Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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

Swift Advances, Excessive charges complaint.


Cvsc
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2129 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

Just a brief outline regarding my experience dealing with Swift Advances regarding a excessive charges complaint of which involved Fos.

2005 I took out a regulated loan for £10000 to be paid over 5 years..

 

Regular monthly payments were made inline with the agreed amount, sometimes a day or so late. This triggers charges on the account of which also incur the same interest rate as the loan.

 

as you can see the charges are relentless.

Late 2008 i was in severe financial difficulty as i was elf employed my business was struggling. Realising the depth of debt especially with Swift following a redemption figure request i conceded that there was noway i was going to be able to repay this debt with the spiralling charges being added to the account.

 

2009 i lost my family home to Swift as i foolishly at the time gave up and did not fight my case in court and just assumed that no matter what i did they would take it anyway.

 

2012 Following media report about ppi scandal i started to look into the Swift charges and noticed i had ppi added, as i was self employed the ppi was invalid and i successfully reclaimed ppi from FSCS as the original broker had gone bust.

 

Then i started looking more closer to the charges added to my account following a SAR request to Swift.

 

Firstly i filed a complaint regarding excessive charges added to the account with Swift of which they dismissed with a Final response so i took my complaint to FOS.

 

After a lengthy battle it was deemed that Swift acted appropriately in managing the account "I have not seen evidence to show that swift was not transparent about the charges or that you have been treated unfairly" is whats stated from FOS in their summing up letter.

 

However as Swift had changed the amount they charge for some of the admin costs they agreed to refund the difference so i received a cheque for approx £900 in 2013.

 

So it seems that despite all the complaining we do not even FOS agree that how Swift conduct their business is unlawful or done in a manner where the consumer is set to fail from the outset.

 

For anyone wishing to know what the letter codes mean then here is an attached document.

 

Im not sure the pdf file loaded properly in previous post.

merged.pdf

Edited by dx100uk
PDF merged to one file - dx
Link to post
Share on other sites

In light of a recent court case would it be worth my while in submitting another complaint regarding the unfair and excessive charges?

Link to post
Share on other sites

do not put your faith in the FOS they are useless in my opinion.

 

I complained to them in Feb 2012 about a £3500 loan taken out with Swift in 2007 that was due to end after 5 years,

 

however after what I thought was the 60th and final payment Swift said we still owed them £4 k due to charges.

 

The FOS investigated on our behalf and I purposely asked them that while they were investigating Swift would not be adding more interest or charges, they stated ''It is highly unlikely Swift will add more charges to this account while we are investigating this complaint''.

 

Well guess what they were totally wrong and to add salt to the wound

 

they took 18 months !!!! investigating my case, during this time Swift were adding £80 a month to my account.

 

They didn't think Swift's charges were unfair and they had added another £1500 to my account balance in the 18 month period.

 

If that wasn't enough they then ''lost'' all the paperwork I had sent them that I had received off Swift's over 5 years,

 

so please excuse me if I don't sing the praises of the FOS. Swift have had something like £7k off me for a £3500 loan taken out in 2007, I still owe about £4k which will take about another 7 years to pay off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget FOS, if you have all the statements, complete a CISheet (spreadsheet) and take it through small claims court.

 

If you dont have the statements send a sar request to swift to get them.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about the delay,

 

Yes i refer to a recent Swift case where the judge deemed the charges to be unfair. It was posted in a thread in this forum but relates to another Legal site.

 

I cant seem to find it for now so if anyone else can link to it then that would be great.Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

For anyone interested in persuing a claim against Swift for unfair charges

make sure that your account has not been closed for more than 6 years

 

i have just been informed by a firm of solicitors that as my account was closed in 2009 then it is now "Time barred" and no court action can be brought against Swift.

 

This despite a case i had against Swift via FOS in 2012 from which i received a small amount of reduced charges back following a fos investigation.

 

Despite the odd court case where these unfair charges and the way the accrue the interest have been awarded to the claimant i dont see anyone ever having any real success against Swift as their t&c's are tighter than a ducks arse and are pretty much able to do what they want and the ultimate goal is to take your home at any cost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

It would be interesting if every complainant against Swift (myself included) undergoing a suspended possession order in court with them,

 

and have just been given a statement of charges) printed hard copies (redacted of course) and then presented the entire case file to the government to investigate.

 

Surely they would have to step in if hundreds of boxes of documents turned up on parliaments doorstep!

 

Out of interest has anybody been told by Swift that they will not charge them if you keep payments on the account despite having arrears.

 

I can't wait to tell the judge that Swift just made that statement to me over the phone

 

. Even though I have had ever increasing charges since taking out the loan in 2007.

 

I would gladly be that conduit to the government to take them down..........

Edited by jamie0035
Link to post
Share on other sites

Swift blemain welcome all the same issue 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...