Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Documents arrived today dated 27th March.  This is a cc taken out a long time ago (2008) and they don't seem to have been able to provide a copy of a CCA agreement, just reams of print outs of lines of texts from old bank statements, default notices etc.   
    • Documents finally arrived today from PRA group.  New day have sent me lots of paperwork, copies of default letters and statements, print out of what looks like a CCA that would have been completed on online, IP address as signature.  This debt is not too old, so possible this is the true copy of agreement ?  Not sure what my defence would be beyond irresponsible lending. 
    • pers i wouldn't.. all you need to know is in the posts of that thread....that being section 127(3) of the CCA refers. if under a CCA return, the 'creditor' claims its a recon, it must not contain any details like a sig, tickbox, or typed name (whether you signed physically or by online tickbox) 1. those are not necessary in a recon, so why inc them? (faked??) 2, it cant thus be a recon!!, it must be a copy of the 'original' from the original creditor, not from a debt buyers filing cabinet. they shouldn't not be 'mixing' some original docs from the OC with crap from their filing cabinet, claiming its ALL a recon! because some of it is faked. just remember there are far more docs like NOA and a DN that are as equally important to a court claim of 'this debt is enforceable'. never rely solely upon the dodgy agreement argument.
    • India has thousands of small gold refineries which are facing more competition from big players.View the full article
  • 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

Egg card CRP


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4694 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

I SARd egg last year asking for everything but specifically mentioning key documents, including PPI application and PPI credit agreement. I received nothing that I can see proves I actually asked for PPI.

 

I recently wrote to egg asking for a refund of CRP premiums and interest, stating the following reasons why I believe it to be mis-sold:

 

1. I don't recall asking for it; and

 

2. My employment status would not have facilitated a payout- I was a student and although I was employed part time, I was not guaranteed any hours, thus I could potentially work 12 hours one week, 4 the next, and none the folowing.

 

 

Egg have replied stating the following:

 

Our online sales process:

 

Does not require you to take rpi as a condition of obtaining the credit card.

 

Does not provide an advisory service.

 

Required you to positively confirm that you wished to purchase this policy during the online application.

 

Provided full terms and conditions of the policy and requested you read them before submitting.

 

 

Therefore they are not upholding my complaint and consider it closed. Yadda yadda. Do egg usually fob people off, or have they actually looked into things?

 

 

By some miracle, I have my original documentation from when I applied. When I was sent the card agreement to sign, I also received a set of T&Cs for the PPI, but nothing to sign. The interesting points from this are:

 

Eligibility

You can take out this policy if at the start date you are:

...

actively at Work and have been working continuously for the 6 months immediately prior to the start date

...

 

Definitions

Work means a continuous period of permanent gainful employment (either full time or part time) You must also pay the correct National Insurance contributions.

 

What is not covered- Unemployment

You are not covered if you become unemployed:

 

because your work is seasonal, casual, temporary or occasional

 

 

I can now amend my complaint to additionally say that my employment was seasonal as I only worked during university term time, and I only started my job 4 months before I applied for the card.

 

 

To recap, I don't recall asking for CRP and Egg have provided no proof; I was employed for only 4 months before the CRP began; My employment was seasonal; My employment could probably be described as casual (zero hour, no guaranteed hours).

 

Should I go back to egg with additional evidence, as they have stated in their letter? Or am I best to go to the FOS?

Link to post
Share on other sites

at the end of the day you have the usual fob-off letter for whatever reason.

 

just ignore what they are saying and put in your claim and spreadsheet

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Craigers,

 

As Dx has said, you have had the brush off from Egg.

 

You need to go through your statements and enter each monthly PPI charge into a spreadsheet along with the date of charges.

 

If you attach the spreadsheet to a post, I will go through it and help calculate how much you should be claiming.

 

DJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm slightly concerned that the fos wouldn't take my complaint as the account began prior to the formation of the fos. how would a court look upon the fact i have the t&cs, and even though i don't recall signing any agreement for the ppi, they clearly state the conditions i have highlighted that the ppi wouldn't cover?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 6 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...