Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
  • 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

Financial Ombudsman - a recommendation


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5825 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

The Financial Ombudsman is apparently so concerned about the level of complaints re bank charges and also the lack of public confidence in his office that maybe it is about time that he was made aware of the true scale of the problem.

 

I would recommend that everyone writes their own letter to the Financial Ombudsman to inform him

  • that they are bringing a bank charges claim against their bank

  • that they are not going through the Office of the Financial Ombudsman as they have no confidence in him.

  • that although he is concerned because he is receiving 150 complaints per week, The Consumer Action Group is receiving 4,000 complaints per week. In which of our two organisations does he believe the greater public confidence reposes?

This will only need a short note. It doesn't need to be expressed well or cleverly. Just send the note.

 

I think that it will help to make a difference

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 257
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Here's the address:-

 

The Financial Ombudsman Service

South Quay Plaza

183 Marsh Wall

London E14 9SR

 

or email them at:-

 

[email protected]

 

or

 

[email protected]

Link to post
Share on other sites

E-mail sent, 151 this week now!!!

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Done

NatWest Charges: £3708.81. Allocated to fast track 14/10/06. *SETTLED IN FULL* 23/10/06 5% donation made

 

HSBC Default Removal and £186 charges: N1 claim issued 28/11/06 *WON* 28/02/07 5% donation made

 

Egg Charges: £370. N1 claim issued 24/11/06. *SETTLED IN FULL* 12/01/07 5% donation made

 

Natwest Student: £150. N1 claim issued 24/11/06. *SETTLED IN FULL* 10/12/06 5% donation made

Natwest Credit card: £317.01 INCLUDING CONTRACTUAL INTEREST, *WON* 30/11/06 5% Donation Made

 

Ikano Data Protection Act deception and non-complience: N1 claim issued 28/11/06. *SETTLED IN FULL* 12/12/06 5% donation made

I am not a lawyer. All advice is merely my own opinion. Nevertheless, I've won £4675 so far!

Tip my scales if you like my advice :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they reply?

 

Am I entitled to complain about the bank taking every penny that goes into my account, (child benefit and child tax credit), and that I have tried and tried to get them to reduce charges/understand I can't work as I am 8 months pregnant with twins... and that I can't feed my child as they are taking all my money?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would ask here, there is something you can do, but I can't find it.

Citizens Advice corporate website - Home

 

Thanks

 

I've emailed them anyway!

 

My baby is well fed and happy, my husband works full time... but the child tax credit we get and the child benefit... goes into my account and we don't see a penny of it!!!

 

For all they care, after the conversations I have had with them about bank charges... we could be starving! Their answer? Get another loan madam...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Me to and one to the OFT.

We haven't got the money, so we've got to think!

Ernest Rutherford

 

A & L

Data Protection Act Letter sent 11/08/06

Data rec'd 14/09/06, Prelim letter sent 16/09/06

LBA sent 22/09/06, MCOL 6QZ68670 issued 2/10/06 - chq for £6,375.34 rec'd 04/11/06.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a reply to mine inviting a formal complaint. Replied to that saying I declined to do so at this point, but thanks for acknowledgement & invite.

 

That's apoint, Beserker, maybe we should all fire one off to the OFT at the same time - it's only a couple extra keystrokes after all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stick me down!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent mine off just now.

Cahoot

Prelim sent 2nd Aug 2006 - usual "if your not happy then sod off" reply.

LBA sent 25th Aug 2006 - another "if your not happy then sod off" and an offer to refund £130, accepted as partial settlement, used to pay for MCOL

MCOL filed on 15th Sept 2006.

Acknoledged 26th Sept 2006

Defended 12th Oct 2006 in a letter to me but not to the courts

Started judgement by default on 30th Oct 2006

Barclaycard

Citibank

Halifax sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) on 09/10/06 nothing back yet

Capital one

etc..........watch out here I come.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right - this is something I haven't done since Easter, so a second letter of complaint will be winging it's way shortly...

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one sent!!!!

