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

Mariana v NatWest - **WON**


Mariana
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6486 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! I just had a good result on the action against Halifax.

 

While that was all happening, I opened a Natwest step account. Had a letter from NatWest yesterday informing me that a charge of £39 has been applied due to a failed DD!!!!! Well, well, well - I am amazed!

 

First of all, I deposited £1200 cash into the account that day. Secondly, when I checked the online statement the dd was shown as paid! Below is an abstract of the letter I posted and faxed to them today ...

 

Thank you for your letter of 15th June 2006. We note your comments therein.

We are writing to ask you to refund to us this charge incurred due to the fail direct debit which you have levied from our account on 15th June 2006.

As you know, this is a new account and we are in the process of setting up our various direct debits. You will note from your records that a CASH deposit of £1,200.00 was made on 15th June 2006. We did check our balance, and at approximately 14:00, 15th June 2006, when the direct debit to Powergen showed as being paid together with the account being in credit by £1,200.00! We can only assume that your system is automated. A reasonable bank employee would have noticed this and acted accordingly. Furthermore, we were informed by Powergen that the direct debit would be effected from July 2006, and were therefore unaware of the direct debit for June 2006.

We feel your behaviour harsh and your actions are not justified in so far as your charge being disproportioned to the action you preformed. Additionally it has now been confirmed that particularly high level of penalties are considered to be unfair per se by the Office of Fair Trading who reported on the 5th April 2006 and are therefore presumed to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary.

 

Furthermore, the regime of fees which you apply to accounts in relation to direct debit refusals are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent Consumer regulations. If you say that they are not then will you please demonstrate this by letting us have a full breakdown of your costs incurred as a result of this breach in order to reassure us that your penalties really do reflect your costs? ....

This is a complete let down by NatWest who I thought would be a step up from those Halifax *&%$!!!

Will keep you informed ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nyah...NatWest don't show it as bounced until the day after it's supposed to go through. It's really stupid. You can go to check and see if it's come out, see it marked as having gone out and your balance changing accordingly, and then find the next day that it's suddenly switched to having "failed," and your balance having dropped by £38 accordingly...

 

I think it was marked on Moneysavingexpert that NatWest are actually the worst for charges.

DPA Letter received by NatWest 11/04/2006

DPA Request expires 21/05/2006

Statements received 15/05/2006

LBA sent 15/05/2006

 

If you find me vaguely coherent, click the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes me so angry! The worst is that I paid in CASH together with a banker's draft. The Manager (!) who was helping out on the desk that day, took it as one transaction. When he finished, I asked him when the banker's draft would be cleared - (wait for it ...) 5 working days (and ....) the deposit will not show for 2 working days! (that is for the cash AND the banker's draft!!!) He then asked if I want the cash to show today ..... HELLLOOOO!!!! YES!!!!

 

Wonder who has the benefit of the interest for the time it takes them to show that cash has been paid in ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. A friend of mine had something similar happen. He paid in some cash and a cheque.They classed it as one transaction, so the cash (which needed to be in the account for the next day) also took 3+ days to clear, leaving him getting charged for something.

 

As this is the first charge, just call them up and ask for it back, politely, namedropping the website when you do. Hopefully, they'll just cough up and that'll be the end of things.

DPA Letter received by NatWest 11/04/2006

DPA Request expires 21/05/2006

Statements received 15/05/2006

LBA sent 15/05/2006

 

If you find me vaguely coherent, click the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks! However, have already faxed and posted letter just before lunch ... I am so p'ed off with banks that I do not want to beg and grovel - I'v done that for far too long. Will let you know what the outcome is ... Thanks again for the info and insight ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a complete let down by NatWest who I thought would be a step up from those Halifax

 

:grin: Dont make me laugh I nearly spilt my coffee!

 

Y

Credit Cards

Barclaycard -WON! Amex - WON! MBNA (x2) - WON!

Mint - WON! Monument - WON! Morgan Stanley - WON!

Egg - WON! Halifax - WON! Sainsbury's Bank - WON!

Citi Cards -WON!

 

Banks

 

08/06/06 Claim against NatWest started.

01/11/06 Case Closed :)

 

08/06/06 Claim against Halifax started

24/08/06 Case closed :)

 

 

Visit my forum: http://www.planet-watch.org/forum

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update - received letter from NatWest - usual blah blah blah - however they agreed to refund the charge of £38, if I sign away any rights I might have in the future regarding charges. How lovely of them to want me to sign away THAT right! I know it is only a small amout, but it is the principle!

