Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 12mph (beyond any UK limit) will certainly qualify for a Fixed Penalty. So you should received an offer of a FP for each of the remaining two offences. Be sure to submit your licence details as instructed when you accept the offer. If you don't your £100 will be returned to you and the police will prosecute you in court.
    • and it will be also now written off under age related criteria anyway.
    • @dx100ukThanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe consequences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points? @Man in the middleI've been searching the forum and you seem very knowledgeable. Would you mind giving a look at my query please? Thanks in advance!!
    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
    • Been perusing the actual figures on the polls above wondering where the '16% claimed for deform comes from? I understand that there are 'weighted' end results based on secret calculations ...   Probably going to repeat this later, but remember that the ukip/brexit/reform/deform party has ALWAYS had poll speculation FAR better than their actual  performance at elections - by large margins. SO: The labor and Tory votes come largely from simply the people who say they will vote for them - sorted Lab 43% Tory 20%, with maybe another small 1-2% coming from the weightings of the 'not sures' Greens largely get what is declared from 'other' , although with another declared green bit from the 'pressed' question   So as the share of the voting displayed in 'other' granted to reform/deform is around 11%, where does the '16% too often being reported come from? Seems that reform has been granted as beneficiary of effectively ALL the don't knows and wont says, who when pressed didn't actually declare for someone else ... effectively adding 40%+ to their reported polling % - rather strange given their consistent under-performance compared to polling - or perhaps that is the cause of the higher rating eh?   Now I admit the possibility (probability?) of wingers being ashamed of declaring their support for the yuckey lemon end of the spectrum ... but surely  that should affect the 'Torys as well? Maybe the statisticians have simply weighted in that deform wingers are simply more likely to lie?   But - without 'weightings' and assumptions that faragits will get everything that isnt declared as a definite and unequivocal 'not that Piers Morgan' - reform is on around 11% it seems.   Add to that the history of polling a lot less than the hype - and the simple fact that faragit wingers seem to be spread across the country (presumably skulking in their moms spare room despite being 45+) and greens and lib dems seem to be community minded - I think two seats will be an epic result for farage. Hardly the opposition - far more raving wingnut party.   and importantly - Has farage got a home in clacton yet?
  • 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

BLS No CCA but still demanding payment


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4968 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

Even though the case seems clear, they do not have a fully executed agreement so the court can not make judgement. Why the need for a massive full day of legal arguments against a team of barristers and witnesses in front of a very high judge?

 

Ok well its for you to point out the flaws in the agreement hence the need for a day in court

 

the judge wont find the faults for you , you need to draw his attention to this and back it up with Case Law hence the Witness statements and Skeleton Arguements

 

so unfortunatley that is how the court works, been in there many times and im afraid it never changes

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 365
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

So when I win its a case of the bigger the court the bigger the party afterwards? :) Just one other thing before bed. The Solicitor asked at least twice before we went if I was interested in settling out of court and went out of his way after the hearing to try and cut a deal with me. The deal was I admit the debt in writing and they let me pay it off without a ccj with regular payment reviews. This apparently is to save on my legal bill if I loose which could be the same size of my claim.

 

There is also charges and PPI which if you work out the interest come to nearly two thirds of this claim. Can I not claim these back before i start or would that be admitting the debt?

 

Thanks for all your advice Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could this be an extreme version of the "who's going to blink first" routine?

 

IMHO as they have admitted there is no copy of the agreement, ignoring the enforceability of what they have got, surely as they are still in default of the original s.78 request, they should not be seeking enforcement anyway!!

 

But then the banks do think they can make up the law to suit them, and some DJ's seem to agree with them :(

 

Due to the direction it is now going, might it be worth investigating whether you can get a pro-bono representation. After all, it worked for Penelope Wilson !!

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its just short of 5K, ive seen dca's give up at the first hurdle on this site so its worth looking into why they are pushing for fast track. Maybe its to put me off as they think they will win and double their money with the costs. Or maybe it's just Lloyds that wont give up till the end, they are tough. I also have a bank charges claim against them which is stayed, they are the only one of 8 claims that isnt over and done with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PM,

 

Any reason why it went to fast track if the debt was below 5k? The legal arguments are straightforward, so it shouldn't be a complicated matter.

 

IMHO the only reason the other side go for tast track is to get their costs. In small claims both sides are usually expected to meet their own costs.

 

I've one claim running at the moment where the CC claim was just under £4k but at the last minute, the solicitors for the bank added the cheque account overdraft of £1200 to just go over the 5k limit, even though the cheque account was NOT in default and was only OD because of £1800 in charges I was claiming back! The solicitors then claimed in the AQ that their costs would be around 8k (yes, £8,000) to bring a claim of less than £4k.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read your update. What 'complex arguments? Did you have a dumpty of a DJ?

