it more difficult to win their case.

I would complain to the SRA that DCB have sent a misleading letter which appears to ask for your contact details when there is no reason to, save for possible nefarious reasons. Conduct unbecoming I would say.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the point of sending a "without prejudice" letter that says exactly... NOTHING?

It can only be an intimidation tactic.

"Oh dear, they're sending letters filled with legal jargon. I'd better pay up."

Personally, I'd use the normal tactic of ignoring... Avoid letter tennis.

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 The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes no way should you give them an email address.

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

Offer sent in the post.

The SRA has made it clear they take no interest in taking action against cowboy solicitors representing private parking companies.

I'm not sure if the Court is telegraphing something by only allocating 30 minutes to the hearing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

No response was received to my offer.

Following the expiration of my offer I received a letter (attached below) which is an almost carbon copy of the letter DCBL sent on 9 January 2024.

I wrote to the Court indicating the estimated time period of 30 minutes was too short in view of the counterclaim. The Court promptly moved the hearing and increased the time allocated to 90 minutes.

Within the Notice of Hearing the court specifically added:

"When you should attend IN PERSON" [sic]

Further the court issued an order:

"Upon the court noting the Claimant's assertion that there are issues of fact in dispute:

Each party must set out in its witness statement any factual matter which is in dispute and the witness evidence with regard to that fact.
"

UKPC - DCBL - Letter 31.01.24 - Redacted.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Intrepid said:

I cannot post up further documents as I have run out of upload space.

have asked if the std forum upload limit for all users can be for you expanded.

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

no intrepid has exceeded the std user allocation space on the server with soo many threads and soo many giant uploads.

this has happened twice before

ive not the time to scroll thru old threads and delete previous uploads to free space, but thats whats needed by a mod

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

Thank you DX, going through old threads is clearly inconvenient and would remove documents others may find useful.

Please don't be put out by people sharing information on a website that is intended to help consumers become better informed and to pursue their rights through the courts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It might be worth checking with the Council or one of the shops in the Martlets to confirm the street is pedestrianised and confirm the name of the car park. it might be the Martlets but it cannot be 1 to 21 the Martlets so your car cannot have been parked between 1 and 21 of the Marlets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DCBL provided a copy of UKPC's witness statement. Those costs DCBL were so concerned about were the price of a second class large letter, no more than £1.60.

Two key documents are missing:

  1. A copy of the contract between UKPC and the Landowner/Tenant; and
  2. A so called land plan indicating where signage is placed.

I wrote to DCBL regarding their incomplete witness statement and provided a copy of the letter to the court. DCBL missed the deadline to supply me with the missing documents.

I have submitted a complaint to the SRA. I decided to submit the complaint against Mr Neil Gordan Smith who is an accredited solicitor and employed by DCBL as its registered compliance officer for legal practice.

 

UKPC - Claimant - Witness Statement Only 13.02.24 - Redacted.pdf

 

 

 

UKPC - Defendant - Letter 17.02.24 - Redacted.pdf

UKPC - Claimant - Witness Statement Exhibits Only 13.02.24 - Redacted-min.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

ideally you do not want DCBL to send the contract  since without it they cannot prove there is  a contract they have no case.

I hope you also complained to the SRA about them misleading you requiring you to send  them your email address to them referring to the CPR  as the reason for when there is no mention of email  addresses in the CPR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what is more likely is DCBL have sent an unredacted version to the Court and they are simply messing about.

If it turns out UKPC's counsel and the judge have full copies I expect rather than throw out the claim a judge would ask both parties if they wish to continue with the hearing or adjourn to give proper time to review the evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@FTMDave I quite agree having spent time re-writing and reading the Skeleton that is somewhat torturous. The length of material is in my view entirely a result of the inadequate Particulars on the Claim Form. To dispute such claims is totally disproportionate to the fair use of the courts resources and the parties time.

I recall that you said some of the arguments are out of date, you never pointed out specifically what and I would still be grateful to know which arguments you are referring to.

I did experiment with an AI reduction of the Skeleton which brought the points down to two pages. However I also presented the Skeleton to someone to read and it took them about 15 minutes, which I don't think is an unreasonable pre-reading requirement for a judge, especially if it assists them in navigating the little time allocated to the hearing.

On balance I would prefer to submit the longer and perhaps excessive version and not risk missing anything out, particularly at the hearing. Judge's are experienced advocates and I'm sure the judge on the day will focus on the relevant points in the allocated time.

Attached is my Skeleton Argument in defence of the claim.

UKPC - Defendant - Skeleton Argument - Redacted.pdf

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...