 

I will write back saying thank you, but no thanks. I am not signing anything and will follow the proper procudure ...

 

Keep you posted....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NATTIE

That's unusual that the wording states that. normally a first charge can be waived as a Gesture of Goodwill. As for the cash and bankers draft. It is the case that cash on it own is straight in the account, however cash and cheques do show the following day because the cheque has to be sent to a processing centre because cheques are not processed on site. The computer screens that the cashiers used is really a big calculator to work out how much cash the teller has taken for balancing purposes. Fraud in relation to Banker's draft is a lot more common than you think which is why the cheque takes 5 working days to clear. From reading other threads, this is farily standard across banks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Update...

 

Had a call from Birmingham Collections centre last week and spoke to a very confused lady. She could not understand why on earth I did not want to accept their offer. After I explained to her that I did not want to sign away any right I might have in future to dipute charges she went away to confirm with her manager. I then received a very irritating letter from Natwest on Saturday explaining the usual blah blah blah charges are correct and fair, we do not agree with the OFT's findings, sorry that we could not resolve this matter blah blah blah .. anyways- it would seem that proceedings via MCOL are pencilled in for Wednesday ... All this for a measly £39 - it is the principle more that anything else ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mariana,

 

Talk about out of the frying pan and into the fire! Over the past 14 years I have banked with just about every high street bank (both business and personal), Natwest have by far been the worst ones!! My girlfriend is currently persuing £3900 from them, most of which is £39 charges for less than £10 over her limit and, like you, bringing the account back into her limit on the same day as it went over.

 

Furthermore, she has been paying £10 a month for the 'privaledge' of having this wonderful account that pays less than 1% interest for credit and charges over 19% for debit!

 

I have just convinced her to open an Alliance and Leicester account which offers 0% overdraft, 10% on savings, 4% on credit, NO account fee AND they pay you £25 if you are recommended by a friend. You can also earn yourself £25 for every person you recommend and there's no limit to it.

 

A&L are apparently quite bad at issuing charges too but we all know what to do about that now, don't we!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, believe me - I will fight every charge they put on my accout hands and nails - but obviously, doing everything now to avoid it in the first place. It goes without saying that having had our monies back from Halifax and not being in the red for most of the month does actually help!!!!

 

Good luck - I will follow your progress with interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry did you say someything about MCOL and Wednesday?

Whats that about? They are going to court to try and get charges allowed?

George Loveless - “We raise the watchword, liberty. We will, we will, we will be free!"

 

My advice is only my opinion, I am not a legal expert.

 

IF YOU LIKE THE ADVICE I'M GIVING AND ARE HAPPY WITH IT, CLICK THE SCALES ON THE BOTTOM LEFT OF THIS POST AND TELL ME.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am due to issue court proceedings through Moneyclaim online (instead of making an application at the court itself). If you are unfamiliar with the step, I would suggest that you read the Frequently Asked Questions and Step-by-Step guide.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting .... checked Moneyclaim and NatWest has entered a defence - 2 days after the claim has been issued ... is this normal for Natwest?

 

Can't really see that they will send in the lawyers to defend a £38 pound claim? ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NATTIE

Mariana-am quite gobsmacked that NW would defend what amounts to £38. To be perfectly honest you would have got it back quicker by going into the bank on Day 2 speaking to the manager and stating that he didn't tell you it was being returned on the same day you were paying in. As a new account he couldd have refunded the whole amount as a GOGW. Hindsight by me re-reading the thread. I'm sure this will be settled very quickly

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, well, well. Was not too worried about it last night. Got a knock on the door this morning from my friendly post lady to sign for a special delivery. Turned out to be a letter from RBOS with a letter stating it is not commercially in their interest to defend this claim. They enclosed their cheque with a note that they are not accepting liability. Excellent!

 

Thank you natweststaffmember for the information. I did just as you suggested and got no-where with them. Anyways, it just goes to show that the system and procedures that Bankfodder and Dave have put in place works a treat everytime!

 

Thanks everyone.

 

Note for MODs - survey completed and will donate again when Halifax claim is settled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations!!

 

That is brilliant news!

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations!

 

Is it just me? Or is there a hint of irony in the above!!

 

Well done Mariana - and well done NatwestStaffMember - for being a good sport!!

HALIFAX - Settled in FULL - £1654 13/6/2006

NatWest - Prelim sent - £985 16/6/2006: LBA sent 30/6/2006 : Summary Cause issued (Sheriff Court) on 14th July : Waiting for Cobbets!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...