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats right, It could double the amount of the claim but it make no difference as I couldn't afford to pay off a £100 debt never mind a £10,000 debt. Trouble is they will have a legal team and I'll be stood there on my own trying to fight them without experts stood next to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the hearing I thought the Judge was going to get up and join the sollicitor opposite me at the table. I explained all about the CCA and also the fact that they have been unable to find the original default so have re created ( forged to you and me) and intend to call bank staff to give witness statements about the default. I also pointed out about the terms of the CCA had to be within the four corners of the agreement, the solicitor told the judge that the application form only excists on mircofilm. The fact that it is now nolonger a complete document isnt that complex to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what's been said IMO it would seem that the solicitor's sole intention was to confuse matters so that it would seem a complex argument and therefore get the case onto fast track.

 

sneaky :(

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And by getting it onto fast track then it helps them to try and force me into accepting their offer. Considering Lloyds own SC&M which will keep their costs low I would have thought the chance of taking someone with no chance of legal help to a fast track court in order to try and double their money would be to much to resist. Unless they know they have little chance of winning if it goes all the way?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought the chance of taking someone with no chance of legal help to a fast track court in order to try and double their money would be to much to resist.

 

Have a search for pro-bono

ProBonoUK.net Home and i think there's also a link on PT's profile

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats right, It could double the amount of the claim but it make no difference as I couldn't afford to pay off a £100 debt never mind a £10,000 debt. Trouble is they will have a legal team and I'll be stood there on my own trying to fight them without experts stood next to me.

 

 

But you will have a much larger and more experienced legal team on your side - CAG!

 

When you get to court, start with the assumption that the DJ is dumb and can be easily led by the sneaky lawyers from the claimants. Prepare all your arguments properly with all the paper work in order. Then draft out what you want to actually say. Print this out in large font on separarte paper. If the other side go first, don't interupt the other solicitor when he is speaking and don't allow him to get you all riled up. Keep calm and then READ out your defence 'speech', as though you were in front of the teleprompter.

 

The claimant has to prove the case, not the other way around, so as long as you don't admit you owe the debt before the DJ, you should be OK. The DJ may ask some questions but remember the DJ has to follow the statute and decided cases. If he doesn't, the DJ can be overturned on appeal.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting...

 

I have BLS chasing me for a llods tsb credit card. But nearly half of the debt was payments for PPI which i never signed up for.

 

I wrote to them asking for the credit agreement form and also for the PPI form signed by me... Nothing!!

 

They sent another letter chasing payment, so i wrote back... Nothing.

 

Got the final letter today stating if i do not make payment or respond within 14 days they will begin legal proceedings against me.

 

So i phoned... I spoke to a young lad who confirmed they had received my requests, i explained that by law they are obliged to provide the info but he was very arrogant.

 

When i explained that over £600 was PPI that i never took out and nearly £500 was charges, he offered to take £600 off the debt if i paid today.

 

But this isn't the point, i pointed out i hade made a request that they are legally obliged to provide to me, if they can't the debt is unenforcable.

 

It seemed like a cop out so i declined and said the time limit has run its course and i look forward to seeing them in court.

 

I may be stubborn but it annoyed me, he was basically admitting the PPI cover was crap

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ive had a few days off picking on DCA's as I began to get stressed out and also been busy making complaints to FOS.

 

Ive recieved the order from court and I have until the end of April to compile my amended defence.

 

I'll have a few questions to I'll be back over the next few days with them all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My defence has to be in by the 28th April so I would be very greatfull for help in putting it together.

 

As this claim involves bank charges of around £2000, if I started to claim them back would that be admitting the debt?

 

If I didnt claim them back and lost the case would I then be able to say I dont agree with the amount?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PM,

 

Did you contact the people via the links I posted? can they help you?

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Admitting or not admitting the debt is irrelevant. The loan is caught by the consumer credit act, so they have to come up with a valid agreement. You are not denying you had the money, they can easily prove that you had.

 

Because the 2006 act doesn't apply in your case, they have to provide a compliant agreement otherwise the judge is not allowed, by law, to enforce.

 

If they have a piece of paper with your signature and the prescribed terms they may well win. Otherwise they don't win.

 

Personally I wouldn't cloud the issue with a charges counterclaim, I'd wait until their claim is disposed of.

 

Now I must get my AQ off tonight!

 

Regards

 

 

Lantana

Edited by The Lantana
Bluntness!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my amended defence has to be in by next monday, I would be very greatful for some help. Should I just add to my oridinal defence and if so what is best to add or leave out. Could really do with your help Paul.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...