Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The lawsuits allege the companies preyed upon "vulnerable" young men like the 18-year-old Uvalde gunman.View the full article
    • Hi, despite saying you would post it up we have not seen the WS or EVRis WS. Please can you post them up.
    • Hi, Sorry its taken me so long to get round to this, i've been pretty busy today. Anyway, just a couple of things based on your observations.   Evri have not seen/read my WS (sent by post and by email) as they would have recognised the claim value is over £1000 as it includes court fees, trial fees, postage costs and interests, and there is a complete breakdown of the different costs and evidence. I'd say theres a 1% chance they read it , but in any case it won't change what they write. They refer to the claim amount that you claimed in your claim form originally, which will likely be in the same as the defence. They use a simple standard copy and paste format for WX and I've never seen it include any amount other than on the claim form but this is immaterial because it makes no difference to whether evri be liable and if so to what value which is the matter in dispute. However, I have a thinking that EVRi staff are under lots of pressure, they seem to be working up to and beyond 7pm even on fridays, and this is quite unusual so they likely save time by just copying and pasting certain lines of their defence to form their WX.   Evri accepts the parcel is lost after it entered their delivery network - again, this is in my WS and is not an issue in dispute. This is just one of their copy paste lines that they always use.   Evri mentions the £25 and £4.82 paid by Packlink - Again, had they read the WS, they would have realised this is not an issue in dispute. They probably haven't read your WS but did you account for this in your claim form?   Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency This supports the view that once a user (i.e, myself) selects a transport agency (i.e Evri) that best suits the user's needs, the user (i.e, myself) enters into a contract with the chosen transport agency (i.e, myself). Therefore, under the T&Cs, there is a contract between myself and Evri.   This is correct but you have gone into this claim as trying to claim as a third party. I would say that you need to pick which fight you wan't to make. Either you pick the fight that you contracted directly with EVRi therefore you can apply the CRA OR you pick the fight that you are claiming as a third party contract to a contract between packlink and EVRi. Personally, I would go with the argument that you contracted directly with evri because the terms and conditions are pretty clear that the contract is formed with EVRi and so if the judge accepts this you are just applying your CR under CRA 2015, of which there has only been 2 judges I have seen who have failed to accept the argument of the CRA.   Evri cites their pre-existing agreement with Packlink and that I cannot enforce 3rd party rights under the 1999 Act. Evri has not provided a copy of this contract, and furthermore, my point above explains that the T&Cs clearly explains I have entered into a contract when i chose Evri to deliver my parcel.    This is fine, but again I would say that you should focus on claiming under the contract you have with EVRi as you entered into a direct contract with them according to packlink, as this gives less opportunites for the judge to get things wrong, also I think this is a much better legal position because you can apply your CR to it, if you dealt with a third party claim you would likely need to rely on business contract rights.   As explained in my WS, i am the non-gratuitous beneficiary as my payment for Evri's delivery service through Packlink is the sole reason for the principal contract coming into existence. I wouldn't focus this as your argument. I did think about this earlier and I think the sole focus of your claim should be that you contracted with evri and any term within their T&Cs that limits their liability is a breach of CRA. If you try to argue that the payment to packlink is the sole reason for the contract coming in between EVRI and packlink then you are essentially going against yourself since on one hand you are (And should be) arguing that you contracted directly with EVRi, but on the other hand by arguing about funding the contract between packlink and evri you are then saying that the contract is between packlink and evri not you and evri.  I think you should focus your argument that the contract is between you and evri as the packlink T&C's say.   Clearly Evri have not read by WS as the above is all clearly explained in there.   I doubt they have too, but I think their witness statement more than anything is an attempt to sort of confuse things. They reference various parts of the T&Cs within their WS and I've left some more general points on their WS below although I do think  point 3b as you have mentioned is very important because it says "Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line." which I would argue means that you contract directly with the agency. For points 9 and 10 focus on term 3c of the contract  points 15-18 are the same as points 18-21 of the defence if you look at it (as i said above its just a copy paste exercise) point 21 term 3c again point 23 is interesting - it says they are responsible for organising it but doesnt say anything about a contract  More generally for 24-29 it seems they are essentially saying you agreed to packlinks terms which means you can't have a contract with EVRI. This isnt true, you have simply agreed to the terms that expressly say your contract is formed with the ttransport agency (EVRi). They also reference that packlinks obligations are £25 but again this doesn't limit evris obligations, there is nothing that says that the transport agency isnt liable for more, it just says that packlinks limitation is set. for what its worth point 31 has no applicability because the contract hasn't been produced.   but overall I think its most important to focus on terms 3b and 3c of the contract and apply your rights as a consumer and not as a third party and use the third party as a backup   
    • Ms Vennells gave testimony over three days, watched by those affected by the Post Office scandal.View the full article
    • Punters are likely not getting the full amount of alcohol they are paying for, a new study suggests.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
  • Recommended Topics

Estate Agent CCJ for +£5k fees - Now Wilson & Roe HCEO's waving Arms about a Charging Order


Recommended Posts

ive got a ccj for a debt now at around 8k.

im now been threatened with a charging order on my property 

Ive read they have to apply for an interim order then a charging order and if needed they can aquire a order of sale.

the advice im looking for is how long from the interim order being applied for what is the time limit before it shows at the land registry?

also if they apply for a order of sale what happens if the property doesnt or takes ages to sell what can happen.

thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the debt/ccj? And who is spoofing you please? 

