Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • pawilso
      CCJ issued for parking in my own space. ( correspondence sent to the wrong address)

      By pawilso · Posted

      Thanks in advance for advice! I was shocked to find out when doing a credit score search this weekend that I have a CCJ in my name. I've spoken to the courts today and have been told Vehicle control services have taken me to court for parking without a permit in my own allocated parking bay that came with my flat rental. The CCJ appears to be to the right apartment block but the wrong address.  It dates back to 2017. The judgement was passed in April 2021 without my knowledge of the ticket or the case ( presumably fine information was sent to the wrong address) I had already been taken to court by VCS previously for parking in my own bay and I won. It seems to me that this is underhanded behaviour from VCS as they had my address from previous interactions and had tried taken me to court for something that a judge had previously ruled on. I'm seeking advice on next steps. I was told by court that i can raise a dispute on the CCJ but I also want to appeal the case altogether. Should I be filing an  N244 Application Notice with an N161? I was told I should pay the court £303. Now that I've got home and had a look, there is a long list of court fees so I'm not sure which is applicable. I was also told the £303 is not refundable. Should I be filing a counterclaim or is that something that can be done at a later date. Ultimately I feel disgusted at having a ccj and then having to pay for the privilege of getting it removed. Any advice on how to make VCS pay for this would be appreciated!
    • honeybee13
      Should we trust Sunak or the next PM to fix the Country's problems? (title revised 24/10/22)

      By honeybee13 · Posted

      Speaking of Truss, another French politician has used her as an example of economic illiteracy. Edouard Phillippe, the ex-PM was on BFM TV this morning.
    • tobyjugg2
      US elections November 2024 [amended 18/04/24 - HB]

      By tobyjugg2 · Posted

      an aperitif before the trumpy main event   Alex Jones must sell assets to pay $1.5bn to Sandy Hook victims as Infowars spared WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Alex Jones, a right-wing conspiracy theorist, falsely claimed the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax  
    • Butterbean23
      Water ingress 7 months after purchase

      By Butterbean23 · Posted

      As gesture of goodwill, we were eventually given a courtesy car from Mercedes (after numerous complaints from us on their lack of communication / misdiagnosis / time they’ve had the car - we’re now at over 4 weeks without our car) They have literally just informed us it will be ready to collect tomorrow. If we pay the cost, where will we stand? It’s so hard to understand what we should do 😫 we will re open our complaint with the finance company then. We emailed Doves yesterday informing them of all the problems (we have touched base with them and let them know prior to this) but they are yet to respond.    Any further advice would be greatly appreciated! 
    • fkofilee
      VodaFone

      By fkofilee · Posted

      Yep

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.
Latest activity

Forced Entry Bill

paulson1985
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3854 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

Voxter

Voxter

Posted
Posted
I wouldnt put it past you and think trsyt is correct on this point. I would guess bailiffs dont have to often pay full price for electrical high value goods:roll::roll::roll::eek:

 

yes i know of a bailiff that paid £3.99 for a 99 inch tv so it must be true :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Tryst

Tryst

Posted
Posted

They need only pay what the estimated value that the item is expected to get at auction. If an item has been estimated at £150, that is all they need to pay, no matter what it's actual value may be. For obvious reasons, estimations are within reasonable limits but an estimation of a 1.5K+ laptop would be around £250 which is an average for reasonably new laptop and doesn't take into account what is inside it. If they know it's a top of the range laptop, it soon gets earmarked and never reaches the auctions.

 

Don't deny this, I dated someone who worked in the admin section of a well known company in Bromley South. I learned a lot of secrets about how bailiffs operate, even down to taking items they are not actually allowed to take because the debtor didn't know what could and couldn't be taken by a bailiff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
loopinlouie

loopinlouie

Posted
Posted
They need only pay what the estimated value that the item is expected to get at auction. If an item has been estimated at £150, that is all they need to pay, no matter what it's actual value may be. For obvious reasons, estimations are within reasonable limits but an estimation of a 1.5K+ laptop would be around £250 which is an average for reasonably new laptop and doesn't take into account what is inside it. If they know it's a top of the range laptop, it soon gets earmarked and never reaches the auctions.

