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.
  • 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

Egg_Charges and Default


Yasmin
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6106 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

No new defence is required , CB, as it as just a case which is being restored, apparently! Although on the application, I did have to make a statement, as to why I wanted to have it restored. As far as I know Egg don't have to submit anything, not that they ever do, LOL.

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 246
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

No new defence is required , CB, as it as just a case which is being restored, apparently! Although on the application, I did have to make a statement, as to why I wanted to have it restored. As far as I know Egg don't have to submit anything, not that they ever do, LOL.

 

 

Good Luck Yasmin-

 

Re: your comment-

"not that they ever do, LOL".

 

Are you saying that Egg never provide a Court Bundle as ordered by the judge?

 

AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well ,not sure about never. However in my case, they did not submit or turn up with it at the first hearing! It's just their general delaying tactics...:rolleyes: unfortunately the judge on that day didn't seem to be too phased by this...they also never responded to my S A R...have not provided me with genuine copy of default notice or proof that I requested the P.P.I.

Amazing how they are getting away with it

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's because these companies pay the FSA and Ombudsmans and also the Judges etc (probably) have shares in the companies!!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, un1boy-

 

I am aware that both the FOS & FSA are limited companies and therefore not government bodies and that they are both financed by levies paid to them by these Giant Financial Institutions.

However, I have faith in the judiciary.

 

Yasmin, looks like I am in a similar position to you, as I have not been provided with a true certified copy of the Default Notice, nor a copy of the Original true signed copy of my CCA credit agreement. My DSIR request was incomplete, unintelligible.

 

Love

AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi Yasmin,

 

How goes with the case?

Any news from Egg???

 

Hondamad :)

__________________

EGG CC Default Removal: Have reported Egg to Trading Standards, Summery Claim - 2nd Hearing Date 09/10/07. Click here to read posts

Monument CC: received statements, now need to send letters. . . !

BoS Current Account: Settled

Citi Cards: Hhmm seems like I have sued the wrong “entity”. Aaaaahhhhh . . .. oh well back to court I go, and they have settled in full!!!

 

:-D:p:D

This is just advice from me. If you are not sure please seek legal advice. However if what I have said has been helpful, than please add to my reputation by clicking on the scales :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.....Well all the usual avoidance tactics. Wrote to their solicitors, to try to avoid further waste of court time, copy letter to the court! Response was a joke...so replied, sending letter copy to the court again, of course.

 

Basically they do not want to remove the default, even though they can not produce certified copy or copy of agreement or PPI. They have ignored the statutory request and of course the figure they defaulted me on includes PPI, which I certainly cannot remember requesting( which has now been refunded) also unlawful charges!!

 

Amazing, that now we are due back in court towards the end of the month, they are endeavoring to produce copies........:rolleyes:

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Just to keep you informed .In Court tomorrow re default they are refusing to remove:rolleyes:

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

good luck yas!! xx

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Much appreciated guys XXX

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Mistermind....Well back from court. Don't know if you recall but my case was a bit complicated, one of the first and has dragged on for about a year with adjournment after adjournment. This was causing me alot of stress, so in November, I agreed a settlement figure and deal with Direct Legal Collections.

 

My understanding was that the account would be marked as settled, the account closed, and any adverse credit removed, including default notice.

 

This seemed to be a good deal, and on the evening before the hearing was due Egg dropped the counter claim and any further action. I went to court however, as advised, and agreed to abandon the claim providing Egg kept to the terms of the agreement.

 

Of course the rest is history. I applied to the court to re instate the case for the default removal only.

 

The Judge was extremely helpful this morning and advised me that the County Court did not have the jurisdiction to order the removal of a default notice. (I had dropped the claim for unlawful charges as the DLC had offered me what I thought was a good deal)

 

When I mentioned the DLC he was not at all impressed. He advised me that if he were to rule that the deal be struck out, then I could reinstate my full claim for the unlawful charges and default removal.

 

We have 14 days to prepare statements, showing our understanding and interpretation of the deal struck between myself and DLC. If it is struck out then my original case will be reinstated and be heard in the High Court.

 

The judge has very kindly issued this case to himself, which is a relief .......

 

I was very impressed with the way the judge conducted the hearing, so on to the next stage.........

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

.....
in November, I agreed a settlement figure and deal with Direct Legal Collections.

My understanding was that the account would be marked as settled, the account closed, and any adverse credit removed, including default notice.

 

.... and agreed to abandon the claim providing Egg kept to the terms of the agreement.

 

Of course the rest is history. I applied to the court to re instate the case for the default removal only.

 

The Judge was extremely helpful this morning and advised me that the County Court did not have the jurisdiction to order the removal of a default notice. (I had dropped the claim for unlawful charges as the DLC had offered me what I thought was a good deal)

 

When I mentioned the DLC he was not at all impressed
. He advised me that if he were to rule that the deal be struck out, then I could reinstate my full claim for the unlawful charges and default removal.

