Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • 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

link and 'sky' BC debt


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2906 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 everyone

This is my first post here, so i hope you will bear with me if I get it wrong.

 

In 2010 I was diagnosed with MS and due to deterioration in my physical condition I had to stop working.

 

To keep it short,

I had to sell my house and paid off most debts, however a debt to Barclaycard CC remained.

 

In Oct 2013 a reduced payment plan was agreed with Barclaycard

and to date I have kept up these payments firstly with them

and subsequently with Link.

 

I have listed below a summary of events.

 

I have a couple of questions and any advice would be very appreciated.

 

Should I respond to Links request for a financial review of the current plan by phone (they have supplied an 0800 number) or in writing ( they have supplied an income/expenditure form).

 

Unfortunately I do not have my original Barclaycard Credit Card agreement

or any statements of my payments when the card was active.

 

Having read about PPI ect..

would it be worth me getting this of Barclaycard

and if so, how do I go about doing this.

 

Again any advice would appreciated.

 

Oct 2013. Barclaycard agree due to my circumstances, reduced payment plan of £26.00 per month for 12 months.. Balance £4451.91

 

Oct 2014. Barclaycard continue agreement at £26.00 per month to be reviewed in 12 months.. Balance £4139.91

 

Feb 2015. Barclaycard write to tell me they are transferring my account to a third party called Asset Link Capital (No5) Limited.

This is in line with the Terms and Conditions of the account and the transfer will happen in Feb 2015.

 

 

They state that Asset Link Capital (No5) Ltd have been chosen after a rigorous selection process.

 

My agreed repayment plan is to remain in place for a minimum of six months

after which Asset Link will get in touch to review my financial situation and may agree a new payment plan.

 

Feb 2015. Asset Link Capital write to tell me the following:

We write to notify you that Barclaycard has assigned your account,

as referenced above to Asset Link Capital (No5) Limited ("ACL5") on 27.02.2015

with an outstanding balance of £4035.91.

 

 

ACL5 has appointed Link Financial Outsourcing Ltd to service your account on their behalf.

They acknowledge payments of £26.00 per month under the terms of an informal agreement,

and will review this payment plan at the date agreed with Barclaycard or six months from this assignment.

 

Jan 2016. Link Financial Outsourcing send letter for payment plan review.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

Firstly, EVERYTHING must be done in writing ONLY.

 

Never EVER discuss this over the phone with any of the fleecing DCA's.

 

If you're paying by DD then cancel it, and pay by standing order, so you control what you pay, this stops them from emptying your account when they realise you know your rights.

 

As this is a 'non-priority' debt you can reduce that amount, to a more realistic and manageable amount that YOU decide!

 

As for I&E forms, there is NO requirement to fill these in, and especially not one from a fleecing DCA, again YOU are in control, so YOU tell them what tune they dance too.

 

When did you take out the card with sharklaycard?

Pre or post 2007?

 

I'd be sending Link a CCA request, costs £1, if/when they fail to produce it in 12+2 (working) days you can stop payment until such time they do.

 

If you don't have all of the statements right from the start of the account opening, then you should send sharklaycard a SAR (£10) they then have 40 calender days in which to send you ALL of the details/statements from your account, which you can then go through and find all of the charges/fees and any PPI they have levied on the account and reclaim them, reducing the total amount owed.

 

Keep a diary of events, get all of the paperwork together, and NEVER discuss this over the phone.

  • Confused 1

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For a SAR or a CCA request just click on the links (words) or look in the library top left in green and it will take you to the templates. You really should get a copy of your credit file and see what is going on. Try Noddle its free for life https://www.noddle.co.uk/

 

 

Link have a habit of messing people around. Don't call them if they call you say in writing only then hang up. If you have a smart phone then block the number..

  • Confused 1

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for reply, l am not sure if it was pre or post 2007 ( muppet moment ) is there a standard format for CCA and SAR process, sorry but have little experience in this

 

OK was'nt looking, I can see the link for SAR so I guess there is one for CCA here as well. Will keep you posted.. thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

if Plink have it

 

 

you can bet your bottom dollar

the balance is 90% PPI

or all manner of £12 penalty charges

all can be reclaimed

and we'll help doing that.

  • Confused 1

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

  • 2 weeks later...

I sent the CCA to Link Financial Outsourcing Ltd and the SAR to Barclay card on the 04.02.2016.

 

I have had a letter from Link dated 08 February 2016, it states the following.

 

You have recently made a request under Section 77/78 for copies of various documents.

 

As you are aware Link Capitol (No5) Limited purchased your debt from Barclaycard plc on 27 February 2015 and as such do not always hold this documentation. We have requested a copy of the agreement and the most recent terms and conditions your account was operated under from Barclaycard plc and look forward to sending this to you in the near future, however please be advised that this can take up to 30 days to provide.

