Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • old and new threads merged i though you were going to send the SB letter in 2017? dx  
    • dunno you've not scanned up what you've had before how can we tell?  
    • Today , after a lot of years i received a letter from this lot. Very friendly, "Were writing to remind you that we haven't had any contact from you in a while".  The velvet fist, followed by  a veiled threat to get their preferred debt collectors involved. Yep dead right. In 1992/3 I took out a Student load under duress from DHSS. up to 2000 I had successfully gotten deferment on low income. But rather than sign on as unemployed ,I decided to be self employed. I applied and they asked for all sorts of documents. I obliged and then correspondence ceased from them, circa 2001. To date I have had no correspondence from Student Loans. I was made redundant in 2009 and reached 65 in 2012 , at which age the loan should have been cancelled. Now , today, 12 years on retirement and 11 ( at least years after last contact) I get a letter with veiled threats. Do I , as I smell a scam a) ignore it and hope that Erudio will think that this phishing attempt has failed or b) respond with a statute barred letter or c) remind them of legal terms that loan should be cancelled 12 years ago or d) combination of b) +c)      
  • 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

HSBC **Court Action Issued**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5501 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

I agree PT

 

Do you think it will be OK to post his reply to his defence up on this thread?

i dont see why not as long as you dont post anything which has details which relate to you on it you should be fine

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 164
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just had another good look through and its a bit doggy to post it so will point out key facts.

 

1 CPR18 & 36 paragragh Defence is off a consumer website and is inapprpiate and ineffective.

 

Then he goes on and on about me threaterning him with SRA FOS etc.

 

Then he goes on about they have supplied me an agreement so its all my fault bla bla bla.

 

And he want under CPR3 the court to hold a 30 min case management conference and me to submit a defence case summary and all other documents that I have supporting the case......

Link to post
Share on other sites

X20

 

i can email it to you if you want.

Just a bit doggy posting it.

Just PM your email address if you want it.

 

Cheers

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we're all interested, thanks for keeping us all in suspenders HAK:-o

So you got your defence from a website eh?

Before the www it would have been a book, or from advise of lets say a solicitor?

And shame on you for reporting them to every authority you bad B*gger you.

Even if the other sides solicitor was acting in good faith, you'd think he'd have got his ducks in a row before taking any action.

As it is, I wonder if its contempt of court to offer a kleenex when he's bleating this stuff to the judge, would be funny

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bazzaar

 

Sorry about not posting but not sure if it will harm my case.

If PT and X20 says it OK to post I will post it tonight.

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

HAK

What you have there is a Reply. A Reply is a rare beast these days and only usually appears where the Defendant counterclaims. Its purpose is to join issue with some aspect raised in the Defence. Though the CPR barely regulates a Reply, what it does say is that a Claimant who does not serve a Reply to a Defence is not taken to admit the Defence. In short therefore if you do not admit the Defence there's nothing you need say.

 

It is evident you did not serve a Counterclaim. It is one of the points the Claimant complains about in the Reply (eh?)

 

The Reply is not the place for the Claimant to

[1] complain tht the source of the Defendant's Defence is or appears to follow formats suggested on consumer websites or to say that by reason of that fact alone, the Defence is inappropriate and ineffective. The proper course is to make an application to the court for an order dealing with what may be argued as inappropriate or ineffective about the Defence.

 

[2] complain that a CPR 18 Request is misconceived. The proper course is to decline to answer and to explain to the requesting party why the request will not be answerd. It will then be up to the requesting party to make an appliction to the court for an order requiring that other party to answer the Request.

 

[3] complain about the Defendant's conduct and set out argument why a Defndant should be held liable for costs. If the Defendant's conduct is to be raised as an issue on costs. The proper course is to raise that issue at the conclusion of the final hearing when the court will consider costs.

 

[4] contend the Particulars of claim are not defective.

 

[5] explain when it will give disclosure of documents

 

[6] invite the court to make directions. If the claimant seeks directions he should make an application to the court for those directions.

 

In short the Reply evidences the claimant's solicitor's sheer frustration. If he had had his wits about him or taken a couple days to chill, he ought to have realised that venting like he has only makes him and his firm appear unprofessional and at a loss as to how to proceed correctly in the interests of his client.

 

I wouldn't post up the Reply.

 

x20

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be going for a strike out on my AQ

 

I will work on it over the next few days and repost.

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck with the strike out HAK.

 

We`re all watching this space ;)

Edited by N.P
Shady spelling

If I have helped or made you laugh in any way in your hour of need, then please click my scales <<<<<<<<<< ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi HAK

 

i think x20 has covered everything that needs covering, it is the rantings of a rather upset solicitor that you have there in the reply my friend. as x20 also pointso ut, it looks very unprofessional on their part so its good for you ;)

 

regards

 

 

paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it OK to send in my AQ well before the due date

 

It's OK, but what advantage do you expect to gain? Plus, how do you construct your case for strike out? On the heels of that Reply, to be honest I'd exercise a degree of caution for the time being if you see where I am coming from.

 

x20

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive drafted info for Section G of AQ.

 

DELETED

 

MC you can view it when it arrives through your letter box...HEHE

Edited by Having_A_Knightmare
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a reply form my defence of Mart Clarke.

 

First he is saying the 36 paragragh defence and a CPR 18 is from a website!!

 

He has made some requests in the defence, Do i have to respond to them??

 

Judging by the following posts on this R2D, I reckon my recent R2D from MC is probably along the same lines (my thread) - like you I've not posted it yet....

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great stuff. They so expect you to be scared of them and so often go to court thinking they will walk this one - I love it when a plan falls apart and have been there on more than one occasion:D

 

Power to the people.

  • Haha 1

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

AQ filed today in person to the Court....

 

Hopefully the judge will see the total sham this case is and throw it out.

I have also pointed out the childish actions of MC.

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...