Already have a thread? 

Is the property in joint names too and debt is just yours? 

 

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 debt? 

Was the court claim defended.. Tell us more please.. 

And I bet the threat-o-gram doesn't say will anything

Scan it up to pdf please 

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

the debt is for estate agent fees which ive just ignored wrong i know.

ccj was issued they came to my home three times i want in so they left letters to state they had been.

im a bit worried about uploading docs,but the long and short of the letter states they have checked with land registry and found out i own the property and giving me one week to pay the debt or they will apply for a charging order,

i dont have the money to pay the debt

,but im concerned they may stop me from trying to sell the property or force me to sell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't force you to sell.. It's a threat-o-gram.. Stop panicking scan it read upload

4 minutes ago, marksheff said:

they came to my home three times i want in so they left letters to state they had been.

Who are 'they' 

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

nope they are not a powerless DCA working for Wilson&Roe.

as the letter clearly states,

it's FROM Wilson&ROE whom are HCEO bailiffs operating to enforce a High Court Writ attained against you for a CCJ Judgement by their CLIENT, Sequence (UK) LTd (T/A William H Brown.)

from you posts it appears they have attended 'several times'? 

so i will guess you have previous letters like a Notice Of Enforcement' etc?? have you. 

and they have subsequently visited too, so i expect they've added ££10 to the debt figure quoted on the judgement for claimant you got..when was that?
 

if you read the bottom of their letter carefully it says: 

Quote

Should .you fail to contact us by this date with your proposals to settle this debt, we will advise the Claimant to apply to the court for a Charging Order against your property.

i can advise my dog to sit, if it does is a totally diff matter.

it's a threat-o-gram that doesn't say WILL anything. Hot Air

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

so as above ans.

can you please answer my outstanding Q's there please

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

well thats not the same - its an intention to remove of goods notice 

all hot air - there no right of forced entry on consumer debt.

+£5k judgement wow those are some estate agent fees!!

did you defend the court claim or ignored everything inc the claimform and got a CCJ by default?

did you know about the court claim at all by the estate agent?

where's the Notice of enforcement from W+R?

thread title updated

 

 

 

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 Estate Agent CCJ for +£5k fees - Now Wilson&Coe HCEO's waving Arms about a Charging Order

thats all the paper work ive received

3x removal of goods left by the enforcement officers and 1x which was posted which ive uploaded,

sorry if im not making sense.

i knew about the ccj but the rest ive just ignored.

i do appreciate you're responses, stuff like this goes straight over my head

,im not in a good place at the moment but not that im excusing my stupidity.

ive just found the notice of enforcement.

ill scan it and send it if you need to see it but bare with me as my internet is a bit slow..

Link to post
Share on other sites

no dont need to see the NOE, just that you did get one.

ok you knew about the CCJ,???

what do you mean please as this can be important.

did you receive the original claimform pack from northants bulk court regarding the estate agent making the court claim against you ?

did this come to your address where you are now or went elsewhere because you'd obviously moved?

or was it just a case of you ignored everything, inc the court claim but you say otherwise :

6 minutes ago, marksheff said:

i knew about the ccj but the rest ive just ignored.


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

ok good that wraps things up nicely.

shame you didn't defend it. thus you lost and got a default judgement CCJ.

for a CCJ to be passed to the High Court thus to HCEO Bailiffs the default judgement CCJ must be >£600

then a writ is issued and the HCEO's try and enforce it with the resultant fees + interest etc that bumps up the sum owed.

as you've ignored them (good work😎) they will eventually try every trick in the book to try and make you engage with them.

ok sadly that means heaps of fees, but there you go.

theres no right of forced entry so poor ole bailiff.....

they will eventually pass it back to their client .

what you have is one of the latter now,  just trying to scam you for want of another word with idle threats.

you ought to deal with this at some point as if the claimant (estate agent) does go for and manage to get a CO, it WILL have to be paid upon sale of your home...eventually. 

if you have no intension of selling before you die, well thats for your executors to sort out in the future...:whistle:

though be 1000% confident, until then its extremely rare for an order of sale to be granted for such a small sum with regard the value of your home and p'haps other outstanding securities that might be against it like a mortgage or secured loans etc. your deeds will outline those.

if there are previous securities, then a 'newbie' like this lot, can't just come along and force you to sell, the others would be rather upset if they did try and probably object and then it will almost certainly 100% fail.

have a think about things , it might pay you to look toward putting an N245 variation to the court and offer a very low £PCM to the court, esp if you have little to no income etc like on benefits/pensioner etc...you might even get it all done for free as there is a small charge for the N245 process.

dx

  • Thanks 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

thank you so much for the help and advice it does mean a lot and youve put my mind at rest,ill take all the advice to heart.

ill definitely not engage with the bailiff.

m.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

update thread with the typo for hte name of the HCEO so people can search easier for their name if they have dealings with them in future?

Edited by jk2054

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Estate Agent CCJ for +£5k fees - Now Wilson & Roe HCEO's waving Arms about a Charging Order

oh yea ta!

one last question

what date was the CCJ/Default judgement?

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

blimey they moved quick.

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

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...