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

Halifax CCA...


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5393 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 Guys,

 

Finally, received CCA from Halifax!

 

My scanner has gone down so I'm unable to copy it. However, after searching around I've managed to find one just like mine but belonging to another cagger, namely darknight. I've pm'd said cagger to ask permission for linking but not had a reply. So I'll post for now but remove straight away if they object.

 

My copy is not anywhere near as legible as darknights, it also has very wide dark borders containg numbers across the top and bottom indicating microfiche copy? They have sent only current T&C's yet the form refers to the T&C's overleaf.

 

I'd really appreciate your thoughts on this please!

 

http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq126/darknight_man/Halifax%20CCA/scan0001.jpg

 

http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq126/darknight_man/Halifax%20CCA/scan0002.jpg

 

This is the link to darknights thread....

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/175319-cca-halifax-valid.html

 

Thank you very much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my opinion but I'd say enforceable if signed by both yourself and the bank, only query I'd have is you've signed one page... them the next... but as its clearly all in one document:-

 

The prescribed terms are there in the left bottom half section, namely mention of credit limit, interest rates and repayment terms.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much shadow for taking the time to look in and give your opinion.

 

I also thought enforceable but then found the thread by darknight http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/175319-cca-halifax-valid.html where it is suggested that the interest rate is misstated.

 

Unfortunately I am not qualified to say if this is true or not. I am currently trying to learn how to work this out though! I also do not know how much weight it may hold if true.

 

I am in the meantime going to request a better copy of the CCA as mine is very poor and of course a copy of the back of the agreement, the T&C's.

 

Thanks again in advance to anyone who can offer any more opinions or advice regarding this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much shadow for taking the time to look in and give your opinion.

 

I also thought enforceable but then found the thread by darknight http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/175319-cca-halifax-valid.html where it is suggested that the interest rate is misstated.

 

Unfortunately I am not qualified to say if this is true or not. I am currently trying to learn how to work this out though! I also do not know how much weight it may hold if true.

 

I am in the meantime going to request a better copy of the CCA as mine is very poor and of course a copy of the back of the agreement, the T&C's.

 

Thanks again in advance to anyone who can offer any more opinions or advice regarding this.

 

I read at point 5 of the scan...

 

"Interest will be charged at a daily basis at the rate of 1.95% per month"

 

This I took as confirming the interest rate, APR is not a prescribed term, its an industry created number to help people "understand" interest rates.

 

Have a read of this thread which should help...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/105315-my-agreement-enforceable-useful.html

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks once again shadow!

 

I think what they are saying on the aforementioned thread is that the figures do not add up :confused:

 

Ah right ok, there is a + and - amount which believe it or not is set in stone in the regulations on how much they can be out by. I'm afraid maths was never my forte at school so I'll leave that to others.

 

You might want to post a link or the agreement on this link asking someone to check over the APR/Interest rate calculations then.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/105315-my-agreement-enforceable-useful.html

 

S.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

well it is not properly exected for starters

 

has to be headed

 

credit CARD agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974

 

there could also be an argument to say that if the initial credit limit is not one of the amounts shown as examples then you would not have known what the interest rate was!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

for debate

 

[10. Agreements for--

(a) running-account credit; and

(b) fixed-sum credit falling within the exceptions in

paragraph 9(a) to ©.

(1) The total charge for credit with a list of its

constituent parts and in the case of running-ac-

count credit, the total charge for credit shall be

calculated on the same assumptions as are set out

in paragraph 1 of Schedule 7 for the purpose of

calculating the APR in place of the assumptions

in Part 4 of the Total Charge for Credit Regula-

tions that might otherwise apply.

(2) The rate of interest on the credit to be

provided under the agreement or, where more

than one such rate applies, all the rates in all

cases quoted on a per annum basis with details of

when each rate applies.

(3) A statement whether any interest rate to be

shown under (2) above is fixed or variable.

(4) A statement explaining how and when in-

 

terest charges are calcthe agreement.]

Page 17

 

THE AGREEDMENT MUST SHOW HOW THEY HAVE CAL THE APR OR A STATMENT FIXED OR VARIABLE

 

WILL BE INTERESTED IN COMMENTS

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i beleive there are calculators around if you search for them on here or google "interest calculators"

 

I would warn you against using these calculators unless the authors publish the formulas they are using and you can confirm that the formulas are correct and that you do indeed get correct answers. I have only seen one site that published a formula and it was incorrect! Far better to master the O level maths required and perhaps some simple programming and do the sums yourself.

 

Many calculator authors clearly do not understand the term APR and invite you to enter its value to calculate monthly rates, monthly payments etc. If you do this you will get an inacccurate (at its worst wildly so) answer simply because the %APR is not the annual rate that banks charge.

