Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

thunderballs

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    246

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by thunderballs

  1. thunderballs
    Also, can anyone indicate how I could lodge a complaint about the judge at the hearing? This is to do with what I said about giving the claimant an unreasonable amount of allowances.
  2. thunderballs
    If instalments are set by the court, and the defendant makes payments on schedule, can the claimant still enter a CCJ on credit reports after 28 days?
  3. thunderballs
    Well, part-won, part-lost. All in all, though, for the reasons below, it didn't need to get to court. I do have the satisfaction of denying Lowell the termination fees - the court costs actually amounted to more than what Lowell ended up with. So, Lowell ended up with a quarter of what they were initially out for. Oh, I'll pay what's been set and I'll pay on time - but I intend to make sure that Lowell/Dryden/3 Mobile work for it in the process, due to many, many open issues and inconsistencies that came out in the hearing. However on the court fees, I felt that the judge gave the claimant far too much leeway (I'm thinking about contesting that), in that she didn't seem interested in the mounted-up false evidence - even though Lowell were forced to admit that they'd included current T&Cs in their evidence pack (she'd already noticed this, by the fact that the last page had clearly been omitted). To her credit, she wasn't greatly impressed about that issue. I attested to the airtime - which was never in question anyway - in fact, I'd said to Three Mobile at the time that I was willing to pay those, but not their termination fees. I also explained that I disputed the entirety of the claim, because Lowell had filed it under the CCA, which I knew didn't cover mobile contracts and I was hardly likely to admit to something I hadn't done. However, she didn't throw out Lowell's re-submitted claim, even though it had been submitted after the 14 day deadline and with only four days notice. I'd also explained that if Lowell had filed the claim correctly in the first place, I would have attested to the airtime and possibly a resolve could have been reached.
  4. thunderballs
    Just need to ask also - would my being offered a lesser handset, at additional cost and with an extension to contract, be deemed as unfair under the UTCCR 1999? And if so, what section of UTCCR 1999 would that come under?
  5. thunderballs
    I was offered something less, yes - and at additional cost as well. As the provider's own log confirms. No, the replacement was never sent because I never agreed to what they proposed.
  6. thunderballs
    The whole PoC situation is a complex one, which I don't want to give too much away about over the next few days - at least not on a public forum. I'm happy to do it via PM, though - I know some other members may feel I'm being a little paranoid about it, but it is a fairly critical time.
  7. thunderballs
    Oh, by the way - here's something else. I should add that on their log, there's notice of a termination letter being sent to me - two years after the account had been terminated, two years after defaults had been logged, and a few months after a note had been left saying the account was written off. Again though, it's not a letter I ever received.
  8. thunderballs
    PoCs are a story in themselves - I'll find out whether the whole thing will go any further within the next week or so.
  9. thunderballs
    That's fine - I just know that there are 'some spies'.
  10. thunderballs
    No problem at all - I did want to treat it as a separate enquiry, in order to gain more familiarity with how that particular act of legislation works.
  11. thunderballs
    Is this an agreement/contract regulated by the ConsumerCredit Act 1974 (as amended)? No. As to paragraph one above, did you at any time affirm the contract andthereby a consensus ad idem was reached between you and the first party to thiscontract (you are known as the secondparty) ? I agreed to a contract, but the item on which the contract was based had to be returned several times over. As to the second paragraph, Did you at any time accept this lesser contract, whether expressly or implied (I.e. by your conduct to it)? No - no consensus was reached. I asked for written details of what was being offered, what I may be eligible for, and was told this couldn't be done. There's no record of all this on the provider's log, of course. The Notice of Assignment must be made by the assignor andsigned under his hand to make the same valid in law pursuant to s,136 of The Lawof Property Act 1925, Did you receive such notice under the signed hand of the person/company towhich you entered into this contract, as required under s,136 of the Law ofProperty Act 1925? No. Was any such notice, required under the Law of Property Act1925, served upon you pursuant to s.196 of the saidact? No. Is it correct to say that the returned handset did not meetthe requirements and conditions upon which you entered the contract for the same? Yes - after a while, even the guy at the shop said they'd stopped offering that particular model because it was subject to too many returns. Did you accept this lesser handset on the condition that thecontract would be extended by a further 6 months? No.