 

Don't deny this, I dated someone who worked in the admin section of a well known company in Bromley South. I learned a lot of secrets about how bailiffs operate, even down to taking items they are not actually allowed to take because the debtor didn't know what could and couldn't be taken by a bailiff.

 

If you get time tryst, it would be interesting to here of what the the bailiffs get up to:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
High Court Enforcer

High Court Enforcer

Posted
Posted
They need only pay what the estimated value that the item is expected to get at auction. If an item has been estimated at £150, that is all they need to pay, no matter what it's actual value may be. For obvious reasons, estimations are within reasonable limits but an estimation of a 1.5K+ laptop would be around £250 which is an average for reasonably new laptop and doesn't take into account what is inside it. If they know it's a top of the range laptop, it soon gets earmarked and never reaches the auctions.

 

Don't deny this, I dated someone who worked in the admin section of a well known company in Bromley South. I learned a lot of secrets about how bailiffs operate, even down to taking items they are not actually allowed to take because the debtor didn't know what could and couldn't be taken by a bailiff.

 

Very interesting.

 

Tryst, just a few questions...

 

Who killed Diana? Who shot JFK? Did man land on the moon? :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
seanamarts

seanamarts

Posted
Posted
Very interesting.

 

Tryst, just a few questions...

 

Who killed Diana? Who shot JFK? Did man land on the moon? :rolleyes:

Are these trick questions

Man didnt land on the moon it was a space craft controlled by man which landed on the moon. ;) not that I believe it of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
RaeUK

RaeUK

Posted
Posted
Very droll.

 

HCE, just a few answers...

 

Who killed Diana? I believe she was being chased by a bailiff ... Who shot JFK? A bounty hunter? Did a bailiff land on the moon? Yes, he thought he could levy on it... :D

 

 

My turn :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
kiptower

kiptower

Posted
Posted

maybe he had a big bonfire of the plants he got @ the last walking - nick your goods from some poor sod, and because they didnt flower, he's getting them fumes now ( 7 pointed leaves )

 

so who is he really

 

Ian Beale from CS :confused:

 

a dreamer :rolleyes:

 

or really Elvis :eek:

 

:D

..

Link to post
Share on other sites
High Court Enforcer

High Court Enforcer

Posted
Posted
Are these trick questions

Man didnt land on the moon it was a space craft controlled by man which landed on the moon. ;) not that I believe it of course.

 

That's a fair point seanamarts.:)

 

The original point was that I just dont believe that bailiffs somehow 'buy' goods on the cheap that are seized from debtors.

 

Goods go to auction and the highest bidder wins. Unfortunately, the goods are sold as seen so yes, a laptop that cost £1500 6 months ago would to the bidder just be a laptop that might not work. £100 if you're lucky I'd say. Also, the chances are the bidder hasnt done any research on the laptop model and is probably unaware of its original cost.

 

Removal really is the last thing anybody wants. It's a pain for the bailiffs and pain for the debtor.

 

But, if the debtor cannot make payment or have a sensible arrangement agreed then it really is the bailiffs only choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
loopinlouie

loopinlouie

Posted
Posted

ps. I out of interest on behalf of friend rang up a bailiff a while ago and said was only on income support etc... blah blah blah was the attitued received. They wanted 50.00 week for parking ticket and he only got 64.00 odd a week.

 

We instead took information to council who promptly wiped the ticket clean and said were going to speak to their bailiffs.

 

Bailiff = money grabbing scu*

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tryst

Tryst

Posted
Posted (edited)

If you are on benefits, there is a certain amount that you can offer and they must take it. I believe they cannot refuse an offer of £3.50 per week or more for a single person on JSA. You can find out what the minimum amount you can offer is from the Jobcentre if you ask.

