Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • where does anything say its a penalty charge please? sit on your hands , stop begging to everyone await if/when you ever get a letter of claim. thread title updated     
    • Hi all, new member, being advised by someone on another forum but looking for the opinion of others to help me decide what to do.  Bit of a long one but I am looking for some quite specific advice or signposting to somewhere that may hold the correct information. Long story short, I bought an Audi on finance years ago and traded my old car in under the diesel scrappage scheme, brilliant. This allowed me to reduce the value of my brand new car by £7,000 Fast forward a few years later and I fell into hardship. Unfortunately I could no longer afford the car and despite my best efforts at trying to negotiate some kind of support from VWFS (Audi financial Services), the car was subsequently marked stolen and I was pulled over at the side of the road using Tactical Pursuit and Contain. My car was then recovered back to the finance company. I struggled for a while, bought an older car to get myself by and eventually got my finances back on track. Then in September of last year I became aware of a CCJ against me filed by VWFS, for the shortfall of the agreement minus the value of the car which was sold at auction. This caused me to do some research into my agreement, legislation and also consult some legal advice. Using another forum and speaking to retired vehicle finance lawyers, it turned out I may have some grounds to apply to set aside the CCJ at a Court hearing, so I drafted some documents and a witness statement and I was successful in setting aside the CCJ, on the grounds that VWFS had no evidence that I had traded in my old car as a part exchange. Now this is where things get complicated. My whole defence on winning the case against VWFS and disregarding liability for the shortfall rested on the fact that, with my old car as a part exchange, I had paid in more than a third of the agreement and VWFS could not repossess my car without a court order or they would be in breach of Section 90 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and I would be entitled to all sums paid under the agreement. I took this all the way, noting that the CCA 1974 and the Consumer Credit Agreement Regulations 2010 state that a deposit is defined as any exchange of goods or by any other means a reduction in value of a purchase by means of a transfer. I recently had my day in Court but as a litigant in person, was cross examined by an all singing all dancing Barrister and of course he persuaded the Judge that I had no case, and that my car traded in under the scrappage incentive was not to be classed as a deposit, despite it literally being written in legislation, amongst other reasons why I found the HP agreement to not be properly executed. I am now appealing this decision as I strongly believe the Judge has misinterpreted the law, What I really need for this to be successful is someone who is knowledgeable in the field of Vehicle Finance to help me understand if I have a possibility of overturning this case, as I have no doubt at all that my car should be classed as a part exchange and a deposit and it is blatantly written in the legislation that the finance companies are bound by. I would massively appreciate if someone can help me decipher this legislation and its application in the sense of my HP agreement, I simply do not understand how I can trade in my car and it not be classed as a part exchange, or a deposit. Similarly, if someone is able to find the exact wording of the terms and conditions of how the Diesel Scrappage Scheme was managed in 2018 that would be an absolute life saver! Thanks so much in advance, this is not a straight forward nor a well documented case but I believe I am onto something and I believe there will be other people in my position who have lost their cars without knowing this clause and could well be entitled to reclaim all sums under the agreement
    • we know them well. you TOTALLY ignore them. NO DCA is a BAILIFF  
  • 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

Hearing to remove stay


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4314 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 244
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just with regards to the telephone conference hearings, we had one for an allocation hearing in July that Barclays' legal rep turned up to. I think any expense from their part comes from paying a barrister to be there (although they paid a junior to be at ours, who had never done one before and was torn apart by the fairly ferocious judge!).

 

It was all very quick. However, the difference there was that the judge had already suggested (read, "decided on") fast track, and Barclays wanted that as well, as they knew it would delay things and they had obviously had a heads up about the OFT case (GRRRR!!).

 

Your hearing sounds like it may be more intricate and they may prepare for it, but all I can say is that the barrister on our call reminded me of someone shoved in front of a camera on the news without their script!

 

Anyway, we had to mess around for ages with Barclays, who ignored all requests for any organisation of the telephone conference. All I can suggest is to make sure you keep in touch with the court and let them know that you are struggling to get any response. They don't get involved, but it is just as well to let them know that you are trying to make sure it's all organised, and they are more than aware of the tactics being used in these cases. Perhaps put on any chasing letters/emails/faxes etc, a cc to the court manager/judge so that the solicitors know the court is fully informed of how much you are having to chase them. That might force their hand a little?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, we had to mess around for ages with Barclays, who ignored all requests for any organisation of the telephone conference. All I can suggest is to make sure you keep in touch with the court and let them know that you are struggling to get any response. They don't get involved, but it is just as well to let them know that you are trying to make sure it's all organised, and they are more than aware of the tactics being used in these cases. Perhaps put on any chasing letters/emails/faxes etc, a cc to the court manager/judge so that the solicitors know the court is fully informed of how much you are having to chase them. That might force their hand a little?

 

Thanks for the info and I have been ccing the Court as well as writting directly to the Court to ask questions. However, the court lost my letter to the Judge so they have some time to find it! LOL I will drop another one off if they have not got it soon.

 

Also I will chase DG again in a few days and remind them of the direction and their obligation to organise the call.

 

Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

To start a new thread in this forum click this newthread.gif

but it looks like you are with the A&L so click this Alliance & Leicester

and then scroll to the bottom of the page and you will find a new thread button there.

Post the same questions on that forum.

There is a link in my signature for post oft cases!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you are PJ newthread.gif

 

I have Heynes v HSBC but only a paper copy, yes the judge did uphold the stay and no further directions were made against the bank BECAUSE Heynes said he would clear the balances of his accounts.