 

yours Sincerely

 

Link Financial Outsourcing

 

A quick recap: 4th February 2015, Barclaycard write and tell me they are transferring account to a third party called Asset link Capital (No5) Limited.

 

27th February, Asset Link write to tell me Barclaycard have assigned my account to them.

 

Forgive my ignorance, but is transferring my account a polite way of Barclaycard saying they sold it ??

 

Is Link stating that being assigned the account, saying they have bought it ??

 

Where do I go from Here ?

 

Again, any comments are much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

until/unless they find the signed agreement

 

 

no dice link..go fleece someone else

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

Link have said it could be up to 30 days before they can send me documentation of my agreement.

 

 

I assume the 12+2 day rule for a CCA still applies concerning this ?.

 

 

I find it strange that Link would buy the debt without any of the original paperwork.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12+2 working days.

 

 

as for debt buying

...

that's how it works

 

all they get is one line with minimal details on whatever debt portfolio they buy

they they send various threat-o-grams out

and see if they can find a mug that thinks

they have the legal powers to do so

 

they don't!

they are not bailiffs

and have

no such legal powers.

 

 

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

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

dx.. thanks for the Link.. It's so uplifting when you find your contributions have been supporting such a Noble Cause!!!!!!

 

I am still paying the monthly amount to Link by DD (changing this to a Standing Order this week), as I have previously stated, have not missed a single payment since Oct 2013. If Link don't come up with CCA in the 12+2 days do I stop the payments or continue until I have all the relevant paperwork.

 

I understand that Barclaycard have up to 8 weeks to respond to SAR request which was sent on 04.02.2016 (£10.00 cheque still not cashed). As the time scales for information requests are very different on this alleged Debt, I am not sure what action to take concerning future payment if the time scales are not met, or are Barclaycard out of the equation on the supposedly, current outstanding amount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what i'd do- stop paying once they fail the 12+2 working days timelimit

 

 

the decision is yours.

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

dx.. thanks for the reply, I appreciate your comments, will wait and see if Link act within the time limits, then make my choice.

 

I have to say I am so annoyed with myself for not starting this process 12 months ago when BC and Link got together, at least this site has encouraged me to find out what is going on and I am very grateful for that.

 

Read this the other day... " The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don't have any ". Keep up the the great work CAG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 calender days for a SAR, regardless.

 

12+2 working days for a CCA.

 

Cancel that DD today, you have zero control of your account with DD's, the companies do.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello all,

 

Have had a reply from Link in reference to CCA request.

 

They have sent me copies of Barclaycard T&C's also copies of Sky Card T&C's ( thinking back, this cc was done through Sky ).

 

The Sky copy has my name and old address printed on the top of the first page, It says These are the terms and conditions of an agreement between us ( Barclays Bank PLC, Sky Card, Northampton ) and you name ******* then my old address.

 

Link Financial and BC both state that where this request was made under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Link) and Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Barclaycard), these documents fulfil their obligations.

 

The letter from link dated 29.02.2016 says that the account has been terminated. The "current balance" is the total outstanding balance that is due and payable immediately. Payment can be sent direct to this office in the form of a cheque. Alternatively you can contact us to discuss an alternative method of payment.

 

Also enclosed was a letter from Barclaycard dated 18.02.2016, part of which says: I enclose a reconstituted copy of your credit agreement together with a copy of the terms and conditions as varied in accordance with section 82 (1) of the act. This is a statement of the variations to the terms made since you entered into this agreement. However, the interest rates, fees and charges set out in the agreement , may differ from those we discussed with you, due to the current status of your account.

 

Is this a complete fulfilment for my CCA request ??

 

I am still waiting for reply from BC for my SAR request but am still within 40 day period.

 

Again any comments are very much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

how did you apply for this card?

 

 

is it on your credit file?

when did you take it out?

 

 

T&C for the time of takeout

and any major changes meet part of the CCA request

as does a recon agreement.

but it sounds incomplete?

 

 

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

hello dx

 

from what I can see it's showing as Link on my credit file.

 

This was taken out quite a while ago, but I think it was through a Sky TV promotion, as I stated on previous post, cannot remember when cc was taken out.

 

When I became ill, had to sell my house and move, and a lot of my paperwork went walkabout.

 

I do remember that once I had the card all my dealings were direct with BC.

 

The information and paperwork that Link Financial ( and Barclays ) have just sent me have no dates concerning when this agreement started. Nothing with my signature on either ( if that makes any difference).

Link to post
Share on other sites

it does

 

 

the cra file should tell you the takeout date

 

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...