 

I am currently paying off a council tax bill of £1100 at £2.50 per week since I am on JSA right now. I would have to notify them if I start work so it can be revised.

 

Edit: If they get pushy, inform them that you want it made as an attachment to your benefit so it is paid at source before you get it. They won't get much more than £3.50 per week at most that way and cannot hound you with visits and threats while that attachment is in force.

Edited by Tryst
Link to post
Share on other sites
pompeyfaith

pompeyfaith

Posted
Posted

As I said above the councils are just as much to blame as in many cases they are effectively there employers.

 

Like our council the revenues dept is run by capita and inturn they use there own bailiffs Equita.

 

They wanted £356.00 out of me by this Thursday I had already paid £351 leaving just £100 to pay them that is £57.50 to the council which is on the bill and £42.50 bailiff fee.

 

No bailiffs had called no levy had been done all I had was 3 letters which they say they put though my door.

 

That is *ull as they came via post as I watched the postman put them though.

 

Oh and I have noticed this council tax year the liability order cost has gone up 100% from £40 to £80 this costs them no more that £4.

 

Yes these councils run by capita are a rip off and a disgrace considering they are there to serve us.

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
High Court Enforcer

High Court Enforcer

Posted
Posted
Rollocks. Bailliff doesnt accept 'sensible' agreements unless it means pay ammount over the odds that someone will struggle to pay and get in more trouble.;)

 

You must remember that the bailiff is technically there for goods not money. The money is a bi-product of enforcement.

 

To be honest, £3.50 per week on a £1000 debt isnt really acceptable in my eyes. The bailiff should remove and sell the debtors goods in those circumstances. However, then were into the problem of the value of household goods at auction again.... :-(

Link to post
Share on other sites
High Court Enforcer

High Court Enforcer

Posted
Posted
ps. I out of interest on behalf of friend rang up a bailiff a while ago and said was only on income support etc... blah blah blah was the attitued received. They wanted 50.00 week for parking ticket and he only got 64.00 odd a week.

 

We instead took information to council who promptly wiped the ticket clean and said were going to speak to their bailiffs.

 

Bailiff = money grabbing scu*

 

Council's regularly pressure Bailiff's to clear up debts as quickly as possible.

 

It is not unreasonable for the bailiff to request £50 per week. He will know he is unlikely to get it and may settle for £30...

Link to post
Share on other sites
loopinlouie

loopinlouie

Posted
Posted
You must remember that the bailiff is technically there for goods not money. The money is a bi-product of enforcement.

 

To be honest, £3.50 per week on a £1000 debt isnt really acceptable in my eyes. The bailiff should remove and sell the debtors goods in those circumstances. However, then were into the problem of the value of household goods at auction again.... :-(

 

 

HCE The bailiff was out of order. My friend had just come out of hospital and I rang when he was worrying how he would afford food if he gave them all that. Surely a decent bailiff would have suggested a person on beneifts could have a nominal ammount took out directly. No they dont becaue they are robbers in my view. Oh and as to belongings my friend had 40 year old carpet and old fashioned furniture from the ark of no value.

 

You side with what you feel is reasonable when you are not reasonable in your answer, what goes around comes around.

 

If on benefits and vulnerable how dare they pressure a person to the extent of not being able to eat, sickening low lifes:-x

Link to post
Share on other sites
RaeUK

RaeUK

Posted
Posted

If you are in the vulnerable category then £3.50 to £5.00 per week is perfectly acceptable. The bailiff - highly trained and skilled - will be fully conversant with the National Standards and immediately pass the case back to the council ...

Rae

Link to post
Share on other sites
pompeyfaith

pompeyfaith

Posted
Posted
The bailifflink3.gif - highly trained and skilled

 

Rae,

 

lol that's the funniest thing I've heard all day thanks for making me laugh :D

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
RaeUK

RaeUK

Posted
Posted

You're welcome PF.

For those who don't know me, I'd like to take this opportunity in pointing out that my tongue was firmly in my cheek - not one of HCEs ... :p

Best wishes

Rae

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...