Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You can edit the answers to be in red or would you like me to do it? HB
    • Apologies dx100uk  I did not put the answers in red  Thank you all for your patience. H
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ?  Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account 4546384809766042. The defendant faild to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. The dbt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?  Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.  It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment?  May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
    • Just an update for all. I received about a letter every other week, increasing in threat levels. Then I hadn't had one for a about two weeks, then Saturday received a carbon copy of the very first letter they sent me in February. Made me laugh, rinse and repeat. 
    • So, your response was not received by the SCP as you did not send it with a valid stamp. Therefore, from my two option in post #14, the first option is the only one available to you, but you do not have the option of asking to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level as the reason the SCP did not receive your response was down to you. Here's a reminder of what to do: Respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box state that you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. This is a tried and tested method to deal with your problem and is almost always successful. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor.. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary. If you are required to attend, your case will be taken out of the SJ procedure and you will be given a date for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court. If that is the way they do it in the area involved you will have to attend, see the prosecutor and offer your "deal" in person. 
  • 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

Ebay item sold buyer wants refund help!!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6544 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

LOL - Don Quixote (DQ) was the first to suggest a letter, above... he suggested robustly defending your position... hence a "DQ" style letter...

 

Make sure you post your letter here before sending so that we can (a) have a laugh at the buyer's expense, and (b) so that we can advise you...

Link to post
Share on other sites

A vexatious litigant is a person who has been forbidden by a High Court Judge to issue proceedings in any County Court in England and Wales without permission.

 

You can get a list from HMCS Her Majesty's Court Service.

 

Chris

In fact, if you go to moneyclaim, there is a link there to the list of Vexatious Litigants. It makes interesting, and at times, amusing reading. For instance

 

O’NEILL, Margarita (aka John Morris) - 9 June 1998

O’NEILL, Thomas (aka Lord Charles Leslie Falconer of Thornton) - 9 June 1998

 

wtf??:confused::grin:

... a little

Mahala is a powerful thing ...

 

If you like my advice, please click the scales.

All advice is offered informally. If in any doubt, seek professional advice.

Barclays:claiming £908. Defence filed

Simply Be: settled in full

Abbey: Claim issued for DPA compliance order

GE Capital: Claim issued for DPA compliance order

Aktiv Kapital: Failed to comply with CCA disclosure. Debt unenforceable.

If this site has helped you, please make a donation to help keep it going.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL... how about this for a new name for a superhero?

 

BADIBANGA, Kay Etienne - 17 February 2003

Just the FAQ’s ma'am. Please read 'em thoroughly before jumping in. Cheers :)

 

Find all the letters under the rainbow here

 

Being a man, I am always right (however I will make no admission of liability if you have misinterpreted my instructions!! :) ) If you are in any doubt, then consult a professional. All opinions offered on this site are just that, and should not be taken as legal advice.

 

Halifax - £1400 reclaimed. Now on a crusade to help others!

Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, if you go to moneyclaim, there is a link there to the list of Vexatious Litigants. It makes interesting, and at times, amusing reading. For instance

wtf??:confused::grin:

 

I didn't know you could get one from there also!!

Chrismc v Vertex Data Science Ltd

SD Set Aside WON + Costs

 

 

Chrismc v Barclays

Won - Settlement Agreed at 11th Hour.

 

Philips Bailiffs

Lost - Judge changed at last minute, it didn't help!

 

G-MAC Early Redemption Charges Waived

Won - Early Redemtion Fees Waived in Full.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

First of all, you need to make several things clear to this guy - anda after reading this, he is a [EDIT] - i've had similar with a mobile phone I sold about a year ago.

 

Any transaction on ebay is deemed as a sold as seen unless bought from an ebay shop, in which case you have your full consumer rights.

 

If the guy left positive feedback then he was obviously happy at that point in time.

 

He hasn't lodged a dispute with ebay, and thus they won't get involved with any litigation other than to look at the advert.

 

If he paid through paypal, things would be different - but given the circumstances there is little they would do even then other than ask for both of you to try and mediate a resolution yourselves.

 

Regarding his threat of court action, i'd call his bluff and take him up on it, based upon the following:

 

i The sale was sold as seen - and correctly advertised

ii If his friend was indeed a mechanic, seeing his certification qualifications would be a must, and if so, why did he not spot inherent problems either at the initial viewing, or within 7 days of use?

 

iii The need to produce the original paperwork that you had - which he will not, and probably try to leave a few pages out.

 

iv Play him at his own game, state that you invited him to get an RAC inspection, but he declined (owing to the fact his mate is in the trade), and was happy with the car otherwise he wouldn't have handed over the money.

 

He sounds like a bagger chancing his luck.

 

Also unless he signed the V5 in front of you, don't bet on him declaring new ownership on it, give DVLA a call to check. You don't want a load of parking tickets and penalties thanks to him.

 

If all else fails, if the car is still in your name, just ring the police and declare it stolen... that'll learn 'im!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If all else fails, if the car is still in your name, just ring the police and declare it stolen... that'll learn 'im!!

 

This of course is a joke and shouldn't be attempted unless you want to get in trouble with the police yourself.

Just the FAQ’s ma'am. Please read 'em thoroughly before jumping in. Cheers :)

 

Find all the letters under the rainbow here

 

Being a man, I am always right (however I will make no admission of liability if you have misinterpreted my instructions!! :) ) If you are in any doubt, then consult a professional. All opinions offered on this site are just that, and should not be taken as legal advice.

 

Halifax - £1400 reclaimed. Now on a crusade to help others!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This of course is a joke and shouldn't be attempted unless you want to get in trouble with the police yourself.

 

Yes indeed it is a joke... sorry humour shall stop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A vexatious litigant is a person who has been forbidden by a High Court Judge to issue proceedings in any County Court in England and Wales without permission.

 

You can get a list from HMCS Her Majesty's Court Service.

 

Chris

 

I'm rather surprised that the Banks haven't tried this one on US :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Dammam I realise you are half joking but just for information...

 

To be labelled as a vexacious litigant, a single person or group has to repeatedly and unnecessarily litigate for similar cases over an extended period. They either sue the same person repeatedly and irresponsibly or they sue many people for the same thing irresponsibly. The court is a very last resort and individuals who fail to respect this rule are eventually entered on the register.

 

The process for making an entry on the VL register is complex and untimately rests with a panel of Judges at Appellate Bench level.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...