Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No, reading the guidance online it says to wait for a letter from the court. Should I wait or submit the directions? BTW, I assume that the directions are a longer version of the particular of claim accompanied by evidence, correct?
    • Thanks for opening, it's been another rough year for my family and I've procastinated a little.. Due to the age of my defaults on this and other accounts (circa 2021), I really need to avoid a CCJ as that will be another 6 years of credit issues. Mediation failed as I played the 'not enough info to make a decision' however during the call for some reason they did offer settlement at 80%, I refused. this has been allocated to small claims track, court date is June 3 and I've received their WS. I'm starting on my WS. They do appear to have provided everything required of them (even if docs could be reconstructions). Not really sure what my argument is anymore but I do want to attend court and see this through. Should a judgement be made against me then I will clear the balance within 30 days and have the CCJ removed - this is still possible isn't it? I'm going to be reading up today and tomorrow and hope you can provide me some guidance in the meantime. Wonder what your advice would be given the documents they have provided? I am now in a position to clear the debt either by lump sum or a few large installments - Is this something i should look into at this late stage? Thanks as always in advance
    • I have now received my SAR. It includes a great deal of information! Is there a time limit on how long account information is kept and/or can be provided to debtors? I have received many account statements which were not previously sent to me. I remember that the creditor should provide explanations of any acronyms and abbreviations that maybe used in the documents. Is this still the case? Also what, if any, are the regulations in regard to adding fees to a debt? Can fees be added to a debt after the court has approved a charge on a property. Perhaps due to the numerous owners of the debt, many payments I made were not properly recorded on the account, some were entered over a year after the payment was made! Following the Legal Charge, I paid every month until my payments were refused. I am trying to compute the over payments, but the addition of fees etc. is confusing me. Any comments and/or help would be appreciated.
    • did you submit your directions
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

sunny loans with FOS...


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

The ombudsman have investigated my loan from Sunny but have decided that is was not irresponsible lending.

Since I lied on the application form (Said I was earning £1250 per month when in fact I was earning £0)

it was acceptable for them to have taken that information in good faith.

 

Sunny did perform a credit check

- but despite my 11 defaults and unpaid payday loans from 5 other lenders amongst other debts

decided I was an acceptable risk for a £400 loan.

 

Will have to try and approach the DCA and see if I can get a full and final settlement

that includes the removal of the debt from my credit report.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did an ombudmsan say that, or did an adjudicator, because it goes against the very meaning of responsible lending. By their remarks, you can go to any lender, say you were earning thousands, and get a loan and no checks would need to be made.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have appealed it because I believe it is an adjudicator

- I received the email around 5:30pm,

 

 

I called straight away but they had left so I could not discuss it today so emailed my response.

 

That was my first point

- I said I worked in a university HR department but actually I am studying HR at a university.

If I was asked for a statement or just one wage slip I would not have been able to supply anything.

 

 

On the income and expenditure I put £0 except for food and transport and nothing was ever queried.

 

My second point was they said they did a credit check

but I had 5+ outstanding payday loans, defaults and debts

- every report scores very poor.

But, I did apply and accept the loan so I am to blame as well.

 

 

I'll see what the ombudsman come back to me with

and if that fails then I will try and negotiate a settlement with the DCA

that includes removal from my credit report

 

 

- I imagine that would be unlikely though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well today has been a day of email tennis with the ombudsman, they initially stood by their decision say:

 

"You’ve said that Elevate didn’t verify any of this information,

however Elevate wouldn’t need to and the assumption would be that your answer were true, correct and honest.

 

 

I can see that Elevate did ask you the necessary questions,

as they wouldn’t be able to lend to you without any form of assessment.

 

 

So while there is some responsibility for Elevate to check this information

there is equal responsibility on you to provide accurate information to them.

 

 

Elevate have confirmed that they did carry out credit checks

and did find some adverse information

- so they reduced the amount they lent to you.

 

 

The loan was lent to you because based on the information you provided it was deemed affordable."

 

I said I wanted to appeal this and have been asked to provide my bank statements

showing a student account £2000 overdrawn and the details from my credit report.

I have sent this but I doubt I'll hear anything further today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well today has been a day of email tennis with the ombudsman, they initially stood by their decision say:

 

"You’ve said that Elevate didn’t verify any of this information,

however Elevate wouldn’t need to and the assumption would be that your answer were true, correct and honest.

 

 

I can see that Elevate did ask you the necessary questions,

as they wouldn’t be able to lend to you without any form of assessment.

 

 

So while there is some responsibility for Elevate to check this information

there is equal responsibility on you to provide accurate information to them.

 

 

Elevate have confirmed that they did carry out credit checks

and did find some adverse information

- so they reduced the amount they lent to you.

 

 

The loan was lent to you because based on the information you provided it was deemed affordable."

 

I said I wanted to appeal this and have been asked to provide my bank statements

showing a student account £2000 overdrawn and the details from my credit report.

I have sent this but I doubt I'll hear anything further today.

 

How wrong of them to lend to you if their checks should have revealed your adverse financial position ; they should write off what they wrongly lent.

BUT

 

Then you will have caused them to suffer a loss.

If you dishonestly made a false representation (lying about your income) in order to make a gain, or to expose them to a risk of loss :

What is to stop them reporting you for "fraud by false representation"?

 

Tread warily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a mess I have created myself, I was worried about raising any kind of complaint because of the lies I had told on the initial application form. It was only after debt advice that I did, I was told it was extremely unlikely I would be reported or have action taken against me as it would highlight that suitable checks were not being carried out before loans were issued.

 

It is something I am concerned about but so far it has not been mentioned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Well the adjudicator dealing with my complaint has changed their opinion and has now requested that Sunny remove any charges and interest, and remove any adverse history from my credit report.

 

This will remove a default from experian, and remove late payment notifications from equifax and call credit.

 

This will leave just the loan amount of £400 to be repaid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

new thread created

 

 

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Alternativly

issue a small claims? :p

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sunny finally responded, and they have not accepted the adjudicators assessment and have requested an ombudsman to review the case. Don't know what the outcome will be on this.

 

My credit reports have just updated, on Equifax and Call Credit the loan shows settled (After 4 missed payments), where as on Experian a default has been applied. I thought maybe it was just a delay on Equifax and Call Credit but Experian had the default in Feb. Don't know why they differ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The ombudsman have upheld my complaint for irresponsible lending and instructed Sunny to remove all interest and charges, and remove all record of the loan from my credit file.

 

In an unexpected move Sunny have cleared the principle amount as well and emailed me stating I need take no further action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well done

dx

The Consumer Action Group needs help to cover its expenses.

You could help by making a money contribution to http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/paypal.php?go=donate

or by downloading our toolbar and using it to search the web instead of your normal search engine:- http://consumeractiongroup.co.uk/cag_plugin.php

Please help.

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...