 

A much better reference case is Carlisle v Clydesdale. again the judge upheld the stay BUT stated that if the bank took any measures against the claimant to recover the debt or report defaults in the period of the stay he would immediately lift the stay and the case would go to hearing. I have a PDF version of this if you PM me your email addy I will send it to you.

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, can anyone plerase tell me when penfold's case is due to be heard?

My best friend has a hearing due for next thursday and iv been doing all this for him but now he will be in court on his own and i am very worried for him!!

Apart from the bundle, what else should i take or advise him to say?

PLEEEASE help if you can? Im panicking....:(

-Craigten

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, can anyone plerase tell me when penfold's case is due to be heard?

My best friend has a hearing due for next thursday and iv been doing all this for him but now he will be in court on his own and i am very worried for him!!

Apart from the bundle, what else should i take or advise him to say?

PLEEEASE help if you can? Im panicking....:(

-Craigten

 

Tomorrow morning! 10.40am on the phone. As it is a telephone hearing I have no issue with anyone knowing now.

 

Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

In DG's defence paperwork they mention:

 

In short, the stay facilitates the orderly resolution of these cases, in the interests of all parties and the efficient administration of justice. It is understood that Moore-Bick LJ’s view, as expressed in e-mails to the Designated Civil Judges, is that His Lordship would be surprised if stays were not granted in most cases

Can anyone shed any light on these emails?

They have not enclosed them in their bundle so can I say this should be ignored as we are unaware of these emails.

Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

on the other hand how do you tell a judge that :rolleyes:.

 

It could be worth trying the old tried and trusted Army approach Pete,

 

i.e. prefix your points " With all due respect to Your Honour, ..." then say what you need to get across. .. . it used to work for me ! LOL :D

 

Seriously though, I've heard this used in court too, many times, by barristers.

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats actually very true, don't forget your a litigant in person your submission and knowledge doesn't have to be perfect your not a professional lawyer (are you? :eek::D), just ask the judge how this can have a baring on your case.

 

and I almost forgot :eek: the very best of luck tomorrow and come back and tell us all how it worked on the telephone!!! :D

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep! All the best Penfold, hope it goes OK for you :D - I'll be interested to hear how a telephone hearing actually works....... I never got that far with my two.......

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Hearing over…Result….Adjournment unit next possible date

What Happened:

Well a telephone hearing was indeed an experience and weird, but all in all ok. The Judge (didn’t catch his name….great for me) was very apologetic by saying he did not know anything about the case, nor had my bundle (that I hand delivered) nor the Defendants bundle (which he did get half way through the conversation).

He basically asked me to state my reasons for lifting the stay. I tried to garble through my points being flustered that he did not have anything to refer to…

I pointed out Human Rights – He asked which article etc…I think I got round it but must have sounded without any real knowledge and just regurgitating something I read!

I pointed out the Defence’s references to Wilson V Robertson and how it did not apply here

I explained about the Waiver and how it did not cover Section 187 – He was most interested in this and asked me to come up with a figure that they had taken from this money….I said “how am I supposed to that?” He said “look through the statements…” Help guys how do I do that exactly? What did he mean and how would I prove or show this?

I also talked about the Judge Behrens case and specifically point 12 about the default and him agreeing to life the stay! If only I could have been face to face with Mrs Watt (a hot shot lawyer from London!). He was interested and did not know it, but wanted to read the findings…Lovely I think.

Anyway he said shall I proceed or adjourn? She said “proceed”, I said “Adjourn” until he has my stuff in front of him since it would be unfair not to read the 120 odd pages I did for him. He agreed. He then said “would I like to try to resolve this after I leave the conference?” I said “yes”, she did too, then once he was gone she said no negotiation. Should I write to the court about this and the fact she said HSBC were not interested in settling with me?

I also pointed out several times: No defence and no successes. No offer either from HSBC at any point. He pointed out 2 successes with other banks and was I aware. I said “yes but would be happy to take my chances!”. He said if I succeeded and then the OFT case failed how would I repay since I said I was strapped. I said I would make a payment plan…LOL Don’t think that was good…but funny!

OK guys help here….

Letter to court re Mrs Watt’s not negotiating with me.

Advice to strengthen up my arguments above especially this business about S187 as he was most interested in this.

Thanks Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Prabs !!!

 

will have to read up section 187... I would have been inclined to say all of the claim :)

 

I think it will be worth while telling the Judge as soon as he put the phone down HSBC refused to talk about a settlement.

 

and the two successes were due to defects in the claimants submissions not due to the banks defence, in fact I believe for both cases the bank weren't even represented in court.

 

again well done

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

and the two successes were due to defects in the claimants submissions not due to the banks defence, in fact I believe for both cases the bank weren't even represented in court.

 

 

 

Pete, tell me more about these please as I would like to include that in the letter to the Judge. Do you think I would get the same guy, he seemed nice?

 

The section 187 seems to be the key combined with Judge behrens. Problem I have with that case is the default was put on before the stay, however, it is being updated so does apply and I know HSBC will not realise that nor the judge. They will merely be trying to wriggle out of the whole thing and keep the stay.

 

Penfold

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Pen.

 

Write directly to the Judge, you will be able to get his name from the Listings Clerk, and send it RD. Inform him that you tried your very best to settle but they would even discuss. Also add the tone that was used from the other side during this conversation? Apologise for him not having your bundle to hand and say what date it was delivered to Court.

 

Good luck

 

Chris:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...