Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just remembered!   Now I know this is no laughing matter for either your or your parents, but I guarantee if you read the following  http://nebula.wsimg.com/e3da92cb966c72de63ec1f98605c2954?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1  by the end you won't be able to contain the giggles 🤣   On a more serious note, quote this in your WS as a persuasive case in (5).  Here there is VCS, someone who left the site, no locus standi, lots of stuff similar to your parents' cases.  And VCS took one hell of a hammering!         
    • You are wonderful, Dave!!   I shall get the WS drafted soon as I can! Thank you so much for your help!
    • I thought they were not allowing people to sign for recorded delivery/special delivery now meaning it could still be argued that they ever received it     
    • Don't worry about the questions - that's what we're here for.   I'll try and flesh out the arguments and answer your questions at the same time.  Let's use "I" to refer to your mum as it's her WS.   1.  Sequence of events Describe briefly that the driver parked in the retail park and visited Citygate garage, thinking it was part of the retail park.  Upon return to the vehicle there was no windscreen ticket or indication of any infringement.  Later I received a PCN for parking in a restricted area, then various threatening letters, after a Letter Before Action which I replied to and finally a claim form.   2.  Locus standi VCS are not the landowner.  The contract they have provided is not with the landowner, it is with another company, it ran out in 2018, the company it is with went into liquidation in 2019, the contract cannot possibly be valid.   3.  No keeper liability VCS should be suing the driver, they have not established keeper liability under POFA (you know all about the 29-56 day stuff, quote it all from POFA).   (Yes!  Good find on their sign!  Include the sign and say VCS maintain they have images that can identify the driver and yet have not identified me as such).   (Yes, keep it vague as to who was driving, it's up to VCS to prove, not you.  They could easily have used POFA correctly but have complete contempt for the law so haven't).   4.  Planning permission VCS go to great pains in their WS to emphasise their signage, none of which I disagree with.  However I do not believe they have planning permission for these signs which is a criminal offence under Town and Country [Advertisements} regulations and means no contract could be formed.  I have requested proof of planning permission from VCS by means of a CPR request but they have not replied.  I have searched XXXXX council planning portal and I cannot find planning permission for the signs.  Their CoP incudes that they must obtain all legal permissions yet they have not done so (look up the bit on the IPC CoP):   (You can't prove a negative.  The work you've done here is more than enough.  They have to prove they have planning permission yet have not).   5.  Predatory practises These are forbidden by the CoP (again, look the section up) (a)  The driver did not find the Notice to Driver on their return to the car although it appears in VCS's photos.  As the car park is patrolled, it is unlikely that a member of the public removed it.  I believe the patrol officer photographed it and removed it.  This is a well-known tactic used by PPCs so that the motorist misses the chance to pay during the discounted period.  I enclose a statement by Mr XXXXX which confirms what i say. (b)  The driver visited Citygate garage which is a matter of metres away from the retail site, in fact the driver thought it to be part of the site.  The patrol officer could easily have mitigated the loss by informing the driver of their mistake, yet did not. (c)  The parking violation alleged was to have left the site, yet the PCN is for a completely different violation, parking in a restricted area.  The area was not restricted, there were no permits to show or payment to be made, it is a free public car park.  This error was made either out of incompetence or deliberately to confuse me and make it impossible to appeal.  In any case in their WS VCS are alleging a completely different breach of contract that that stated in their PCN and in all their previous correspondence I would point out that the patrol officer will not attend the hearing so I will not be able to cross examine him, and I am confident that neither will the WS author since from research I have carried out I have discovered that neither Ambreen Arshad nor Mohammed Wali (VCS's other paralegal) who always write the company's WSs ever attend hearings, presumably to avoid cross examination.  Its is especially easy to attend on-line hearings during the COVID pandemic as no travelling is involved.   6.  Unicorn Food Tax Easy, copy from Alaska 101
    • Good evening. thank you for the add. I have a problem with returning a Dell laptop within a 14 day cooling off period. I bought it online on the Dell uk website, and it was delivered to me on the 6th of September. I could not set it up because I was stuck at one of the steps (got the frozen screen and I could not get past it waiting for hours for something to happen). Then I contacted Dell Technical Support. I spent over 4 hours with their advisors on the phone and whatsapp and they could not help me to resolve this problem. So there seems to be a software( or hardware?) issue and I want to return it. I have tried to arrange a return thru the Dell website by picking the date, however, I did not receive any email confirmation of this and nobody showed up on the day. I phoned and emailed and they said I could not return it. Earlier this week I have contacted both their customer service and complaints emails with no success. They are not giving me their returns address. The guy in the 2nd email was trying to offer me a £130 off voucher but never got back to me with the returns address in the UK. I have used the Resolver  site yesterday to write another complaint quoting Dells own returns policy as well as the Comsumer Rights. My return window is running out. What can I do now?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Brown Vs Barclaycard