 

It would be very easy for banks to supply calculators into which you are invited to put the APR and which would then give the answers that the banks want. A possibility? I am not a maths or IT graduate but I could do it in under a day.

 

One example.

 

A bank quotes in an agreement 15.9% APR. Monthly rate 1.24%. Is the APR correct? Yes it is!

 

Working from the montthly rate applied the annual rate applied is

 

((1+1.24/100)^(12) -1)*100 = 15.938% (to three decimal places the accuracy required)

 

So the APR is 15.9% but they are charging 15.938%.You will say (as they do) that the difference is minimal. To be sure it is for small loans over short periods but try the effect on a loan of £10000 over ten years. They will also say that their figures are right because the are charging an APR of 15.9%. So they are but by a sleight of hand they get 15.938%. Clever b****rs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This I took as confirming the interest rate, APR is not a prescribed term, its an industry created number to help people "understand" interest rates.

 

 

 

I understand exactly what uou are saying and yuo are corect except for one little point.

 

The APR is not an industry created number. It is in fact a statute created entitity fully characterised in the CCA (1974) and subsequent regulations. It was indeed meant to allow punters to compare and better understand interest on loans. The precribed term is 'the rate of any interest to be applied' and this can never be the APR which is an approximation and sometimes expresses compulsory fees (as in this case). A monthly rate is capable of satisfying the the prescribed term for interest raates.

 

The banks for their own ends have assiduously propagandised that ' we charge the %APR quoted'. They do not do so but their propaganda has been very successful.

 

What do you think a judge would make of an agreenent that said.

APR 15.9% Monthly rate 1.24% Annual rate 15.9%? Which is the prescibed term and are these interest rates consistent?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi pelham,

 

Must have just missed you on Thursday and I couldn't get on yesterday.

 

I would be very grateful if you could check the APR / Interest rate figures on this CCA please.

 

http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq126/darknight_man/Halifax%20CCA/scan0001.jpg

 

Thank you very much for looking in.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This agreement is a mess as far as interest is concerned.

 

Under 5)

 

The monthly interest rate is 1.95%. They have therefore shown the prescribed term 'the rate of any interest to be applied' This is an actual annual rate (AAR) of 26.08%. Your agreement is not absolutely unenforceable by statute.

 

Please note that the %APR does not express the annual interest rate alone.

In your case there is an additional fee annually of £10 and for cash advances an additional charge and both these must be shown by a higher %APR.

 

Under 1)

 

You will see the effect of the annual fee of £10 in the first column. Notice that the higher the limit the lower the %APR. This is because the more you borrow the less the £10 fee affects the %APR - there is a dilution effect. As you would expect the cash advance fee increases the %APR. for cash advances

 

This agreement nicely shows that the %APR is NOT the rate of any interest to be applied which is 1.95% monthly (26.08 annually).

 

I have not worked out the exact %APRs for you because the exact vakues do not matter in practice.

 

Under 7)

they say they have not taken account of the account fee and the cash advance handling fee to clculate the %APR. They clearly have done so but this statement is in fact unlawful because they must take them into account.

 

What does this all mean - apart from being a mess. Well it is possible that a judge will rule this agreement unenforceable on interest data groumds but he does not have to do so because they have shown the prescribed term for interest. You would have to show him/her either

 

a) that they have not charged a monthly rate of 1.95% and to do this you would have to check some of the interest amounts charged.

 

b) that they have not shown the items required by Scedule 5 and Schedule 7 of the 1983 Regs of CCA(1974) correctly or at all and that this was prejudicial to you when you signed the agreement.

 

Schedule 1

 

They have not shown the annual rate of interest.

 

They have not shown how interest will be calculated from the annual rate and how it will be applied.

 

They have shown the %APR ( these would have to be checked if you try this route)

 

Scheduke 7

 

The have not given you total cost for cerdit and the method adopted tp calculate this.

 

I do not think you will persuade a judge probably unschooled in the CCA legislation and who has little maths to make ths agreement unenforceable. If you do try I would suggest you consult with someone like Pt 2537 before doing so. There may be other grounds for contesting the ageement.

 

Personally I think that regulators, lawyers and the judiciary have been very slack to have allowd the banks to get away with this for 35 years.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pelham, thank you ever so much for taking the time to check this for me.

 

R.E: Actual interest applied.

Interestingly, Darknight posted in his thread the historical T&C's that they had sent him. They state this would be charged at a rate of 1.85% per month.

 

I shall perhaps do a SAR which might just throw up some statements from that far back? However, I am currently awaiting a better copy of the CCA and I have also asked for a copy of the 'overleaf' and historical T&C's. I do have other concerns with it and have created another thread asking several questions which would help eliminate or indeed highlight further these 'concerns.' Although, I'm not having much luck with answers.

 

Anyway, thank you again pelham. I really appreciate your help. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...