Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well we can't predict what the judge will believe. PE will say that they responded in the deadline and you will say they don't. Nobody can tell what a random DJ will decide. However if you go for an OOC settlement you should still be able to get some money
    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • 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.  
  • 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

EON/Wedlake Bell LLP PAPLOC Now Claimform - old Dual Fuel Energy Util Bill for old property


Jase1982
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 253 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

if you dont attend court if/when there ever is a hearing at your local court you will lose..end of.

 

dont forget to not only put no but the reason too from the guide

 

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

In the (name your local county court)

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Morning, I received the attached copy of DQ form through to my email today.  Which is over 2 weeks after the deadline.  Is this allowed?  Had I not filled it in time I'd lose.

 

I also received a copy of Notice of change of legal representative form, which isn't great, so I've been unable to properly redact it and attach it here.  In summary, it basically says that they are now no longer represented by the legal representative stated on the claim form, and he will now be representing the case himself.  His position is Litigation officer.

 

Two things struck me ... 1. why would they send all this via e-mail when there's no guarantee I'd receive it, and given they instructed me to send all correspondence to their legal representative (who now is no longer involved in the case), they probably wouldn't have received a copy of my DQ form as I sent it to their legal representative.  Were they ever involved at all as I've not had a response to my CPR request.

 

2. Where it asks whether the case could be considered without a hearing, they have ticked yes.  So, they are basically saying that here is a bit of paper and here is a figure owing, this is what you owe and the case is closed and shut.

 

Any advice would be appreciated as MCOL still has no update since 3/4/23.

 

Claimants DQ by email.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not dated so may have been filed with the court on time....check the status on MCOL claimant DQ received  dated xxxxx.

 

Change of Sol irrelevant.

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

On MCOL it just says DQ sent to me 3/4/23 and case stay lifted 3/4/23...

 

What happens if he's requested to have no hearing, yet I've requested one?  What is he hasn't filed this by the due date as it looks to me as though he hasn't and has just sent me this filled in and completed.  I have no way of knowing if the court has received, other than MCOL, and MCOL says he hasn't filed their DQ.  In fact, MCOL says I haven't filed mine, even though I have

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep an eye on it until its updated...normally DQs are sent to both parties same date when a stay has been lifted.

 

What date were they supposed to be filed 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

  • 2 weeks later...

So, it's been 2 weeks since I had that e-mail from someone at E.on (Subject of this thread is incorrect btw).

 

MCOL has also not been updated at all and I've received no further information through the post.

 

Does anyone have any advice on whether this is normal?  I've fought cases before but I don't recall it taking a month for a DQ to be filed and processed.  I'm just wondering if this guy is bluffing and hasn't actually filed it?  Any insight would be appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • AndyOrch changed the title to EON/Wedlake Bell LLP PAPLOC Now Claimform - old Dual Fuel Energy Util Bill for old property

You can only go on the MCOL status page ...if last entry defence filed then that's where its at.

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

  • 2 weeks later...

it won't show stayed on MCOL ....its automatic court process.

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

Cant ever be stayed anyway now once DQs have been submitted...it can be struck out if the claimant fails to submit their DQ on time or if the defendant fails to submit on time the defence can be struck out and judgment for the claimant.

Its an allocation delay which will be with your local county court nothing to do with MCOL now.

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

On 04/05/2023 at 11:33, Jase1982 said:

On MCOL it just says DQ sent to me 3/4/23 and case stay lifted 3/4/23...

😂

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 think it is unlikely that a claim will be stuck out immediately if a DQ is not filed on time. If you read the wording on the court directions issued by the CCBC it usually says "may be struck out".

I think it is probably standard practice that the court will issue an "unless order" giving the party in default of the directions one last chance to comply.

MCOL records are not gospel. The processing time of the court means that documents received, perhaps on time, may not be recorded as filed until a later date.

While this may appear confusing I suppose in a way it is technically correct, a document may have been received on time and probably marked in some way to show when it was received, but is actually filed on a different date commensurate to the workload of the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

I think it is unlikely that a claim will be stuck out immediately if a DQ is not filed on time. If you read the wording on the court directions issued by the CCBC it usually says "may be struck out".

I think it is probably standard practice that the court will issue an "unless order" giving the party in default of the directions one last chance to comply.

I didn't say immediately and obvs there would be an " Unless Order " :confused:

  • 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

  • 2 weeks later...

And yet you filed it 20th April the courts must be creaking :classic_wink:  Next will be the Proposed or Notice of Allocation N157///come back when you receive this....hopefully it will be before December :becky:

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

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Morning,

I received a letter yesterday from the local magistrates Court saying the following...

IT IS ORDERED THAT UNLESS THE DEFENDANT DO FILE THE DIRECTION QUESTIONNAIRE BY 12:00 ON 9TH AUGUST 2023 HIS STATEMENT OF CASE SHALL BE AUTOMATICALLY STRUCK OUT AND JUDGEMENT SHALL BE AUTOMATICALLY ENTERED FOR THE CLAIMANT

 

I'm a bit confused because I filed my DQ before they did in line with the timings already set out by the court.  It was the claimant that filed there's weeks after the deadline.

Can someone please advise?  Thanks

 

Maybe they've sent this demand to the wrong party?

mcol says I filed my DQ 16th June, even though I filed it in April.  There's nothing on there about their DQ having ever been filed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

weve seen that before.

we've also seen people not read the letter properly.

 

scan it up

 

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

time to give the court a ring me thinks..

though there is not harm in sending a copy of your courts N180 again by email to the court querying the N24 they sent referencing the existing MCOL entry 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...