Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks all. Think I have come to a plan dx please correct me if I am getting you wrong but I am going to go down the route you suggest. simply stop payments for now until I receive a DN and it gets marked on my file. Then contact each lender and start making token payments to each one. i then assume most like they will then at some point sell to DCA. Once they are sold I’ll be coming back to see how best I deal with it.  Let me know if I am making some error in judgment or missing anything with my plan 
    • while politicians trough at subsidised bars and canteens, claim thousaands in expenses while letting out their properties and tories vote to leave UK children hungry That ALL needs to stop
    • J&P Credit Solutions are specialists on debt recovery. Either way they seem to be swapping between the JandP and IDR whatever their exact definitions are.
    • Primary and secondary teachers are supporting pupils with their own money, buying food and warm clothing. Eight in 10 primary teachers in England spending own money to help pupils | Education | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Increasing numbers of children hungry and lack adequate clothing, with two-thirds of secondary teachers also supporting pupils  
    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
  • 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

MBNA C/Card so far with 10 to go?


icepop55
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5524 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

  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Steven

 

permalink #83&84

 

The Reg.. bit, do I just write it as it is, or do I need the whole lot in paper form?

 

 

 

Could someone please direct me to a paper copy of the above REGS...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Steven

 

Having lots of promblems IE!!!! Doubles up and does not let me connect with address when I need to click for further INFOR!!!!

A bug it seems on IE and I can't shift it????

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

You could reply and say, yes you would like to reach an amicable settlement and will be quite happy to do so as soon as they provide the documentation you have repeatedly asked for.

 

You could tell them that their continued refusal to comply with consumer credit legislation is obviously a deliberate policy to confound and confuse, since any confusion that exists in the case could easily and immediately be lifted by them producing the requested documents.

 

Copy any letter to the court.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. J Wild of Restons writes out on solicitors letterheaded paper, has signed the letter and has expressed legal opinion. There is no J Wild (that could be him) registered with the Law Society. I suspect that his letter may have contravened the Solicitors Act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

J Wild styles himself 'litigation manager'. IN reality he will be some office junior in short trousers. ;)

 

 

Icepop, if you do answer the letter you could point out that, it would have been far quicker just to send you the proper document (If they have got it, of course.)than waste all these letters posturing and threatening. If they haven't got it, they ought to withdraw the case as they have no cause of action.

Edited by steven4064

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. The proffering of legal opinion is very highly regulated in the UK.

 

I think he has stepped over the mark. They are "Restons Solicitors" not "Restons Debt Management". "Solicitor" is a protected word.

 

A letter to the Law Society ( lawsociety.co.uk ) is very quick and they take it very seriously. If it was me, I would simply asking their opinion and copy them with the letters, takes 5 minutes. A "litigation manager" may or may not be a "solicitor", but at the end of the day Mr. Wild has stated he is acting on behalf of a client, has tendered legal opinion and has used the stationary of a firm of solicitors. It's a surprisingly serious offense. If you want Restons to back off pdq I would give it a go.

 

In a similar vain try offering medical opinion, on a GPs stationary, but sign it off as, say, "practice manager" and see what happens.

 

The legal profession are every bit as tight as the medical profession, if not more so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, what a strange day!!!

 

Mr J.T.Wild rang me at work and announced that MBNA have written to the Court to withdraw the Summary judgment application against me. No reason was given or explanation offered apart from the usual costs of litigation but to say there didn't want to go any further????

 

Wants me to sign a CONSENT ORDER.It seems in order, with all order costs withdrawn and all further proceedings in the claim be STAYED.

 

Will post all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks good. Be mindful that if you miss payments for £14.27 then I guess they can apply for judgment for the outstanding portion of the £9k. Better make sure that there are no hiccups along the way or it could cause a few headaches.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have them by the short and curlies so you can dictate terms.

 

Also, I can't remember, are there any charges in this amount? If so, you should make their repayment part of any 'deal'

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve just read the particulars of claim on this case and seen at the end they state

 

“Together with:-Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1985 at the rate of 210.08pence per day to the date of Judgment or sooner payment” [£767 per year] which looks like 8% per year

 

Which to me means if this case ever got back in court there is a a nice little “financial time bomb” …..

 

 

Analysing how long it will take to pay off under the tomlin order

 

£9,499.20 at £14.27 PER MONTH = 666 PAYMENTS = 55.5 YEARS (corrected figure )

 

 

Regarding this tomlin order I was going to ask the question about whether interest could be added to the £9,499.20 but I seem to have answered my own question above . as the answer is contained in the particulars of claim

 

observation

how long do you have to pay under the debt plan?

and maybe a silly question will signing this prejudice your other creditors ??

Edited by FANTASY CHARGES
just had a maths lesson

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve just read the particulars of claim on this case and seen at the end they state

 

“Together with:-Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1985 at the rate of 210.08pence per day to the date of Judgment or sooner payment” [£767 per year] which looks like 8% per year

 

Which to me means if this case ever got back in court there is a a nice little “financial time bomb” …..

 

 

Analysing how long it will take to pay off under the tomlin order

 

£9,499.20 at £14.27 PER MONTH = 666 PAYMENTS = 12.8 YEARS

 

Regarding this tomlin order I was going to ask the question about whether interest could be added to the £9,499.20 but I seem to have answered my own question above . as the answer is contained in the particulars of claim

 

observation

how long do you have to pay under the debt plan?

and maybe a silly question will signing this prejudice your other creditors ??

 

Think the Consent order needs amending to reflect that interest shouldn't be charged.................

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...