animaleyes76
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5155 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

On MCOL my claim was issued on 12th June however I have not yet issued to SOC to MCOL.

 

On the letter for sending SOC to MCOL it states charges + interest = claim.

 

Bearing in mind we are now 2 days later the amounts differ to the claim amount made due to interest. Do i send as is or amend back 7 days to the claim date? doh

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any typos spelling mistakes are due to leprechauns in my keyboard they move the letters around sometimes (amended just for Bookie)

 

"How do I...?" A Dummies' Guide to this Forum

FAQ

Forum rules

Cag toolbar

 

 

Please Donate if you can - help CAG help others

 

I offer help and advice in good faith, based on my knowledge and experience. I am NOT a legal or financial expert. There are many CAG members and site team who are better qualified. Please do not make major decisions based on my advice alone.I do not give advice via P.M's. If anyone can correct my mistakes or improve on my advice, please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sent same link to your other post ... just selece the institution you require

Any typos spelling mistakes are due to leprechauns in my keyboard they move the letters around sometimes (amended just for Bookie)

 

"How do I...?" A Dummies' Guide to this Forum

FAQ

Forum rules

Cag toolbar

 

 

Please Donate if you can - help CAG help others

 

I offer help and advice in good faith, based on my knowledge and experience. I am NOT a legal or financial expert. There are many CAG members and site team who are better qualified. Please do not make major decisions based on my advice alone.I do not give advice via P.M's. If anyone can correct my mistakes or improve on my advice, please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What can I say? You are just SOOOO helpful it's unbelievable! Tried to give you some more positive feedback but says have to give to someone else first. I will though. Spent ages looking for that link! lol

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah... lucky you.

 

I am still waiting for mine since Novemeber 06... can you believe it?? :eek:

 

It is turning into a bit of a saga actually with them fobbing me off with dodgy fake looking statements which show a balance of zero and zero tranactions for 19 consecutive months... I am just in the proccess of disputing this.

 

I am trying to find members in the same situation, but as of yet haven't found anyone... looks like I am the only one...:confused:

 

What a game eh!!

 

Well... good luck with your claim, lets hope they cough up soon.

 

Maxine :-)

Moodle

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

full defence.. standard stuff. transfered to guilford ad now awaiting the same directions as i got in my barclays case

 

  • The particulars of claim do not provide details of particulars of the precise charges alleged to have been unlawful, or the date thereof. To the extent it is alleged that the claimant incurred bank charges on the claimant’s account for unauthorized borrowings (whether unpaid fees for returned cheques, “Paid Referral fees” or any other such fees)., the Defendant puts the claimant to strict proof of each charge and the date thereof.

  • The particulars of claim are summary in nature. Accordingly , this defence is summary in nature and the defendant reserves the right to amend this statement of case in due course.

