Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2886 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 All

 

Just looking for a bit of advice please. I recently complained to some payday loan companies about unfair treatment and irresponsible lending. I had an email acknowledgi my complaint pretty soon after I submitted one of them. It outlined their complaints procedure and said they would send a final response within 8 weeks. A few days later I received a redress email that admitted I had been treated unfairly and that my balance as a result had been reduced to 0. Do you think this is their response to my complaint or is this just one step in their investigation into the complaint? And sorry to sound a bit dumb but what does 'balance restatement' mean?

 

Many thanks

 

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi City

 

Welcome back to CAG. Well from looking, looks like a resolution to a complaint.

Did they email you / send you a yellow leaflet by any chance?

 

Can we see the response minus personal details?

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi There

 

Thanks.

It's been a while!

 

 

I can't figure out how to copy it on my tablet

 

 

it doesn't say it's final resolution and I haven't been sent a yellow leaflet.

 

 

Should I email back and ask if it's a part resolution?

 

 

Will post it on Monday when I am on the laptop.

 

 

 

This wasn't their response to my complaint.

They are still investigating it.

 

 

I will receive the resolution in a few weeks.

 

 

Will update here when I hear from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi there,

 

 

I've had my final response and I can't figure out how to take out the personal details

but here goes:

 

 

You have made a complaint in relation to affordability checks completed prior to your loan approval.

You state there was no way you were able to afford these loans

and that you were having to borrow the next month to survive.

 

 

I have reviewed our records and can confirm that these loans were considered on the basis of the information that you supplied at the application stage.

 

 

At the time of application you confirmed you were a homeowner in full time employment earning a net monthly income of £XXXX.

 

 

We believe you received an income from this occupation that was sufficient to service the amounts you had requested.

 

 

Please be advised as a responsible lender we assessed all our applications on an individual basis

and completed our own business criteria checks,

however we had our own regulations in place which we adhered to.

 

 

Applications were only approved after the successfully met the required checks.

When an application was reviewed by underwriters,

the business conducted affordability checks based on an individual's credit score

which took into account your banking and address history.

 

 

Alongside these affordability checks the business also carried out further checks by phone with you to gather information regarding your income and employment details.

 

 

The business verified these details via telephone in order to confirm your correct details,

which enabled us to evaluate your affordability prior to your loan being approved.

 

 

At this point you confirmed your income and as a result the business deemed the loan to be affordable

and the funds were credited to you.

 

 

Please note that it wasn't a requirement under the Regulation of the OFT at the time of your application

for the business to conduct a credit check for your loan approval.

 

 

Upon application you would have been fully aware that you were making an application for a loan which was not credit checked,

this would be due to the fact that it was clearly visible on the application page and advertised a such.

 

 

We appreciate that you may have had a number of loans at the time of application and were experiencing financial difficulty, however the business was unaware of these loans and of any impending circumstances which would affect your ability to make repayments and we were not informed by you during the application stage.

 

 

Please be advised it is also a consumer's responsibility not to sign the agreement should they not be satisfied with the terms and conditions.

 

 

Additionally as part of its process CFO Lending sent a Consumer Credit agreement to you by e-mail to sign electronically.

This confirmed all the terms and conditions of your loan, with this document sent to you to ensure you were aware of the specifics of the agreement you were signing.

 

 

These documents also advised we are a Payday loan company and these loans are designed for customers who are in need of unexpected financial expenses before their next pay date, i.e. short term loan.

 

 

It is not intended to resolve finances or debts outstanding or should not be applied when you are aware of your inability to make repayments.

 

 

The next bit of the letter is about how much I loaned for,

when they didn't receive payment and when the loan fell into default,

late interest and charges were applied as per the terms and conditions of the consumer credit agreement.

 

 

Our Final Response The business understand you are dissatisfied with the affordability checks completed prior to loan approval, however we feel the checks which were carried out were sufficient to decide whether the loan was affordable to you based on the information provided to us at that time.

 

 

We also do not believe the information you supplied to be incorrect with the amounts requested not disproportionate to your income.

 

 

Please also note interest and charges were applied appropriately to your account as per the terms and conditions of your consumer credit agreement should you default.

 

 

We also feel we assisted you when we were aware you were expecting financial difficulty by setting up a suitable and affordable repayment arrangement to assist you in settling your account with CFO Lending appropriately.

