Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
  • 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

Monument/Barclays


manc1976
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3774 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

With regard to the payment break plan, this was an automatic addition to the account after it was opened, in my case I didnt sign anything so I reported them to the Finacial Ombudsman service, they kicked and struggled abit, but in the end they refunded the full amount plus statutory interest.

 

I take it that you are still being charged interest and alpplied penalty charges to the account whilst they are still in breech of section 78. You have two choices, at this point you can begin proceedings against them because they have broken the law and continue to do so, the law states that you are unable to profit from unlawful activity, so all interest and charges that have been applied during the breech is unlawful enrichment for which you are entitled to be refunded to the account, with statutory interest. I took them, settled with out liability, you'll have to PM me for details.

 

The second option is to wait until thay default you which they probably will -vexatious act, they cannot enforce whilst in breech of section 78 which includes default issue. They have therefore brought the 'contract between you' to a close without warrent, since you have merely been enforcing your rights unnder law and they have been acting outside it. Now you have them, you rescind the contract under the CCA, they have a prescribed period to reply otherwise they commit another offence. Then you sue them for breech of contract and full recission of the arrangement between you. That allows you to reclaim, all interest & charges (with stautory interest) to place you both in a situation that existed before the 'agreement' was reached, but it also allows you to claim compensation for their breech, the fact that they have posted and erroneous default marker on your record, incidentally, I have read on another thread that a colleague is actually taking the CRA to court as well for allowing the compant to post defamoatory material, since the OFTs recent guidelines has cancelled the CRAs cop out of 'we asked them (the bank) if it was true and they said it was'

 

Anyway hope this helps.

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I sent a SAR request to Monument and asked for full disclosure including any recordings of phone calls that were made.

 

All we got back were statements going all the way back to when it was Providian

 

No recordings and No agreements were sent to us, therefore they have not complied with my SAR request.

 

I will be writing back to tell them that I demand ALL of the information they hold.

 

If they dont have any recording, then they can't prove that the Payment Break Plan was agreed.

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I had a reply to my further information request under SAR

 

monument_20feb09.jpg

 

So, at least they cannot dispute this in court. They have no evidence that proves that we asked for the Payment Break Plan. I will be interested to see if they are still adding it to the statements.

 

I bet will have been paying high interest on these payments too, what is the best way to work out how much in total?????

 

It may even come to enough to cover the debt, in which case would be worth taking them to court.

 

Thanks

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have had a statement through today and the Payment Break Plan is now not showing.

 

Now all I need to do is go through old statements and work out how much it all comes to, as I think it could be close to what the balance is now.

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
  • 1 year later...

Upon checking my wife's credit file, Arrow Global have changed her status to deceased and the account settled ????

 

This seems to have been done about a year ago, how can they do this without evidence?

 

Barclays have also done this to another account on her credit file

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...