Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you all   JK, I agree; if they were to accept my full claim today, then the interest would be around 8-9 pounds. If I were them, I would have offered to pay the interest and said no to the 12 pounds for the letters. These have not been mentioned, which is my mistake.   As you pointed out, if the judge were to award at 4% and I did not get the letters, I would get less.   Bank, thank you. I do hear what you are saying. If I am to continue with this, then I will need to pay an additional trial fee of £59. If I win everything, then great, but if I win less the claim and court fee, then I lose out. I am not sure what the judge will think about the interest. I think we have to remember that I won the item and, therefore, did not pay a penny for it. Yes, I have had to purchase an additional one, but maybe the judge will hold this against me. I am content that this is a win. I have not signed any non-disclosure clauses, and they do not ask for this either in their offer. 
    • Are you saying that both businesses were closed? Yet you stayed there for over two hours. . If both were closed than to charge £100 is a penalty since Horizon had no legitimate interest in keeping spaces clear for the company. sake as there were no customers..
    • Well you would think that would be the case. Sadly i doubt there is one honest broker within the BPA or IPC and most of their members. they are there to take as much money as they can from motorists regardless of PoFA.   Take the Consideration  period for example. This is a minimum of 5 minutes to allow motorists to find a parking space, read the T&Cs giving them enough time to leave the car park without having to pay if they decide not stay. Simple. Well it would be simple if it were any other company than BPA [or IPC who have now fallen into line with BPA's "reasoning"].  You see if you decide to stay then despite the fact that during the Consideration period when you still weren't classed as parking , once you accept the terms [with all the underhand little tricks designed to trip you up] that five minutes is now included in your parking time. [No not the parking period because the poor dears who ANPR cameras are apparently unable to work out what the exact parking period is since their ever so infallible cameras [yeah right] are incapable of tracking cars once they are in a car park]. After 12 years they still haven't worked out a way of doing it. Some of them fudge and the majority [with a wink fro their ATA [Accredited Trade Association though it should be Discredited Trade Association] just ignore the parking period all together. This is what BPA claim is the Consideration period Entrance grace period: This is for when motorists enter a car park, read the signs and/or attempt to make payment then leave. In these instances, motorists must be offered a reasonable amount of time before an operator takes enforcement action, but we do not define this time, due to the variance in size and layout of car parks. An entrance grace period for a small, permit-only car park could be below 5 minutes, whereas for a large multi-story this could be 15. But  heaven forbid that anyone should leave 6 or 7 minutes after entering  their member's car parks. . They are dutybound to receive a PCN. This is regardless of how busy the car park would be [Christmas eve for example ] .Our minimum is their maximum. Moving on to Grace periods. Again BPA gobble degook. Exit grace period: This must be a minimum of 10 minutes and this is when a motorist intends to stay – for example, if you paid for an hour but spent a total of 1 hour 10 minutes on-site, you will not receive a PCN. It is important to note that the grace period is not a free period of parking however and should not be advertised as such. If that ten minutes in not free parking what is it. their members all think they can send out PCNs for anything after 1 minute after the exact time never mind ten minutes. Our snotty letters have stood the test of time. Do not try to reinvent the wheel -especially with DCBL . They don't even know what a non compliant PCN is for goodness sake! You already know more about PoFA then they do. However if you include that they will find a way to disabuse the Judge of your logic and the law. So don't give them the chance.  I am sure you have the Parking Prankster going on about the rogues misusing the rules on planning permission by lying and stating that they had "retrospective permission". There is no such thing in English law yet Judges were swallowing it until one Judge pulled up Parking Eye about one of their Witness Statements alluding to "rp" by claiming it was "tantamount to perjury".  It wasn't tantamount,it was plain and simple perjury. Parking Prankster: The great private car park planning approval scam PARKING-PRANKSTER.BLOGSPOT.COM Guest blog from shuteyepark, from the Consumer Action group forums In December 2013 my daughter received a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) fro... Hope it wasn't too long winded Nicky Boy.🙂
    • and more immediate issues WT* is the UK doing. Ukraine needs these funds and weapons NOW Lets sincerely hope this isnt another Tory VIPal skimming issue.   MoD accused of ‘go-slow’ with half of £900m Ukraine fund unused | Defence policy | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Delays mean just £404m of the money donated by nine countries has been committed or spent  
    • If everyone who wanted or needed a permit could get one easily how would PCM make any money?    
  • 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

Capital Finance One Ltd - my Problems


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4743 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

Hi,

 

I havent visited the forum for a while and hope you dont mind me "hijacking your thread" but as you are in the same boat as me I recieved the following email in regards to offering them a payment plan. Im assuming it isnt true what they are saying on the email in regards to the door step collections or Penalty charges??

