Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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

Packaged account complaint time barred


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2675 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.

First time for me posting so be gentle.

 

 

I have read this thread with interest as I've just been time barred for my packaged account complaint by the bank and FOS as they say the bank has told them they "would have" sent me 'refresher packs' in July 2009 and March 2010 so I should have complained within 3 years from then.

 

 

My complaint is that they upgraded my account without my knowledge in 2003 and at a time when I was in financial difficulty and would not knowingly pay more in bank charges.

 

I'm keen to know what is a CCL letter that is mentioned earlier in this thread?

 

Thanks

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

Hi everyone. First time for me posting so be gentle.

 

I've just been time barred for my packaged account complaint by the RBS and FOS

as they say the bank has told them they "would have" sent me 'refresher packs' in July 2009 and March 2010

so I should have complained within 3 years from then.

 

I'm struggling to understand how anyone's complaint can possibly succeed if the Bank sent out these 'packs' over three years ago.

 

My original complaint is that they upgraded my account without my knowledge in 2003,

at a time when I was in financial difficulty and would not knowingly pay more to the bank in charges.

 

They actually upgraded both of my current accounts at the same time

and have upheld the complaint on one of them on the basis they shouldn't have upgraded both,

although they did reverse one of the accounts back to a fee free account a short time later

but they've now reimbursed the fees for the time period they were charged.

 

This fact alone seems to me that they accept the fact they miss sold me,

but are now rejecting the complaint on the other account by using the time bar rules.

 

I've only now made my complaint due to seeing all about these in the media

and doing some digging and realizing that I actually got sold tow of them in 2003.

 

I've also read on previous threads about CCL letters and am keen to know if these are to do with the banks using the time bar issue to reject complaints.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.fca.org.uk/static/pubs/guidance/gc12-04.pdf.

 

Link for CCL letter/FCA.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I am in a similar position having been provisioned with a NatWest AG account back in 2004 but got nowhere with NW or the FOS.

 

NatWest essentially told me my complaint was outside time limits and referred me to the FOS who are also siding with NW's position.

 

It is interesting to note that NW have settled some claims but are immediately rejecting other similar claims?

 

Unsure of the selective approach but considering writing again to NW senior team to ask them to reconsider their final decision on my case.

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in a similar position having been provisioned with a NatWest AG account back in 2004 but got nowhere with NW or the FOS.

 

NatWest essentially told me my complaint was outside time limits and referred me to the FOS who are also siding with NW's position.

 

It is interesting to note that NW have settled some claims but are immediately rejecting other similar claims?

 

Unsure of the selective approach but considering writing again to NW senior team to ask them to reconsider their final decision on my case.

 

Paul

 

Optional Current Account package charges ikilledbambi or PPI ?

 

PS you need to start your own thread.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I claimed these charges back with ease for some of my employee , yet personally I have met a brick wall .

 

 

They are stating outside FCA time scale , as they alledgey sent out a pack in 2009 , nine years after they simply switched it and it is from that date I should have reasonsably been aware , according to them .

 

 

I did raise it but was told by the actual manager at the time it was the only account available .

The uphold rate with the ombudsmen is apparently low.

 

 

I'm thinking letter before action

- breach of fiduciary duty all over again ,

they will not provide details of their legal department .

 

 

I think this is almost criminal

- they take money without permission ,

then say oh well we sent a pack out and throw the FCA into it to blindside

- they don't even quote the section of the handbook it relates too.

 

 

If anyone else took money without asking they would be a thief .

I became aware of this latest scandal in March.

 

 

 

 

Are there any of the old Cag team still on board .

 

 

Here were I really miss Martin ,

can't help thinking what he would have made of it all .

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...