Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
  • 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
      • 160 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

URGENT: Claiming beyond 6 years in Scotland


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6095 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

As has been widely reported in today's press (07/06/2007):

 

"Judges at the Court of Session in Edinburgh ruled that under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973, rights to bring actions (for personal injuries) became time-barred past 1990."

 

Solicitor Cameron Fyfe said that he would now consider taking the cases (3 out of a possible 450) to the UK's highest court, the House of Lords.

 

He said: "I accept that these time bar cases are very difficult in Scotland. There's been more success in England and it may be that we will pursue this in the House of Lord. We shall have to consider how we go forward."

 

Although this is to do with hundreds of former children's home residents claiming they were abused by staff - I am confident that this may have set or be setting some sort of legal precedent.

Dummie's Guide to CAG: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

Me v BofS: Charges: £13,048.10 #2a/c Statements from 08/01/01 received. Charges:£5,156.39 Information Commissioner's Office informed June 12th who wrote to BoS, June 22nd for non-compliance. #1a/c: passed to BoS Senior Review Team. Discovered 2 further a/cs, and 3 Loan accounts. "Goodwill offer" of £7,424.23 06/07/07. Accepted (partial repayment). 20/07/07 Top-up payments of £2,558.10 & £1,154.00

£11,136.33 paid back thus far.

New claim issued: 9/07/2007 for 3rd account: £500+ PRESSING ON!

Don't forget - when you win - a donation to CAG would be welcome!

If anything I've said has remotely been of any assistance, then please tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

How could they do this to people who have suffered such abuse at the hands of supposed carers? It's abhorrent.

 

The scars of these poor victims (why, btw, should that word be struck from our vocabulary: guess it's those doing the inflicting who think people should not be referred to as victims -sorry - sidetracked rant,) are not time barred.

 

The struggles caused by the hardships some of us (probably most of us,) have experinced because of the banks taking our money, thereby landing us in increasingly deeper debt, is not time barred.

 

The tax man (person) isn't restricted to "time barring", when it comes to collecting money (although they don't appear too ready to announce when someone has overpaid) so why should those the banks have robbed fall VICTIM to time barring?

 

Justice, huh? Perhaps someone should reset the scales.

 

So, 'scuse the ignorance, is Cameron Fyfe for or against the victims? I'd be rather surprised to discover that he's against given what know of his past history alone.

Vital spark v Lloyds Tsb

2nd November 2006: 1st letter, requesting back statements, hand delivered to lloyds TSB: got receipt.

I have received the information on my accounts going back 6 (six) years but not going back to the begining of my hsitory with the bank, as I requested.

Think I'd best send a letter suggesting they send the lot and informing them that I have already paid the £10 for such information.

Mairi's awaiting my details so that she can help me work out the interest due on the charges taken.

 

Personal: growing and changing while ever remaining the same. Get to know me and tell me what I'm like coz I can't figure me out.

 

Quote: If you can't beat them, confuse them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I meant by being surprised given my knowledge of his past history, if it was t'other way round.

 

Thanks though. :-)

 

;) Maggie-the-Pict. :p

Vital spark v Lloyds Tsb

2nd November 2006: 1st letter, requesting back statements, hand delivered to lloyds TSB: got receipt.

I have received the information on my accounts going back 6 (six) years but not going back to the begining of my hsitory with the bank, as I requested.

Think I'd best send a letter suggesting they send the lot and informing them that I have already paid the £10 for such information.

Mairi's awaiting my details so that she can help me work out the interest due on the charges taken.

 

Personal: growing and changing while ever remaining the same. Get to know me and tell me what I'm like coz I can't figure me out.

 

Quote: If you can't beat them, confuse them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An' jist hoo did ye ken A wiz wee? Bit, nae sae much wee as concentratit Guidness.

 

A dae fair like yir cloud formation.

:)

Vital spark v Lloyds Tsb

2nd November 2006: 1st letter, requesting back statements, hand delivered to lloyds TSB: got receipt.

I have received the information on my accounts going back 6 (six) years but not going back to the begining of my hsitory with the bank, as I requested.

Think I'd best send a letter suggesting they send the lot and informing them that I have already paid the £10 for such information.

Mairi's awaiting my details so that she can help me work out the interest due on the charges taken.

 

Personal: growing and changing while ever remaining the same. Get to know me and tell me what I'm like coz I can't figure me out.

 

Quote: If you can't beat them, confuse them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah comoan. Are ye no in the vital spark!! Nae mare than 2 wid git init!!

 

re photo

 

I had and have never seen a cloud like that! Some folk thought it was a nuclear test mushroom but it wasn't. Brilliant sight that day. And its Scottish!!

 

There was probably something deep down that made me choose it to represent the way I feel about how the banks treated me!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys!

 

Steady on!

 

This is important for us!

 

Sorry to be a "downer" - and, yes, I did enjoy the chit-chat!

 

BUT:

 

For those of us whose lives have been *put-on-the-line* by these institutions - the ruling in the Court of Session is important!

