Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks London  if I’ve read correctly the questionaire wants me to post his actual name on a public forum… is that correct.  I’ve only had a quick read so far
    • Plenty of success stories, also bear in mind not everyone updates the forum.  Overdale's want you to roll over and pay, without using your enshrined legal right to defend. make you wet yourself in fear that a solicitor will Take you to court, so you will pay up without question. Most people do just that,  but you are lucky that you have found this place and can help you put together a good defence. You should get reading on some other Capital One and Overdale's cases on the forum to get an idea of how it works.  
    • In both versions the three references to "your clients" near the end need to be changed to "you" or "your" as Alliance are not using solicitors, they have sent the LoC themselves. Personally I'd change "Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept" to "Dear Kev".  It would show you'd done your homework, looked up the company, and seen it's a pathetic one-man band rather than having any departments.  The PPCs love to pretend they have some official power and so you should be scared of them - showing you've sussed their sordid games and you're confident about fighting them undermines all this.  In fact that's the whole point of a snotty letter - to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did do court so better to drop you like a hot potato and go and pursue mugs who just give in instead. In the very, very, very, very unlikely case of Kev doing court, it'd be better that he didn't know in advance all the legal arguments you'd be using, so I'd heavily reduce the number of cards being played.
    • Thanx Londoneill get on to it this evening having a read around these forums I can’t seem to find many success stories using your methods. So how successful are these methods or am I just buying time for him  and a ccj will be inevitable in the end. Thanks another question is, will he have to appear at court..? I am not sure he has got it in him
    • Here's a suggested modified version for consideration by the team. (Not sure whether it still gives too much away?)   RE: PCN 4xxxxx Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept, Thank you for your dubious Letter Of Claim (dated 29th April 2024) of £100 for just 2 minutes of overstay. The family rolled around on the floor in amazement of the idea you actually think they’d accept this nonsense, let alone being confused over the extra unlawful £70 you added. Shall we raise the related VAT issue with HMRC, or perhaps the custodians of the unicorn grain silos? Apart from the serious GDPR breach you’ve made with the DVLA and your complete failure in identifying the driver, we’re dumbfounded that the PCN is still not compliant with the PoFA (2012 Schedule 4 Under Section 9.2.f) even after 12 years of pathetic trial and error. We also doubt a judge would be very impressed at your bone idleness and lack of due diligence regarding parking periods. Especially with no consideration of section 13 in your own trade association's code of practice and the topological nature of the Cornish landscape versus a traditional multi-storey. And don’t even get us started on the invisible signage during the ultra busy bank holiday carnage, that is otherwise known as the random parking chaos in the several unmarked, unmanaged over-spill fields, or indeed the tedious “frustration of contract” attempting to get a data connection to Justpark.  We suggest your clients drop this extreme foolishness or get an absolute hammering in court. We are more than ready to raise the above issues and more, with a fair minded judge, who will most likely laugh your clients out in less time than it takes to capture a couple of useless ANPR photos. If you insist on continuing this stupid, money grabbing quest, after having all of the above pointed out, we will of course show this letter to the Judge and request “an unreasonable costs order” under CPR 27.14.2.g and put it toward future taxis to Harlyn Bay instead.  We all look forward to your clients' deafening silence. Signed, "Spot". (Vehicle Keeper's pet Dalmation).
  • 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 5504 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...