Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just a typo change that I'd make for the last line. Maybe also add something that says "I assume you will be fully aware that you cannot rely on a clause of a contract that you do not produce."
    • Hello, Firstly, and most importantly I am sorry for your loss. I would go back to the bank with the death certificate and ask them to step in. Remind them firmly but politely that there is no limit for DD claims   Please let us know how you get on.
    • My wife is the named person to his bank account with him having Dementia being his daughter (I say named person she still is but he recently passed away and the deputyship application has now being stopped by the solicitor as it's no longer needed) We've only just got the Death Certificate so the bank will be the next step informing them. She went to the bank and explained the situation but even being his named person the bank said she didn't have the power to stop DD without any legal documents (virgin money) was the bank. She could have copies of bank statements that was about it.
    • I see you said you tried to stop the DD but it seems that didn't work. May I please ask why that didn't work? You should be asking your bank to cancel the DD and I don't see why they would have objected, hopefully you can clarify this. I agree that you should be making a claim here against your bank and ask them for a DD refund. There is no timeframes for this.
    • Thanks DX,   I wasn't aware we could do that for that length of time. I'll ask my wife to check with the bank this week
  • 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

please help!


111honey
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5807 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 all,

although did not get a reply from this post(posted in natwes thread) i just hope someone could give me an advice ,i've been to court today for my application for re determination given my defence I&E and list of creditor on arrangement in place,explained to judge that i could only afford t pay 103/mon as part of my available funds distributed to each creditors, i also emphasize that whilst NatWest is not accepting my payment offer i still continue to pay even prior&after CCJ and perhaps at higher rate in future, also its unfair to put a CO whilst other creditors is accepted my offer without any unnecessary condition.

 

shoosmith rep acting on behalf of natwesr emphasize that the amount i am paying does not even cover the interest of 170/mon in this ccj and will increase my debt more, anyway the judge said it will take me 20 years to pay therfore forthwith payment granted. i said i could only afford what my offer is ,he said i just continue to pay the amount i could afford but NatWest has the right to apply for CO in my property.after the hearing the shootsmith rep told me that if they apply for co it does not mean that they wiil force me to sell the house ,told him that they can not get money eventhough i sell my house because of negative equity, he said if co granted it will be better for me coz i could request to freeze int and it will save me money .

 

is that true? any idea what will happen next? iam thinking of going bunkrupt(total debt over 80thou) but my heart is breaking when my 9 year old daugther crying thinking that we will lose our house.

thanks for any advice.court asked me to pay 26110.00 or 550/mon as per ccj.

Edited by 111honey
add info
Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks babybear but how about if i dont have equity in my house ,according to the ccj letter if i am unable to pay legal action will take place that include sending bailiff and a charging order.i there a possibility of sending bailiff or they will just put the co.thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but unfortunately the amount set in ccj is 550/month i could not afford it i just make a payment of 103 based on pro rata.that is why the judge decide a forthwith payment because he said it will take me 18 years to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...