Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Same as Barclays one I have just updated on. PRA group have written back and told me they intend to proceed with claim, have also sent another stack of documents, similar to last time round. I did fill in an online income breakdown etc on their website  offering to pay them x amount of money back each month,  a couple of weeks back, they haven't acknowledged that ?  
    • Hello, I wasn't able to update the defence, so they got the daft one.  Pra Group have responded dated 25th April saying they intend to proceed with claim. I have also received a stack of documents, similar to last time - print outs of old statements, but this time around they have send me a copy of the Barclay Card Conditions. Unsigned and dated. The address is an old address.  A consumer credit agreement with current address. Pages of it and no signature. I have uploaded onto a PDF what I have. The CCA agreement looks like a generic print out, I5 pages + long, I've included the 1st page that had my details on (redacted) don't know if its necessary to upload all of it.  Barclays 26042024.pdf
    • I suggested consideration of bankruptcy some years ago. It was not well received.
    • That is a superb WS. However, I have a few tweaks to suggest. In (2) "indicating" not "indication". I think to be consistent with your numbering, in (6) the Beavis case should be EXHIBIT 2. Do you really need to include over 100 pages of Beavis?  I think that would be likely to annoy the judge.  Just try and find the bit where they decide it was not a penalty due to having an interest in limiting the time that vehicles can stay. I'll have a look myself for this bit later as it's highly likely to be in WSs from PPCs who think that that paragraph means all their charges are valid always on every occasion. After your current (7) add this.  It's always useful to refer to a judgment when making a legal point - 8.  In the case PCM vs Bull, Claim No. B4GF26K6, where the Defendant was issued parking tickets for parking on private roads with signage stating “No parking at any time”, District Judge Glen in his final statement mentioned that: “the notice was prohibitive and didn’t communicate any offer of parking and that landowners may have claim in trespass, but that was not under consideration”.   In (14) if my maths are right the CPR request should be "EXHIBIT 3".  it is missing from your list of exhibits. In (16) the two figures should be £100 and £170.  They are entitled to increase fro,m £60 to £100, they are not entitled to increase to £170.  To make it clear for the judge I would write - 16. The Claimant has artificially inflated their claim for a £100 invoice to £170. This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims. 17. The Claimant has also invented a second fictitious charge, for legal representative's costs, when they have no legal representative. You also need ot number your exhibits. The rest is excellent - well done.
  • 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

Monument paid PPI refund to DCA on sold card debt - help!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2473 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

I applied for the PPI from Monument and i had an outstanding debt which was very old, they sent out an letter to claim PPI and i have applied online.

 

Now i have received an response from the they will be adjusting the money towards my debt, I have attached a copy from them, can you please guide and advise what would be the next best step to get the Ppi

 

PDF uploaded

monument reply.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry what is you problem then?

 

 

that's a std letter from monument by the way

had the same only 12yrs ago

but ofcourse the FOS have decided several times now it IS PPI but that's not the issue?

 

 

so why are you not happy with it?

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

if they still own the debt

yes they can offset against it

nothing you can do about it sadly

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

yes if they still own it

 

 

in E&W a statute barred debt still exists

just that any judgement anyone might get in court cant be enforced

so they don't bother.

 

 

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

Hi Dx

 

I have proof that is attached stating that they do not own the debt,

 

please see the attachment and advise.[ATTACH=CONFIG]65619[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]65619[/ATTACH]

 

Sorry i am having problems with the attachment uploading,

 

it says that the debt was sold to Arrow Global in Dec 2014, so what should i do now?

Edited by almdhussain
problem with attachments
Link to post
Share on other sites

attach as PDF's

follow upload

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi

I have recived £400 out of 2.6k,

when i called Monument they told me that according to terms and conditions they are setting off the balance to the DCA.

 

I have read the thread by nutter192 and written a letter to them and yet to receive a response from them,

also asked for the written confirmation about the setting off the debt to Arrow Global.