Dummie's Guide to CAG: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

Me v BofS: Charges: £13,048.10 #2a/c Statements from 08/01/01 received. Charges:£5,156.39 Information Commissioner's Office informed June 12th who wrote to BoS, June 22nd for non-compliance. #1a/c: passed to BoS Senior Review Team. Discovered 2 further a/cs, and 3 Loan accounts. "Goodwill offer" of £7,424.23 06/07/07. Accepted (partial repayment). 20/07/07 Top-up payments of £2,558.10 & £1,154.00

£11,136.33 paid back thus far.

New claim issued: 9/07/2007 for 3rd account: £500+ PRESSING ON!

Don't forget - when you win - a donation to CAG would be welcome!

If anything I've said has remotely been of any assistance, then please tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was being a tad grumpy - that's all!

 

Fed up with the inertia from HBoS, Trinity Road.

 

You know something ? - The only correspondence they've had the courtesy to acknowledge were the two SAR requests way back in April, 2007!

Dummie's Guide to CAG: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

Me v BofS: Charges: £13,048.10 #2a/c Statements from 08/01/01 received. Charges:£5,156.39 Information Commissioner's Office informed June 12th who wrote to BoS, June 22nd for non-compliance. #1a/c: passed to BoS Senior Review Team. Discovered 2 further a/cs, and 3 Loan accounts. "Goodwill offer" of £7,424.23 06/07/07. Accepted (partial repayment). 20/07/07 Top-up payments of £2,558.10 & £1,154.00

£11,136.33 paid back thus far.

New claim issued: 9/07/2007 for 3rd account: £500+ PRESSING ON!

Don't forget - when you win - a donation to CAG would be welcome!

If anything I've said has remotely been of any assistance, then please tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right Dusary. I too apologise. Just a wee lighthearted break from the drugery of chasing banks. Soon they'll have taken our sense of humour in charges, if not already.

 

So does the case (involving Cameron Fyfe ,) stated above, mean that the courts are likely to judge against customers who are claiming?

Vital spark v Lloyds Tsb

2nd November 2006: 1st letter, requesting back statements, hand delivered to lloyds TSB: got receipt.

I have received the information on my accounts going back 6 (six) years but not going back to the begining of my hsitory with the bank, as I requested.

Think I'd best send a letter suggesting they send the lot and informing them that I have already paid the £10 for such information.

Mairi's awaiting my details so that she can help me work out the interest due on the charges taken.

 

Personal: growing and changing while ever remaining the same. Get to know me and tell me what I'm like coz I can't figure me out.

 

Quote: If you can't beat them, confuse them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey!

 

I really was just a tad and a half grumpy! (Guess HBoS had taken my sense of humour!!!!)

 

Well, as far as I see it:

1) Court of Session ruled that anything pre1990 was timebarred.

2) Fyfe is considering appealling to the House of Lords.

 

But, at any rate, interesting that it would appear that we might be justified in claiming at least as far back as 1990...... I don't know whether this is a precedent being set for the old Limitations thingie!

 

(PS. I'll try to keep smiling!!)

Dummie's Guide to CAG: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

Me v BofS: Charges: £13,048.10 #2a/c Statements from 08/01/01 received. Charges:£5,156.39 Information Commissioner's Office informed June 12th who wrote to BoS, June 22nd for non-compliance. #1a/c: passed to BoS Senior Review Team. Discovered 2 further a/cs, and 3 Loan accounts. "Goodwill offer" of £7,424.23 06/07/07. Accepted (partial repayment). 20/07/07 Top-up payments of £2,558.10 & £1,154.00

£11,136.33 paid back thus far.

New claim issued: 9/07/2007 for 3rd account: £500+ PRESSING ON!

Don't forget - when you win - a donation to CAG would be welcome!

If anything I've said has remotely been of any assistance, then please tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey!

 

I really was just a tad and a half grumpy! (Guess HBoS had taken my sense of humour!!!!)

 

Well, as far as I see it:

1) Court of Session ruled that anything pre1990 was timebarred.

2) Fyfe is considering appealling to the House of Lords.

 

But, at any rate, interesting that it would appear that we might be justified in claiming at least as far back as 1990...... I don't know whether this is a precedent being set for the old Limitations thingie!

 

(PS. I'll try to keep smiling!!)

 

The P & L Act covers many aspects of life including suing someone for bodily injury but precludes suing them after the prescribed period of 3 years after the injury, see link:-

 

Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 (c. 52) - Statute Law Database

 

I don't think any ruling on this particular section of the Act will affect any other parts of the Act, especially as regards the time barring on debt, which of course works both ways. None of your creditors can pursue you for your debt after 5 years.

 

The Act also covers land or property prescription whereby if you fence a piece of land or use a property for 10 years without any judicial interruption i.e., any court ruling, then you can register Title to that property, see link:-

 

Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 (c. 52) - Statute Law Database

 

and then that property is yours, except for property as in Subsection 4 where the time limit is 20 years.