 

Hi Craig,

 

Unfortunately we are unable to set up a payment plan for you, but you do need to make payments towards the account of what you can afford to help bring the balance down. Due to late payment you have to expect to pay some kind of penalty whether you have advised us of your situation or not but if you co-operate with me I am willing to negotiate about some of the fines on your account but I need your commitment and a payment to enable me to do this.

 

In regards to door to door collections, they are eligible to visit your address and do not need any permission or warrant to do this. We are able to use our door to door collections team and they are more than eligible to try and recover the full balance for us, and add on their own additional fees for making the visit. It is up to you if you want to co-operate. You have provided your work number as a contact number and we are eligible to attempt to contact you daily on all numbers you have provided to try and recover your debt. As you have an outstanding balance with us we have every right to do so and until an arrangement is made that is suitable for both of us or we receive the minimum payment (Interest) we will continue to contact you on all numbers provided as part of collections process.

 

Kind Regards

 

Nicola Coleman

 

Nicola Coleman

Total Claim £956

 

21/11/06 - Letter sent demanding charges back

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get that email to the OFT and Trading Standards IMMEDIATELY, they are grossly inflating the debt, they CANNOT let the doorstep collectors charge 'their own level of fees' and they CANNOT send them round at will, completely breaches the OFT guidelines on debt collection.

 

Get the complaint in pronto.... they are way way out of line here, you have been trying to negotiate with them but they do not want to know.

 

COMPLAIN COMPLAIN COMPLAIN

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I shall get that sent to them tomorrow. My orignal debt was £270 which i owed them, since none payment it has gone to over £550, ive never once ignored the debt as im sure a lot of people havent, they just dont respond to emails, are they allowed to add such high fees, or penaltys as they call it??

Total Claim £956

 

21/11/06 - Letter sent demanding charges back

Link to post
Share on other sites

My initial loan was 268, now its 500. 20 a month is all theyre getting. They can pass it to who they want.....Door to door collection, if they can get past the dog in one piece ill pay the full amount :).

They are by miles the worse , everyone else is prepared to do some sort of negotiating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically they are NOT allowed to add charge on charge on charge, they are SUPPOSED to allow you to negotiate, and based on the original loan amount plus one months interest seems more than fair considering the intended short term nature of the original loan.

 

They do like to try court now and again but are getting stung now people know how to defend themselves, (I've done several defences for PDL companies now and work on the basis of flawed particulars of claim, the loan history, their ultra high interest rate and charges and a plea for mediation - they do NOT want to explain their charges and interest rates in front of a judge). There is no real merit in going down the default notice route as it is not always advisable and some judges will automatically give judgement to the claimant if they see 'Default Notice' at the top of a defence. I also don't put in a lot of legal arguement as the person defending won't remember thecounter case law in court (some companies DO hire an expensive lawyer but fail on the basic arguement, high interest rate, short term nature of loan and unjust charges, not to mention onerous terms and conditions....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your helpful comment, as I said this thread wasn't started by me so I don't want to turn it all about me but I'm assuming everyone is in the same boat and receiving the same lack of communication, should I start making a standing order for what I can afford to pay them (£30 a month starting 1st May) or should I wait? As I dont want to pay this if all there going to do Is cancel out my payments with charges, also do I just pay off the original balance in the region of £300 I think or will I now have to pay £550 with all there penaltys and charges?

Total Claim £956

 

21/11/06 - Letter sent demanding charges back

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ;'rule of thumb' which has been succesful in court cases is the ORIGINAL LOAN AMOUNT plus ONE MONTHS INTEREST - any more is extortion. Just because their onerous terms and conditions state this and that does not mean that they are just. The ultra high interest rates alone do not justify all the additional charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...