:p Sent Data Protection Act to halifax, NatWest and woolwich on 07/08/06

received Data Protection Act frm halifax 29/08/06 charged. Sent request letter to halifax 30/08/2006

recieved gesture of £84 claiming £340 on 28/09/06

sent letter before action on 29/09/06

sent moneyclaim form , issued on 27/10/06

**WON RECIEVED SETTLEMENT LETTER 15/11/06

recieved Data Protection Act from Woolwich 31/08/2006, no charge sent request letter to woolwich 04/09/2006sent LBA on 26/10/06 have till 10/11/06 moneyclaim filed 16/11/06

NatWest 40 days is 18/09/06 . Sent request letter 31/10. Sent LBA letter 15/11/06 till 29/11

**WON RECEIVED FULL SETTLEMENT***

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the Ombudsman is beginning to take serious notice - have a read of the ombudsman monthly newsletter and article in thisismoney.com and issue 57 - October/November 2006

 

James Coney, Daily Mail

8 November 2006

Reader comments (1)

 

Complaints about 'rip-off' bank overdraft charges have hit record levels, figures show. pixel.gif

bankstressphone_100x110.jpg STRESS: Complaining to your bank can be a frustrating experienceThe number of people complaining to the Financial Ombudsman Service soared from 60 a week in May to more than 150 a week in October.

 

In some cases, customers have run up hundreds of pounds in charges after going just a few pence overdrawn.

With complaints expected to hit 10,000 this year, the chief ombudsman has warned banks to start acting fairly when handling claims for compensation.

He accuses banks of giving customers the run-around by paying back the charges only to those who are prepared to go to court or make a complaint to the ombudsman. And he threatened to make a legal ruling that will force banks to pay back all charges.

Instead, he wants banks to accept that their charges are unfair and refund them when customers complain, rather than resorting to delaying tactics and bargaining over how much they should refund.

Banks will charge customers as much as £39 for going beyond their overdraft without permission, and slap on a further charge of around £25 for every direct debit or transaction that is then bounced or allowed to go through.

On top of this, the banks will charge an interest rate of close to 30pc on unauthorised overdrafts. The charges can often send the customer overdrawn again, plunging them into a spiral of debt.

These charges are feeding record profits of a combined £34bn at the big five banks - Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds TSB, RBS-NatWest and HBOS.

Many, including the Office of Fair Trading which has launched an investigation, believe that these charges are illegal because they amount to an unfair penalty rather than being a true reflection of the cost to a bank when a customer overspends.

The OFT is expected to make an initial decision early next year. In October it demanded that banks impose a £12 cap on charges for customers who go over their credit card limit or make a late payment.

In the past six months, thousands of customers have demanded that the banks reimburse charges - banks initially reject such claims. But if the customer complains again, many banks will offer to pay back a proportion of the charges.

Only if the customer then goes to court or registers a complaint with the ombudsman will the charges be reimbursed in full. But the banks always back down before a court or ombudsman ruling can be made, to prevent any sort of precedent being set.

Chief ombudsman Walter Merricks believes that if banks reimburse those customers who are prepared to complain several times, then they should have to pay back money to everyone who makes a claim.

He says: 'This sort of horseplay is bad. It seems inequitable that you will pay back money to some consumers just because they are prepared to be persistent.'

 

Merricks warns that if banks failed to pay back consumers, or if the OFT investigation was lengthy, then he would be forced to weigh in with a ruling that could force banks to reimburse customers.

Money Mail and This is Money's Fair Play On Charges campaign has helped thousands of readers claw back charges since May. The campaign has revealed other dirty tricks that banks use, including closing the accounts of customers who win back charges, and putting black marks on their credit records.

Marc Gander, a campaigner from the Consumer Action Group which gives advice to bank customers wanting to reclaim their charges, says: 'These charges are a rip-off. Banks have perfected the art of giving their customers the run-around.

'Complaining about your bank can be a very stressful and daunting process, so they weed out the faint-hearted. This means that many people drop out before they claim back all their money and results in the bank saving money.' A spokesman for the British Bankers' Association says: 'We are involved in a dialogue with the OFT at the moment, and we take on board the concerns with the ombudsman and will be discussing these with him. Our members believe that their charges are transparent, fair and legal.'

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe

Mooreda,

 

The first article just goes to show how mr merrick does not want to take this issue up. he wants a quiet life and let us slug it out with the banks to keep his workload light.

 

Notice how he refers to the FSA and OFT....think it says all there is about the Finanacial Ombudsman and the concern he has for the unwashed plebs of the world.

 

it will be us, the unwashed who lead this revolution in the finanacial industry.

 

It wont be the mealy mouthed politcians, or the heads of Quangos, or whatever Office..it will be the likes of Martin Lewis, BankFodder and Dave, who helped the rest of us get back what is rightfully ours and if the regulations are changed, it will be these three people we owe out thanks and our sanity.

 

Mr Merrick should hang his head in shame. No wonder the finanacial institutions cock a snoot at his office, they know he will only rapped them over the wrist with a wet bus ticket.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...