 

Even though FOS says they cannot offset to a different company but Monument insists they can,

i am thinking of putting in a claim to get the balance, i shall be sending in LBA's soon.

 

Any advice on this matter is much appreciated.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

no harm in ringing the FOS now and asking their opinion.

 

 

they might help before you need to pop their FOS CQ into them

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

  • 7 months later...

HI guys

I have recieved an email from the fos adjudicator and they have told me that Monument has not done anything wrong by offsetting my debt even though they it is not owned by them?

 

this is new for me as i have read in the forums they cannot do it but the fos agrees they can,

 

can anyone help as i have to prepare and fight for this one, the letter that i have received from fos the text is below

 

""your complaint about R. Raphael & Sons Plc (trading as Monument)

 

Thank you for waiting while I’ve been looking into your complaint.

 

I’ve now looked at all the information that you and Monument have given me.

 

Based on what I’ve seen, I don’t think that Monument has done anything wrong – so I’m not asking it to do anything else.

I’ve explained why below.

 

your complaint Monument paid you a refund for the Payment Break Plan (PBP) attached to your account.

 

The refund was applied against your debt, which is now owned by Arrow Global.

The surplus was paid to you by cheque.

 

You believe this falls out of this service’s guidelines, and that the whole refund should be paid directly to you to pay off “as required or as I see fit”.

 

You’re also unhappy that Monument has not followed this up in writing after discussing the matter over the phone with you, and that it has not provided confirmation of tax paid on the refund.

 

I can only consider the complaint about Monument.

my findings

The guidance that you are suggesting Monument is in breach of is an issue of Ombudsman News dated September/October 2004.

It does not concern refunds.

 

Your assertion that Monument’s final response letter dated 9 November 2016 “admitted the Payment Break Plan was mis sold” is incorrect.

 

Monument very clearly stated at the top of that letter that “Without admission of liability, and as a gesture of goodwill, we are prepared to adjust your account”.

 

So Monument’s offer was made as a gesture of goodwill.

That’s important.

 

It’s quite possible that this PBP was not mis-sold and that you should really not be due any refund.

 

Indeed, I’ve not seen any information suggesting that you were mis-sold the PBP.

 

So it is to your benefit that Monument has refunded you these amounts as a gesture of goodwill.

 

Do I think that Monument acted unreasonably in offsetting the debt? Not at all.

 

It’s worth noting that in accepting this offer you agreed to the terms of it – most specifically, that “Any adjustment is offered without admission of liability and as a gesture of goodwill.

No conditions can be placed on the offer by any other party.

Any monies still owed from the original debt will be offset by the adjustment”.

 

But even without this cause, I can’t agree that Monument has acted unfairly.

 

Firstly, it’s paid you a refund that as far as I can see there was no reason for it to pay.

 

Secondly, this has benefited you.

It has not only cleared your debt but resulted in a further payment direct to you.

 

Monument has not acted at all unreasonably in paying the refund this way and I will not be asking it to do anything else.

 

Monument’s position is set out very clearly in its final response letter and was further explained to you by telephone.

 

In that sense, I’m satisfied it has addressed your queries.

 

Concerning the tax paid on the refund, this is very clearly explained on Monument’s final response letter.

 

I’ve included the relevant sections below:

what happens next If you don’t want to take your complaint further, you don’t need to reply.

 

But if you don’t agree with what I’ve said, please let me know why by 25 August 2017.

 

I’ll look at any new information you give me and let you know what I think.

 

If we don’t hear from you by 25 August 2017, we might not be able to look at your complaint again.

 

So if you want to reply but you think you’ll need longer, please tell me as soon as possible.

 

In every case, both the business and their customer can ask an ombudsman to make a final decision.

 

If you have any questions, please get in touch.

Yours sincerely""

Link to post
Share on other sites

then you now need to prove it was mis-sold, in otherwords they were wrong to levy it upon you.

 

 

look at the T&Cs of PBP and find where you are not entitled to it. you did not meet the requirements.

 

 

that way it will over turn the GOGW and then they must refund you directly.

 

 

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...