 

So you can see there are various periods of time for different things in the Act and as I said, I don't think any ruling by the House of Lords would affect the 5 years on debt recovery.

“It's not personal, Sonny. It's strictly business.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

You appear to know what you are talking about (which is infinitely more constructive than my speculations!).

 

Thank you, Yanni.

 

Still - there are some of us who are aiming to go beyond the 5/6 year limit. And, I'm one of them!

Dummie's Guide to CAG: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

Me v BofS: Charges: £13,048.10 #2a/c Statements from 08/01/01 received. Charges:£5,156.39 Information Commissioner's Office informed June 12th who wrote to BoS, June 22nd for non-compliance. #1a/c: passed to BoS Senior Review Team. Discovered 2 further a/cs, and 3 Loan accounts. "Goodwill offer" of £7,424.23 06/07/07. Accepted (partial repayment). 20/07/07 Top-up payments of £2,558.10 & £1,154.00

£11,136.33 paid back thus far.

New claim issued: 9/07/2007 for 3rd account: £500+ PRESSING ON!

Don't forget - when you win - a donation to CAG would be welcome!

If anything I've said has remotely been of any assistance, then please tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am only really familiar with the P & L Act as applied to land registration and registration of inhibitions, an inhibition being a legal device to stop a debtor from selling his land i.e., hoose!! without repaying his creditor from the proceeds of the sale - see

 

Registers of Scotland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

An inhibition falls after 5 years unless renewed, i.e., the creditor has to apply to the court to have the inhibition renewed after 5 years if the debt is still outstanding. Inhibitions also fall if you die!!

 

Below is lifted from Shelter website

 

"What is an inhibition?

When a property is sold, the buyer's solicitor searches through the property registers held by Registers of Scotland, to make sure the seller has the right to dispose of the property. Inhibitions are recorded in the Register of Inhibitions (sometimes called the ROI or Personal Register). If you have an inhibition registered against you, you won't have the right to sell your home, or to take out a secured loan (such as a second mortgage) against it.

If you're in the process of selling your home and the missives have already been concluded, the inhibition won't affect the sale. Nor will it affect any property you buy after the inhibition was registered.

 

How long does an inhibition last?

An inhibition will no longer apply if:

  • you pay off the debt and the creditor discharges the inhibition
  • the creditor discharges the inhibition on the condition that you repay your debt using the proceeds of the sale of your home
  • it is dismissed by the court (for example, because the court doesn't agree that you owe the creditor money)
  • you successfully apply to the court to have the inhibition recalled
  • you die
  • five years have passed - however, the creditor can re-register the inhibition if they choose.

Once the inhibition has been discharged, this will be registered in the ROI."

 

I think it is a long shot in going over the 5 years but they can only say no.

“It's not personal, Sonny. It's strictly business.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

A long shot ? Agreed! BUt worth a try. I can always amend the N1 can't I?

 

Or negotiate with them when they try to settle before it comes to Court!

Dummie's Guide to CAG: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

Me v BofS: Charges: £13,048.10 #2a/c Statements from 08/01/01 received. Charges:£5,156.39 Information Commissioner's Office informed June 12th who wrote to BoS, June 22nd for non-compliance. #1a/c: passed to BoS Senior Review Team. Discovered 2 further a/cs, and 3 Loan accounts. "Goodwill offer" of £7,424.23 06/07/07. Accepted (partial repayment). 20/07/07 Top-up payments of £2,558.10 & £1,154.00

£11,136.33 paid back thus far.

New claim issued: 9/07/2007 for 3rd account: £500+ PRESSING ON!

Don't forget - when you win - a donation to CAG would be welcome!

If anything I've said has remotely been of any assistance, then please tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
can i claim from an old business account which opened 16 years ago then closed 5 years later due to bank charges

 

I'd say it is worth a try.

 

I got a lsit of charges taken from my account in resonse to my last letter complaining about them not sending all of the material I requested and for which I paid the £10. The letter said that, if I wanted information form prior to the year 2000, it would take a lilttle longer to obtain and send.

 

I want it.

 

I'll get this Lloyds thingy over first before going on to Clydesdale and Mastercard.

 

Perhaps, though, someone here might be able to help me regarding the MasterCard. I got it through the Clydesdale Bank, does that mean my reclaim would be via that bank or would I go for MasterCard?

 

I'm not quite sure how these credit ca rds work. I don't use tehm any more.

Vital spark v Lloyds Tsb

2nd November 2006: 1st letter, requesting back statements, hand delivered to lloyds TSB: got receipt.

I have received the information on my accounts going back 6 (six) years but not going back to the begining of my hsitory with the bank, as I requested.

Think I'd best send a letter suggesting they send the lot and informing them that I have already paid the £10 for such information.

Mairi's awaiting my details so that she can help me work out the interest due on the charges taken.

 

Personal: growing and changing while ever remaining the same. Get to know me and tell me what I'm like coz I can't figure me out.

 

Quote: If you can't beat them, confuse them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...