Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Lantern/Moriarty PAPLOC Now Claimform- Morses Doorstep Loan ***Claim Struck Out*** now Judgement for Claimant!!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 370 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

Hello, 

Helping my friend out again.  This last year has been rather lovely for her as she has not been sent constant DCA letters but here they go again. 

Have any of the procedures changed since Covid or is it still the same CPR/CCA and wait for documents or court paperwork(and fill out the form)?  

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Topic moved to Debt Collection Agencies Forum.

 

Andy

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

Sure moriarty's client is morses??

Not a dca?

 

I suspect the letter says letter of claim and there is a reply pack too wanting I&E too?

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

ok lets keep pulling teeth .......who?

 

 

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

aha though so our old mates MMF that rebranded as lantern because the got fined so many times be differing authorities for the way the for want of a differing word tried to scam debtors some years previous

 

i'll move you to the MMF/lantern forum and you can have a read...

 

but yes follow post 2 of our letter of claim thread by 30 days.

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Lantern/Moriarty letter Of Claim - Old Morses Loan

was this a doorstep loan?

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

good, they'll never get anywhere with this, just trying to find a mug that wants to wet themselves believing they are bailiffs and have superpowers.

no-one touches these old morses doorstep loans now with a barge pole, been that way for years , as the paperwork is virtually non existent, just like provident doorstep loans.

 

even if it were, with a bit of scratching you'll probably find this was one in a series of Loans?, that rolled and rolled, or no affordability checks were ever done, so can be subject to an IRL complaint against morses too.

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Lantern/Moriarty letter Of Claim - Old Morses doorstep Loan
  • 4 months later...


 

Name of the Claimant ? Lantern Debt Recovery

 

Date of issue –  02/05/22

 

AOS 21/05/22 -

 

defence 03/06/22

 

Particulars of Claim

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?

1THE DEFENDANT OWES THE CLAIMANT £XX UNDER A REGULATED LOAN AGREEMENT WITH MORSES CLUB PLC DATED XX AND WHICH WAS ASSIGNED TO THE CLAIMANT ON XX AND NOTICE WAS GIVEN TO THE DEFENDANT ON THE XX(DEBT).  


2.DESPITE FORMAL DEMAND FOR PAYMENT OF THE DEBT THE DEFENDANT HAS FAILED TO PAY

 

3.AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS XX AND FURTHER CLAIMS INTEREST THERON PURSUANT TO SECTION XX OF THE COUNTY COURT ACT 1984 LIMITED TO ONE YEAR TO THE DATE THEROF AT THE RATE OF 8.00% PER ANNUM AMOUNTING TO XX.  

 

What is the total value of the claim? ~£475
 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes, December last year.  
 

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No
 

Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Morses Doorstep Loan, of which the agent never returned.  
 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After
 

Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Home Loan
 

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Unknown, I am unable to get her to apply to one, even the free one.  
 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Debt Purchaser
 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Unsure


Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Unsure
 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Unsure
 

Why did you cease payments? Agent never turned up, Mainly due to pandemic I assume although they never turn up for these things.  
 

What was the date of your last payment? None made
 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Unaffordable lending maybe? No complaints were made but I see provident etc are all shutting up shop.  
 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No


Will mark as defended and work on the defence.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Lantern/Moriarty - Morses Doorstep Loan
  • dx100uk changed the title to Lantern/Moriarty PAPLOC Now Claimform- Morses Doorstep Loan

what date did she take this out

you have removed all dates

 

old and new threads merged

 

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

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?

1THE DEFENDANT OWES THE CLAIMANT £XX UNDER A REGULATED LOAN AGREEMENT WITH MORSES CLUB PLC DATED XX AND WHICH WAS ASSIGNED TO THE CLAIMANT ON XX AND NOTICE WAS GIVEN TO THE DEFENDANT ON THE XX(DEBT).  


2.DESPITE FORMAL DEMAND FOR PAYMENT OF THE DEBT THE DEFENDANT HAS FAILED TO PAY

 

3.AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS XX AND FURTHER CLAIMS INTEREST THERON PURSUANT TO SECTION XX OF THE COUNTY COURT ACT 1984 LIMITED TO ONE YEAR TO THE DATE THEROF AT THE RATE OF 8.00% PER ANNUM AMOUNTING TO XX.  

 

What is the total value of the claim? ~£475

 

 

 

1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature .The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

2. The Claimants pleadings are noted.  The defendant has in the past had financial dealings with Morses. The Defendant does not recall the precise details or agreement nor the claimant having failed to state any alleged account number. 

 

4. The claimants pleadings regarding failure of payments and termination are noted although irrelevant without a corresponding agreement number in connection to the alleged debt.
 

5. The Claimants pleadings regarding the assignment of the debt is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment  pursuant to section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 allegedly served on **/**/**** from either the Claimant or Morses.

 

6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

(b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice

(c) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

(d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

6. On receipt of this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request pursuant to the CCA1974.  The claimant as of this date is yet to comply and is therefore prevented from enforcing any alleged agreement. 

 

6. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

7. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82 A of the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

8. 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.

I was going to insert something about them failing to adhere to the 30 days requirement of the PAP as its now been 5 months but having now read the PAP from Justice.gov.uk I cant see anything that requires them to do so.  Have I misunderstood that aspect?  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to include the fact you replied to the pap wanting details inc a CCa request and the claimants sols failed to reply put the date of the loc and the date of you reply.

 

when did she take this out please

you've munged every date from their poc.

 

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

It was taken out about a week before the Lockdown.  

 

Thanks, I will add PAP stuff now that now.  

 

1.  The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature .  The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

2.  The Claimants pleadings are noted.  The defendant has in the past had financial dealings with Morses.  The Defendant does not recall the precise details or agreement nor the claimant having failed to state any alleged account number. 

 

3.  The claimants pleadings regarding failure of payments and termination are noted although irrelevant without a corresponding agreement number in connection to the alleged debt.
 

4.  The Claimants pleadings regarding the assignment of the debt is denied.  I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment  pursuant to section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 allegedly served on **/**/**** from either the Claimant or Morses.

 

5.  It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

(b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice

(c) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

(d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

6. On receipt of the claimants letter before action dated 01/12/2021 I requested copies of the information requested above by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request pursuant to the CCA1974.  The claimant as of this date is yet to comply and is therefore prevented from enforcing any alleged agreement. 

7.  The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.  The creditor must provide that document/information requested within 30 days of receipt of the response or provide an explanation as to why it isn’t available. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.

 

8.  As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
 

9.  On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82 A of the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

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.

Edited by MrJohnW
Link to post
Share on other sites

1. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.The creditor must provide that document/information requested within 30 days of receipt of the response or provide an explanation as to why it isn’t available. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.

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

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 months later...

what happened in this thread?

 

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 is from the court, says she needs to provide any documents she will rely on in court.  

Shall we send a reply stating that the claimant has not provided any evidence of the claim and has not replied to the CCA/CPR, so there are no documents available to her?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

No ...you must comply with the directions stated within the N157 Notice of allocation by submitting a fully particularised statement in support of the defence and any documents wished to rely upon or referred to within either the defence or statement.

 

All the above must be filed with the court and served on the claimants  solicitor by the date stated within the Notice of Allocation.

 

Andy

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

So, there are no documents to file, the claimant has provided no evidence thus far, and no one to give evidence at court(As she wont attend, and no one can attend on her behalf).  

So do nothing?  

 

Edited by MrJohnW
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...