Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Payday Overdraft (wage payment and payday loans ltd)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4574 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

Has anyone dealt this company?> Gotta be one of the most rude, obnoxious companies I have come across so far.

I defaulted a while back and heard nothing until I started getting generic emails from the so called manager saying I was about to have court proceeding issued etc, thing is the email was not just sent to me as there was no direct reference to myself and the to field was blank am assuming there were a number of people BCC into the email, I received court papers a couple of weeks ago but nothing since, then today I get a phone call (after he spent 5 mns being extremely rude to a colleague asking my managers name, HR dept address etc) informing me he has a court order and is about to issue an attatchment to my work. I have agreed to repay £50 per month on the basis that 1 I receive written confirmation of the agreement, and 2 their account details are provided as I will only make payment to them they are not having any of my details. I have also requested a copy of the court judgement he is said to have as its funny I have not received a judgement.

I want to know where I stand on them calling work and harrassing colleagus and also if I am correct in stating that only a court can contact my work regarding an attatchment of earnings not the company themselves?

I think this looks like a last attempt to bully people into paying up by a desperate company!

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I received were papers that they were applying for a judgement, I keep receiving random emails though one saying they r going for a judgement tomorrow then others saying they r going for an attatchment Monday but as I say these are all generic emails no personal rference to me and look as though they have been sent to an address list. This is why I have asked for a copy of the judgement with the amount on before I agree to any payment plan.

 

I borrowed money last yr in June I think it was about £250 I think,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely you have to be notified of a court date, so that you can defend yourself is need be.

I think they are clutching at straws.

Keep the emails and is it hasnt and then does go to court, you can show their immoral bullying tactics

Link to post
Share on other sites

just received an email saying I owe them £1010 yeah ok, told them the most I will pay is loan plus 1 month interest or they can take me to court and ill fight them all the way, I highly doubt a court would issue a judgement for that much from a £250 loan, I am actually relishing a fight now with them as I have emails of them offering me loans to this day even nthough they know I am in difficulty and an email encouraging people to take out payday loans.

 

I am still waiting to see a copy of this alleged judgement against me, I will have to find the paper I received saying they were attempting a judgement and call the court,

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are having a game with you, if they do manage to get an attachment of earnings you can apply to the court to have it overturned on the grounds you did not get a chance to defend yourself, and if they have gone directly to your HR department they need reporting to Trading Standards pronto. In fact why not report them anyway for unjust enrichment, loan sharking practices are frowned upon by Trading Standards, who may have an Economic Exclusion department to escalate stuff through.... to getan attachment of earnings you would have had to default on a judgment and again you have grounds to get one overturned (if they have one).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have checked with Money Claim online, they applied for a judgement but it has never been granted against me, big fat load of lies. I have put in a defence against it on the grounds I tried on numerous occasions to come to a repayment agreement with them and they refused to co-operate and tried to bully and harrass me into agreeing to pay them back over £1000 by saying they would take me to court, lets see what happens now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hiya. I have a question about the same company. I have applied for a loan with them. They are asking me to pay tax on the loan at 5%. This is about £375. Apparently I get this back when I am credited the loan in my account. Is this normal?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^

asking for money up front is nothing else than a [problem], that way they can turn you down at the last second and keep what you paid up front.

 

No mention of a Credit License on their Website, no mention of a APR either, plus a little trip to Google Streetview reveals that they are either operating out of a Bedroom (like all legit financial service companies :lol:) or the address provided on their website is fake as well...

 

So best to just report them to the relevant authorities and don't let them pressure you into paying anything you don't owe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. The address this company have given me in London belongs to a hotel. On putting the post code into google a long list of companies were listed. Seems like building or unit with several different offices. The phone number is different than the one I was given by the person dealing with the load. So I will be ringing this new number in the morning. Should be interesting.

 

What raised my suspicion was the fact all transactions were via western union. And the people I have been speaking to were of an asian origin. English extremely poor. I have had a few loans in the past but never had to pay tax upfront to release the loan. So looks like I got away with it lightly, just paid my apparent 1st instalment, and not the supposed £375 tax. Also they said, as a gesture of good will (after I complained about the tax) they were going to debit me an extra £1000.