 

We have 14 days to prepare statements, showing our understanding and interpretation of the deal struck between myself and DLC. If it is struck out then my original case will be reinstated and be heard in the High Court. .........

 

Yasmin, you have been a member of CAG since February 2006 when it was BankActionGroup, even before the OFT's watershed pronouncement of 5th April 2006. You go right back to the era of Stephen Hone, whom the Abbey intimidated with threats and ordeals, then finally appeased with a fivefold repayment at the last minute in order to stay out of court.

 

On the impending High Court trial should you wish to proceed I would suggest four itemised pros and cons:

 

(1) PRO - Your win on the reclaim of unlawful charges.

 

Favourable verdict would be a foregone conclusion. Such judgment will set a landmark precedent binding on lower courts, leading to nationwide publicity followed by a blizzard of automatic judgements in Small Claims Courts in favour of full refund of 6 years unlawful charges with interest to anyone who asks. To mount a defence Egg will need to expose all their unlawful earnings figures analysis, and even then they are likely to lose, so they would rather die than face you in High Court.

 

(2) Neutral - Removal of Default Notice (your outstanding aim):

 

(A) Egg Default Notice was served on you without mailed pre-warning contrary to law.

 

(B) Default condition was triggered by PPI for which Egg failed to produce evidence of your consent to subscribe for it.

 

A verdict on this issue would be beyond me, I leave it to CAG highflyer lawyers.

 

(3) PRO - additional damages

 

Egg messed you about for a whole year, and went back on a tit-for-tat understanding last November (you drop your lawsuit, they wipe the slate clean including withdrawal of Default Notice). If you have clear paperwork in black and white recording this bargain basis, then the picture is one of Egg going back on its written word, time and again by intent causing you distress, time and expense over an extended period. Natural justice would suggest additional compensation a la Stephen Hone as well as removing Default Notice.

 

(4) CON - Legal costs awarded against the loser

 

In the High Court the winner's costs running into 4- or 5- figures can potentially be awarded against the loser who already has his/her barrister expenses. For the ground-breaking first case to reach the High Court, CAG's real lawyers will have to hold your hand. With such large costs involved, even a small risk would be serious.

 

-------------------------------------------------------

 

Egg would rather die than land in High Court, and the card industry will collectively frown on Egg if they were foolhardy enough to proceed. For this reason I believe paras (2) (3) (4) would be academic, as item (1) will not happen.

 

To get out of (1), Egg will have to satisfy you with (2) and (3), with deeds before court date, not words -- which even in black and white they previously failed to honour.

 

GL Yasmin, but it's time for top CAG lawyers.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Mistermind for that interesting and informative feedback. I will certainly bare all that in mind as I prepare my statement and wait to see what unfolds.....

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Mistermind....Well back from court. Don't know if you recall but my case was a bit complicated, one of the first and has dragged on for about a year with adjournment after adjournment. This was causing me alot of stress, so in November, I agreed a settlement figure and deal with Direct Legal Collections.

 

My understanding was that the account would be marked as settled, the account closed, and any adverse credit removed, including default notice.

 

This seemed to be a good deal, and on the evening before the hearing was due Egg dropped the counter claim and any further action. I went to court however, as advised, and agreed to abandon the claim providing Egg kept to the terms of the agreement.

 

Of course the rest is history. I applied to the court to re instate the case for the default removal only.

 

The Judge was extremely helpful this morning and advised me that the County Court did not have the jurisdiction to order the removal of a default notice. (I had dropped the claim for unlawful charges as the DLC had offered me what I thought was a good deal)

 

When I mentioned the DLC he was not at all impressed. He advised me that if he were to rule that the deal be struck out, then I could reinstate my full claim for the unlawful charges and default removal.

 

We have 14 days to prepare statements, showing our understanding and interpretation of the deal struck between myself and DLC. If it is struck out then my original case will be reinstated and be heard in the High Court.

 

The judge has very kindly issued this case to himself, which is a relief .......

 

I was very impressed with the way the judge conducted the hearing, so on to the next stage.........

 

 

well done Yasmin...

 

Has anyone go their charges back yet from Egg?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

so far so good Yasmin!!

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanx for your good wishes, all... and you especially AC, let us know when you get your next hearing date. Hang on in there. Have you been drinking UN1boy ?? unlike you to come up with a question like that LOL.... Look at Misterminds roll call. x

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Court date through this morning....1st available date 6th June!!:rolleyes:Have to get my statement in soon however, as the judge gave us two weeks to do that. Wonder if Egg will keep to the deadline.......

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Good Luck Yasmin!

 

I didn't understand your last post regading Mister's roll call - I wasn't aware that anyone has won against Egg yet.

 

I will be with you in spirit that day....

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have sent a letter to the court requesting an earlier date, and stating my reasons. This is dragging on and on......Thanks un1boy for good wishes...

Woolwich won in court/default removed Barclaycard Settled Halifax settled

Capital 1Settled GE Money Settled

Egg Settled-court action re.default 4th hearing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

goodness me, I can 't believe that this is STILL ongoing!

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6106 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...