 

 

Needless to say under the circumstances and in an effort to resolve your complaint with the business we will offer the following as a full and final settlement to your complaint.

 

 

I have looked further into your account and can confirm you are due redress from the business.

We have been working alongside the FCA to conduct a review and customer redress scheme has been overseen by an independent third party whose appointment was agreed by the regulator.

 

 

We can confirm your account falls under the redress area of Balance Restatement.

This comprises of all default interest and charges applied to the account to be removed from your account.

 

 

The business have also identified another area for redress for your account which is Reporting of inaccurate data to CRAs.

Redress for this are will be applied to your account by removing any default entries associated with CFO Lending from your credit file.

 

 

Your current outstanding balance is £917.27.

We will write off the remaining outstanding balance in the form of redress,

which takes into consideration payments towards this account.

 

 

This will reduce your outstanding balance to the sum of £0.00,

which in turn settles and closed your account with CFO Lending.

 

 

Please be advised the reduction in balance has already been applied to your account, with your account settled and closed.

If you are happy with this resolution to your complaint please confirm your acceptance via return.

 

Sorry, I tried to add paragraphs twice but they kept disappearing...

 

they say they didn't carry out credit checks and then they say they do.

I still have the credit agreements and it says the standard 'how we use your info' business below.

 

 

"In considering whether to enter into this Agreement, we may search your record at credit reference agencies.

They will add to their records about you, details of our search and your application and this will be seen by other organisations that make searches.

 

 

Our search of records at credit reference agencies may be linked to your spouse/partner, or other persons with whom you are linked financially.

 

 

For the purposes of any application or this Agreement you may be treated as financially linked and you will be assessed with reference to "associated records".

 

 

We may also add to your record with the credit reference agencies details of your agreement with us,

the payments you make under it and any default or failure to keep to its terms.

 

 

These records will be shared with other organisations and may be used and searched by us and them in order to:

l Consider applications for credit and credit related services such as insurance for you and any associated person;

l Trace debtors, recover debts, prevent or detect money laundering and fraud, and to manage your accounts.

It is important that you provide us with accurate information.

 

 

We may check your details with fraud prevention agencies and if you provide false or inaccurate information or we suspect fraud, this information may be recorded.

 

 

Fraud prevention agency records will be shared with other organisations to help make decisions on credit, motor, household, life and other insurance proposals or claims for you and members of your household.

 

 

Please write to us at our address stated above, or telephone us on if you require details of the credit reference agencies or any other agencies from whom we obtain, and to whom we pass, information about you.

You have a legal right to these details.

You have the right to receive a copy of the information we hold about you if you apply to us in writing. A fee will be payable".

 

In my original complaint I also asked them to explain what looked like a glaring anomaly on the statement they sent.

It showed a payment of £600 being made which was credited back the same day.

They haven't made any reference to that at all.

 

 

Incidentally, I didn't make a £600 payment or agree to make a £600 payment at any time with them

and it was during 2013 when I had a payment arrangement in place.

 

 

Has anyone got any ideas about what to do next please?

 

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there.

 

I posted a thread here early in April but it's disappeared

 

I managed to post on it earlier by searching for the thread title. Can someone tell me which heading it's now under please?

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly we appear to have database issues at present

 

 

can you give it till the morning?

 

 

then you'll find all your threads by clicking your username on the left

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

thread now sorted

 

 

so they have removed the default

and set the bal to £0

 

 

what is your outstanding issue?

 

 

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

Thanks for sorting the post out. It was a bit difficult to read.

 

I am happy with the balance being written off. There is nothing on my credit report to remove as these loans don't appear.

 

I am just wondering whether it's worth pursuing it further because the response says that they didn't have to credit check and they advertised this as a no credit check loan but further down the response it says they did. Also if they had they would have seen a number of other payday loans and defaults on my file. The balance write off was made up of charges mainly. I paid back more than twice the amount that I borrowed even without the balance write off.

 

If it's not worth pursuing on the basis of unaffordability that's fine. I don't really understand what balance restatement means either.

 

Thanks again.

 

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have mentioned that when writing to them.

 

I had a 'balance' of £920 from a £358 loan, they nabbed £658 from my bank leaving a balance of £270 (this money was put back into my bank but they didn't put it back onto the balance haha!), wrote a complaint and they offered to clear the balance plus £500 refund, and £40 for excessive communication.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...