Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case on this topic that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Should this ever happen to me, I will make an appeal at the first stage to avoid any problems that may occur at a later stage. Although, any individual in a similar position should decide for themselves what they think is an appropriate course of action. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • 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

MyJar 4 year late default


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2593 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

Look at this response from Myjar, 2010 loan defaulted 4 years late.

 

 

We write to advise you that we are now in a position to provide you with our final response. We take all complaints very seriously and we are grateful to you for having taken the trouble to raise this matter with us. We will use the information you have provided to try and prevent similar issues arising in the future.

 

As you are not contacting us from your registered email address, please let us know if you wish us to update your account with this new email address. If you do not wish to update your email details, please note that we would need to ask you security details every time you contact us from an unregistered email address.

 

Relevant facts

 

Your complaint relates to MYJAR entry on your credit file. You have explained that you discovered our entry on your credit file and are concerned that the date of the entry is incorrect. As a resolution to your complaint, you have requested us to either amend the date of the credit file entry or to remove it entirely.

 

Investigation

You took out your last loan with us in February 2010. You have claimed that you settled the last loan you had with MYJAR. Please note that according to our records, you have not made any payments towards the balance and as such a default notice was sent to the email address you signed up with on 15 July 2014. Since no repayment was received within the given timeframe, a default was registered against you. We note that on 17 May 2016, the loan was set aside due to the age of the debt and the credit file entry was updated to Satisfied.

 

Please note that at the time your loan defaulted, MYJAR did not share data with any credit reference agencies. As we only started sharing data with credit reference agencies in 2014, it was not possible for us to have issued the default notice before. Nevertheless, we can confirm that the registered default date reflects the date of the action of the default and the date when the loan was marked as Satisfied reflect the date when it was set aside.

 

Due to reciprocity agreements between us and the credit reference agencies, we are obliged to provide them with accurate information regarding all of our customers’ accounts.

 

Decision

In light of above, despite our empathy, we are unable to uphold you complaint. Due to the age of the debt, it has been set aside, meaning that you do not have any financial obligations towards MYJAR. Please note that we are unable to remove the loan entry registered against you as we believe that all creditors need visibility of true account behaviours and how their accounts have been managed, removing them would only put the client at greater risk.

 

You have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge – but you must do so within six months of the date of this letter.

 

If you do not refer your complaint in time, the Ombudsman will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances. For example, if the Ombudsman believes that the delay was as a result of exceptional circumstances.

 

You can find information about how to do this on the Financial Ombudsman Service website: http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk. There is helpful information about how to complain in the leaflet Your complaint and the Ombudsman which you can find at: http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/consumer-leaflet.htm.

 

Kind regards,

Link to post
Share on other sites

what a load of ole twaddle

 

the default should have been registered on your 3rd missed payment

regardless to if they were or where no registered with the Credit ref agencies

 

off to the ICO with that one then.

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

MY My./.. MYJAR again bending the rules.

DX is completely right. They dont need to report to the CRAs in order to issue Default Notices!

 

FOS would have a breakfast day with these guys.

You can now go to them... Why not refer to them now...? You can raise a complaint online.

 

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

  • 1 month later...

I emailed their previous response to Mandy bent asking if if she was for real... Default now removed!

 

Dear Mr XXXXXX

 

Thank you for your email in relation to your historic account with MYJAR. As MYJAR’s Group Compliance Officer, I am responding to the further communication you sent to our complaints team today and cc’d Mandy Bent.

 

I have looked at your complaint and the response we have provided, below is additional information, which I hope will clearly articulate the outcome of the complaints team investigation.

 

During the first half of 2014, MYJAR started using Credit Reference Agency (CRA) services for the first time. As part of the boarding requirements with the CRA we were required to share all account status data from that point and also to share all historical data. This is quite normal, to extract data from a CRA the lender must also share data with them. This forms parts of the reciprocal agreement terms creditors hold with Credit Reference Agencies.

 

Before MYJAR provided the CRA with the information to registered the default entry on your credit report, we were required to send you a default notice to give you the opportunity to remedy the original breach of the agreement.

 

 

This was sent to you on the XX July 2014, the earliest opportunity prior to boarding with the CRA services.

 

 

Before that time, we did not use CRA services, (as explained) and therefore there was no requirement to issue you a default notice. There is however a requirement to keep a customer up to date with the status of an account, this was done so in the form of email and SMS communications when your original contractual payment was not received.

 

As we didn’t hear back from you after we sent you the default notice by email to xxx@xxx.co.uk we carried out our obligations with the CRA and shared your account status data with them. The requirement we have is to ensure the data recorded is a reflection of the true history of your account and after checking I can confirm that the information is accurate.

 

Since MYJAR issued the final response to your complaint, I can confirm the default entry is no longer showing on Call Credit’s records, this is due to the date in which the agreement was opened, having passed 6 years. The Equifax entry is still showing despite the 6 years passing. I have today arranged for this entry to be removed, as it should have been at the same time Call Credit removed theirs and updated your records.

 

I do hope the explanations set out above and the request to remove the entry from Equifax satisfies your original complaint. However, if you are still not satisfied you are able to take your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service as explained in our final notice, sent on 09 Feb 2017.

 

This is our final communication on the matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...