Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
  • 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
      • 160 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

First Direct & Final Demand


girlie12
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5908 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

We sent the usual letter to First Direct requesting a copy of our agreement, a copy of the default notice & any deed of assignment & have had a copy of a "Final Demand" sent although nothing else.

 

Just wanted some advice because the Final Demand doesn't say Default on it & want to know if it is "legal"

 

It says the following & is dated 13/01/05

 

"Dear Sir

 

FINAL DEMAND

 

Despite our previous correspondence concerning your debt, we have to date received no satisfactory response.

We now DEMAND immediate repayment in the sum of £*****. This amount is made up as follows:-

Account number Balance Credit/Debit

1234567899 £****** Dr

 

The outstanding balance of £***** will have further interest added on the same basis as presently applies until the date of repayment.

 

YOU HAVE SEVEN DAYS TO REPAY IN FULL or let us have satisfactory proposals for repayment by instalments or otherwise. If immediate repayment in full cannot be made, the enclosed Financial Statement must be completed & returned.

 

If you fail to comply with this demand DEBT COLLECTORS or SOLICITORS will be instructed.

Details of your default including your name and address will be given to the CREDIT REFERENCE AGENCIES named below if we have still not received a satisfactory response from you within 28 days. Credit Reference Agencies supply information to lenders in order to establish an individuals credit history quickly & simply.Lenders then use this information to help decide whether or not to accept applications for credit from their customers. If details of your default are given to Credit Reference Agencies this may make it more difficult to obtain credit elsewhere in the future"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes. Part of the stipulation of the CCA is that the payment must be made.

And without the £1, the Company does not have to respond to your request.

So to stop everything in its tracks, you will need to send another CCA request

including the £1. If they had the original agreement, they would have sent it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

What they've sent you doesn't comply with Part VII of the CCA 1974, so any Default/Termination is unlawful.

 

Follow the advice given, as you can't query this without requesting a copy of the agreement. Templates are available in the library if you need them.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I sent a letter to First Direct on 26th Nov enclosing a postal order requesting:-

  1. You must supply true copy of agreement etc
  2. You must supply a true & certified copy of the orig default notice not a Final Demand as prev sent.
  3. Any deed of assisnment if the debt was sold on.

Now received a reply -

"Please find enclosed your postal order along with copies of account opening forms for your accounts (single loan account & joint bank account). There is no legal requirement for us to hold copies of Default Notices so I have been unable to enclose a copy per your request.

 

The 1st Account you held (joint bank account) was not a consumer Credit Act regulated product,therefore no Default Notice is required.

 

As we received no satisfactory response to the Final Demand your accounts were passed to Metropolitan Collection Services and an entry was made on your credit file. The final Demand is our notice to register adviser information on your credit file and satisfies our legal obligations beforepassong accounts to a Debt Collection Agency.

 

Once your account is paid in full this is reflected on your credit file, which is updated.

 

No Deed of assignment is required as Metropolitan Collection Services are part of HSBC group.

 

I trust this clarifies the position.....blah,blah!!"

 

Please advise what action I now need to take - I am feeling a little lost amongst all the paperwork:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, "account opening forms" sounds like an application form to me!

 

Can you scan/post up what they've sent you? (Removing personal information of course)

 

They are wrong about the bank account - read here;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/31515-ccas-overdrafts.html?highlight=overdrafts

 

then this post;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collectors-debt-collection/125120-wescot-credit-services-advice.html#post1307682

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you open a photobucket account and upload it to there you can the insert the links or images into posts. Have a read here for further instructions (towards the end of the guide) http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a little more on Coutts & Co v Gabriel Oscar Alan Sebestyen 2005 which outlines the legal position on the Act and overdrafts http://www.shlegal.com/Asp/uploadedF...it_12_05. pdf page 5

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The account forms are application forms and bear no relation to the overdraft agreement. Without any documentation as outlined in the OFT Determination, they can't rely on that to say they don't need to comply with the CCA - the application forms don't contain the prescribed terms, (credit limit, repayments and interest rates) so the overdraft will be unenforceable as a result under s.127(3) CCA 1974. (When will these Banks learn how to comply?)

 

The loan agreements look ok as it has the prescribed terms. (above) The APR isn't right, but works out at 6.67%, which is within the tolerance allowed under the regulations;

 

Permissible tolerances in disclosure of the APR

1A. For the purposes of these Regulations, it shall be sufficient compliance with the requirement to show the APR if there is included in the document -

 

(1) a rate which exceed the APR by not more than one; or

 

(2) a rate which falls short of the APR by not more than 0.1; or

 

(3) in a case to which either of paragraphs 2 or 3 below applies, a rate determined in accordance with the paragraph or such of them as apply to that case.".

 

What is the date of your signature? If it's after the date printed on the agreement, that could make this a prospective agreement, so is void under s.59; (the fact the signature is printed and predated adds weight to this argument)

 

59.—(1) An agreement is void if, and to the extent that, it purports to bind a person to

enter as debtor or hirer into a prospective regulated agreement

 

IMHO, this agreement is properly executed. If you want to challenge it, you will have to do so based on the fact they can't provide any evidence of the original Default Notice, so can't prove that they have Defaulted the account correctly.

 

Also, do you know if they have applied charges to the Loan account? This would invalidate any Default Notice, unless they can prove their charges are lawful, (which they can't) as the Default amount includes those charges;

 

Failure of a Default Notice or a Termination Notice to be accurate not only invalidates such Notice, (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co NLD 14 July 1998) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, (Wilson v First County Trust, Wilson v Robertsons (London) Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1088, Wilson v Pawnbrokers [2005] EWCA Civ 147) but would also give the Claimant a claim for damages in the sum of £1,000. (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119)
  • Haha 1

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your speedy & indepth response.

 

The loan agreement WAS dated the day after their date so I reckon this may make it void under S59.

 

Will have a look at whether any charges have been added to the loan account.

 

Are there any templates I can use for my reply for either the bank a/c or loan?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There won't be any templates for this, as each case has it's own specific merits and won't fit a template as such.

 

I'd avoid discussing the enforceability of the loan agreement, as you don't want to point out the obvious - plus this could help them if they decide to enforce against you later.

 

Stick to the Default Notice issue, IMHO, so start by writing back telling them they do have an obligation to prove they have Defaulted you within the prescribed process of the Act - if they haven't, suggest that they remove the Default from your credit file, as unsubstantiated.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...