  • The defendant is entitled to charge the claimant for unauthorized borrowings by reason of its standard terms and conditions. The claimant accepted the same when the account was opened, including (in particular but without limitation) the following terms and conditions (which are summarized)

  • The Defendant’s right to charge a “Paid Referral Fee” where the defendant pays an amount (either by compulsion or election) which causes the account to become overdrawn - £30 per item (previously £25)
  • The Defendant’s right to charge and administrative fee if a cheque , standing order or direct debit cannot be paid because of insufficient cleared funds in the account £35 per item (previously £30)
  • The Defendant’s entitlement , if the claimant becomes overdrawn without an overdraft limit, to charge interest at the unauthorized borrowing rate on the excess balance

4 The defendant’s standard terms and conditions gave the claimant a fair and transparent view of those terms and the charges applicable for the unauthorised borrowings (including where the account is overdrawn without an overdraft limit or where the claimant exceeds the authorized overdraft limit)

 

5 If and to the extent it is the claimant’s case that the failure to make necessary payments and / or failure to remain within authorised overdraft limits and / or failure to arrange an authorized overdraft constituted a breach of the terms applying to the account and that the contractual entitlement to debit charges from the claimants account constitutes liquidated damages clause, the same is denied. The charges constitute payments the claimant agreed to make by reason of the terms and conditions of the account and were consideration for the defendant advancing credit to the claimant. which the defendant was under no obligation to advance. The defendant was entitled to impose such charges an interest when the claimant incurred the overdraft.

 

6 Accordingly, it is denied that the legal principles relating to liquidated damages clauses and penalty charges are relevant or applicable to the facts set out above. Further or alternatively it is denied that any such charges constitute unlawful penalty charges or are in breach of thee Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, or are in breach of the Unfair Contracts Terms Act 1977 (or any other provision), or are unreasonable within the meaning of s15 of the Supply of Goods And Services Act 1982 (or indeed any other provision)

 

7 Therefore, it is denied that the charges were unlawfully debited from the account.

 

8. If and to the extent that the claimant incurred charges on the account, this was caused by the claimant having gone into the overdraft without having agreed with the defendant an authorized overdraft facility or to increase the overdraft facility and / or failure to make payments to bring the balance of the account back into credit.

 

9. It is averred that the said charges and interest are and remain lawful and enforceable and that the defendant was entitled to debit the same

 

10 The defendant denies that it is liable to the claimant for the sums claimed and interest as pleaded or at all. In the alternative if (which is denied) the said charges are unenforceable and constituted a breach of contract by the defendant, those charges which were applied to the account prior to 30 May 2001 are not recoverable because the are time-barred under the terms of the Limitation Act 1980 in that more than six years have elapsed since the accrual of the case of action

 

11 In the alternative, and without prejudice to matters stated above, if (which is denied) the said charges and interest or any part thereof are unlawful or unenforceable as alleged by the claimant or at all, and the charges were a consequence of the breach of contract by the claimant , the defendant has nonetheless suffered loss and damage as a consequence of such breach of contract in allowing the account to go into aunauthorised overdraft . Accordingly, in the event that the defendant is unable to rely on its express entitlement to enforce the charges as set out above, it will seek to recover to the extent necessary such loss and damage as its actually suffered, which will not necessarily be limited to the value of the said charges, and the defendant seeks to set off such sums against any liability owed hereunder to the claimant

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah standard ..... send em your SOC's again :(

Any typos spelling mistakes are due to leprechauns in my keyboard they move the letters around sometimes (amended just for Bookie)

 

"How do I...?" A Dummies' Guide to this Forum

FAQ

Forum rules

Cag toolbar

 

 

Please Donate if you can - help CAG help others

 

I offer help and advice in good faith, based on my knowledge and experience. I am NOT a legal or financial expert. There are many CAG members and site team who are better qualified. Please do not make major decisions based on my advice alone.I do not give advice via P.M's. If anyone can correct my mistakes or improve on my advice, please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Any typos spelling mistakes are due to leprechauns in my keyboard they move the letters around sometimes (amended just for Bookie)

 

"How do I...?" A Dummies' Guide to this Forum

FAQ

Forum rules

Cag toolbar

 

 

Please Donate if you can - help CAG help others

 

I offer help and advice in good faith, based on my knowledge and experience. I am NOT a legal or financial expert. There are many CAG members and site team who are better qualified. Please do not make major decisions based on my advice alone.I do not give advice via P.M's. If anyone can correct my mistakes or improve on my advice, please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...