 

Got a few calls to make in the morning. Thanks for your help.

 

One last thing. Will my bank account be safe? I believe they have my account details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also they said, as a gesture of good will (after I complained about the tax) they were going to debit me an extra £1000.

 

One last thing. Will my bank account be safe? I believe they have my account details.

 

Sounds very suspicious to be honest.

 

Unfortunately most Payday loan companies have a habit of raiding bank accounts, so it's best to close the account and move to another bank, then for repaying the loan insist that they provide you their Account details so you can control when and how much you pay instead of them hitting your Debit Card with random fantasy charges and so on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have no licence ? then they are trading illegally....if they are attempting to mislead you with some kind of 'tax' issue then I suggest you forward all correspondence to HMCS and the OFT...

Link to post
Share on other sites

PAYDAYOVERDRAFT IS CORRECT AND LEGITIMATE ON 0208-144-2009 AND BASED OUT OF LONDON ENGLAND.

THERE IS A CON BY IMPERSONATORS. BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING:-----

 

WESTERN UNION

PAYMENT IN ADVANCE

 

Paydayoverdraft the real one doesn,t do either so be aware.

 

There is a [problem] going on with people pretending to be Paydayoverdraft.com. BE CAREFUL. Paydayoverdraft is the correct trading name of Wage Payments and Payday Loans Ltd regiustered in the UK which is a legitimate company. PLEASE BE AWARE that anyone who asks you for money in advance is a FRAUD and probably based out of Africa. This is why they use Western Unioun as you have to send the money abroad.

Don,t be an idiot and send money to anyone. anyone affected must complain to the Police.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

This is the response I got after offering a repayment monthly, couldnt pay in full due to completely unexpected change in circumstances which has left me almost 300 a month worse off;

"you can pay what you wish to but we will still be pursuing

In fact we are starting an investigation into you as when you applied you had a disposable income.

if we find, as we suspect, you have lied then we will pass your file to the Police for criminal proscecution for obtaining money by deception."

I've told them to take me to court because at least then my situtation will be judged fairly as opposed to them trying to bully me into something I cannot possibly do

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of tosh, get onto the OFT today and ask them to investigate this tin pot company. The company have broken a lot of the NEW OFT guidelines which were published today.... as well as a lot of the old ones.

 

Yours could be the complaint that tips the balance in favour of an OFT Investigation, and they will NOT like that one little bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All you do is log onto

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk or http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk and phone them up, stressing how upset and angry this has made you feel,as simple as that. You will be told they can't deal with individual complaints but will take yours into consideration and maybe send you a witness statement to fill in. You will also get a reference no so if the company send any more threats you refer back to the OFT and the reference.

 

That is it, it isn't always a simple step by step process for every thing you do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol::mad2:

Thanks for the reply. The address this company have given me in London belongs to a hotel. On putting the post code into google a long list of companies were listed. Seems like building or unit with several different offices. The phone number is different than the one I was given by the person dealing with the load. So I will be ringing this new number in the morning. Should be interesting.

 

What raised my suspicion was the fact all transactions were via western union. And the people I have been speaking to were of an asian origin. English extremely poor. I have had a few loans in the past but never had to pay tax upfront to release the loan. So looks like I got away with it lightly, just paid my apparent 1st instalment, and not the supposed £375 tax. Also they said, as a gesture of good will (after I complained about the tax) they were going to debit me an extra £1000. PLEASE CANCEL ANY DIRECT DEBITS NOW AND CANCEL YOUR BANK CARD AS LOST ASAP OTHERWISE YOUR ACCOUNT WILL BE RAIDED THEN DO NOT PAY ANY ONE UNLESS ITS WITH A STANDING ORDER/OR PRE PAID DEBIT CARD/OR FASTER PAYMENT:evil::roll:

 

Got a few calls to make in the morning. Thanks for your help.

 

One last thing. Will my bank account be safe? I believe they have my account details.

Edited by quackquack
CANCEL UR BANK DETAILS
:violin::ban::lock1::bump::clock:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, ive forwarded the emails to the OFT and also requested that if Payday overdraft want to talk to me again they should correspond by post so If they try anything like this again I can forward the letters straight to the OFT

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...