  12. thunderballs
    Reason I ask is because they have cited one, but it's the wrong one.
  13. thunderballs
    That's fine - just I notice that there are 'guests' here, so at least until after the hearing, there are certain details I'd rather not say too much about.
  14. thunderballs
    Also, would the Notice of Assignment have to cite an act of legislation under which the account is supposed to be covered?
  15. thunderballs
    The last one is a bit of an issue - would you mind if I asked you a question by PM?
  16. thunderballs
    Actually, just looking through the bundle and according to the log, it seems I was sent two default notices (neither of them have any deadline dates) some three weeks apart. Copies of the actual notices that were sent haven't been made available to me - and these are letters I genuinely don't recall ever receiving.
  17. thunderballs
    The company terminated the contract - I didn't. This was due to a returned handset and failure on their part to reach a consensus - they claim to have offered a handset inferior, on the proviso that my contract gets extended by six months. I've been told (but am not sure) that such an offer, if the offer constitutes less rights than an initial agreement or if I'm 'losing out', I cannot be held against if I feel obliged not to accept it. "The assignment must be absolute (unconditional)" - I didn't receive one from the provider. The claimant sent one (a mocked-up 'provider letter' within the same envelope as other documents), but I never got one from the provider, and there's no provider-copy available or a record of the provider ever having sent one out either. Let's just say that as far as NoA goes, there's some rather glaring holes apparent. "The assignment must not purport to be by way of charge only." - Could you expand on this one please? "The rights to be assigned must be wholly ascertainable and must not relate to only part of a debt or other legal chose in action." - No act of legislation was mentioned in the NoA. Another document that was sent together with it does, but it would be the incorrect one. In addition, the dates are also out. "The assignment must be in writing and signed by the assignor." - Again, the claimant sent one, but the provider never did. "The other party or parties to the claim must be given notice of the assignment. " - The account had already been terminated long before that point, without the issue of a default notice. Again, no reference of any default notice ever being issued, and no copy available.
  18. thunderballs
    Apologies if this has been answered before, but I'm told that there are four requirements that must be satisfied for a Notice of Assignment to be absolute. Can anyone state what they are, and what they mean? Also, I believe that mobile ETFs have been previously ruled as unfair and court claims containing them would be invalidated. Anyone have more details on this also?
  19. thunderballs
    I have a separate Lowell/Drydens thread going on, but I do have two separate questions to ask independently of that. 1) Does anyone know of any confirmed cases where Lowell or Drydens have been warned for citing late post-hearing amendments without permission being granted? 2) If so, have they ever been reprimanded for it? If it's the case where it's common practice on their part, then I believe it'll help my own case quite substantially, and this is why I ask.
  20. thunderballs
    Where andyorch (not sure where his original post has gone) has said that I can opt for sanctions to be imposed, I take that this means I can ask the court to prohibit the claimant from using an amended argument. Thanks to andyorch, I believe I've found the CPR passage with which I can do that.
  21. thunderballs
    Done. Not sure why the PM function has an aversion to spaces between words, but I'd like to keep the content of it to PM if that's OK.
  22. thunderballs
    Many thanks - I've drafted a bit of written correspondence which I intend to forward to the court. As it's probably the last one I need to submit, am I OK to forward this draft via PM (I don't want it to be seen by any 'guests'), and see what you think?
  23. thunderballs
    Thanks for that - it does make more sense to merge threads (for some reason, I hadn't thought about that).
  24. thunderballs
    Oh, I should also point out that the T&Cs they've included in their court pack are the current ones - not from when they're saying the contract was taken out. Also, their court docs have been served by email - the email states a bundle's on its way in the post.
  25. thunderballs
    Well, even if the court lets them amend, the dates that DF are still citing are out anyway. I did get one of those knock-off Three NoAs from Lowell, but nothing at all from the OC - the DSAR request I got from the OC never had one either.

Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...