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

PPI and Loans.co.uk


tagal
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4908 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, am at the moment trying to claim back PPI for a joint loan we took out with GE money. This was done through Loans.co.uk. I have received back usual standard letter from Loans.co.uk saying they will respond within a month.

 

I did read that Loans.co.uk were fined by the FSA in 2006 for mis-selling PPI and wonder if anyone has any experience of claiming back from them and would the fact that they have already been fined be in our favour.

 

Thanks X

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi, have just received a final response from Loans.co.uk saying "we pride ourselves on the high levels of service that we provide to our clients..."

 

"The loan agreement was issued to you along with the terms of the PPI, and provided you with the opportunity to read and cancel the cover should the policy not reach your requirements. By signing the loan agreemment, you were confirming that you had read the policy details and were agreeing to the terms and conditions of the loan and the PPI."

 

Due to the fact that they have already been fined by the FSA for mis-selling PPI's, I am surpised they now say they "will not enter into any further correspondence regarding this matter", and we should complain to the the F.O.

 

Sorry for long post, but quick questions.

 

I am more than happy to pursue this through the F.O as I did with my bank charges. But deep down I feel they are really correct in saying that we read and signed for the loan and PPI although we don't know have any paperwork. I doubt we would have read all the small print etc. Do we have a leg to stand on?

 

If so, what should i put on the complaint form to the F.O.

 

Thank you X

Link to post
Share on other sites

The law is quite clear and established in that they have a duty of care which means they must only sell you a policy that is suitable for your needs. If you have a good look through the stickies you will find plenty of caselaw that backs this up.

 

The fact that you signed the paperwork is irrelevant - you would not have been expected to wade through every clause and term. You signed it in good faith that they had not made any misrepresentations during the sales process.

 

The Misrepresentation Act switches the burden of proof on them to prove that they did not missell, it does not require you to prove they did.

 

Now, if you are going to go down the FOS they seem to be only willing to look at policies taken out after January 2005 - if your PPI is older than that then you would have to go the court route. Full details in the stickies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tagal

Standard bog off letter from Natasha Williams and Loans.co.uk.

We pride ourselves on the high levels of customer service we offer our clients.? 14.000 mis-sold PPI,s Fines totalling £455.000, WHAT A GREAT SERVICE ?

 

Hello

 

They should all be shame faced.:lol: We all need to be reporting them to the relevant authorities. Even if these enforcement authorities, do not act on individual cases, the company will get a black tick:lol:

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal experiences. I have no legal training, but have educated myself in aspects of consumer legislation. My motto "NEVER GIVE IN, NEVER SURRENDER", THERE IS A WAR ON YOU KNOW

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi Tagal,

 

Well in Feb 07 i started my pursuit of reclaiming £10,000 refund from Loans.co.uk, i put together a letter clearly stating all the facts of the loan and the PPI how it was sold ect and forwarded to the FO.

In Oct 07 i received a judgement from the FO ruling in my favour and instructing Loans.co.uk to repay in full all the premiums plus interest, cancel the PPI and instruct GE Money to restructure the loan without the PPI. It is now end Jan 08 and have receieved confirmation from GE Money that the new forms are on their way to me for signing, this after alot of time delaying by Loans.co.uk.

So my advice is to claim it back because you will win in the end, you will also find the FO is very much on your side and that Loans.co.uk is not flavour of the month with the FO anyway.

If you want any help off me regarding how i made my claim, just ask.

 

The big G:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it is as simple as that. It may depend on when you took out the loan. Before Loans.co.uk were fined by FSA they gave advice on PPI however after the fine they stopped giving advice and moved to giving "information only", ie they would give you details of the PPI but not tell you whether or not you should buy it (at least that is the theory!). If they simply gave you information without making a recommendation and you chose to buy it, you may struggle to make a claim. Can you recall whether or not they specifically recommended you take out PPI? It's always worth threatening to go tothe Financial Ombudsman as it costs you nothing to do so, however the firm you are claiming against has to pay (even if they win the argument), so it's an added incentive for them to settle the claim early.

Link to post
Share on other sites

did the insurance underwriter provide you with a policy document .this would not come from ge or loans.co .my claim against ge includes a policy document not provided .other caggers have posted this too,try ringing the underwriters ,they may have been members of gisc before 2005 allowing the fos to take it on, failure to provide a policy they are as much to blame as the other 2.how would you check if it,s suitable for you .my policy schedule shows the benefits ,not the exclusions:mad: .may even be the same provider cardif pinnace:( hth

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Big G!

 

To be honest I had a response from Loans.co.uk saying that I accepted the loan and as far as they are concerned that is that, so I was going to give up. But reading your response I have now sent of my forms to the ombudsman this morning, as the time I took out the loan I was in severe financial difficulty and would of accepted any insurance and with a pushy sales person I just agreed.

 

Anyway I will let you know how it goes, the ombudsman are good and the fact that Loans.CO.UK have already been fined by the FSA must be a bonus.

 

Thanks again, and am pleased that things worked our for you X

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I forgot to say thank you to everyone who as responded to me, I haven't been on this site for a while and am touched that you have taken the trouble to help. I will keep you all posted. I have decided it's worth a try to go the ombudsman route anyway X

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an added note, my loan was taken out in early 2004 and did think that maybe the FO would not take it on because it was before 2005 but they did. The claim was based around the facts 1. the loan was over ten years and PPI only covered me for the first five, whats the point in that. 2. At the time of taking out the loan i was not informed of other forms of PPI such as monthy payments and most importantly you can obtain cover elsewhere at a much cheaper rate,

.

Geoffm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the loan was taken out in 2003 over 20 years and paid off after 4 years (Oct 2007). Not sure how I stand with it being before 2005. But worth a try. Wonder whether mine was only for first 5 years - I didn't look into that, and so didn't mention it to the FOS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tagal,

 

You should still be able to go to FO on a couple of fronts. If loans.co.uk was a member of the GISC at the time (which is likely as most firms joined around 2001) FO still has jurisdiction. Also FO now has jurisdiction over loans following an amendment to the Consumer Credit Act in 2006. Definitely worth a try!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there

 

I have reported to FOS about loans.co.uk for mis selling. As I had received the same sort of response from Natasha Williams. We paid £3,500 upfront which we borrowed on top of the loan. I have also had to persue my loan/mortgage company as well through the FOS for the same PPI (see Kensington Mortgages and PPI) Apparently waiting for FOS to instruct a ajudicator so FOS have written to both Loans and Kensington. Will keep you posted

 

good luck with it and I am sure you will win

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, after what BigMark had said I contacted the insurance company who was used for the PPI by Loans.Co.UK and can't quite believe what they told me:

 

They said that although the loan was for 20 years odd, we were only covered for first 5 years. She also said "we sent you no confirmation to advise you of this and therefore you need to tell the FOS this"

 

So basically if the worst had happened and we had to make a claim after 5 years we would not have been covered, therefore would of lost our house as it was a secured loan. They didn't think of telling us this when we took out the PPI. I am so angry, I have conctacted the FOS who have added this information to my complaint form. Hope this strengthens our case, he said it will take about 3 weeks to look at my complaint as there is a backlog. But the FOS are good, and managed to get me 3,500 bank charges back from Barclays, so I have every faith in them. Only worry is that loan was taken out in 2003. Will keep you posted. X

Link to post
Share on other sites

Johnny, should we have been told this insurance was only for 5 years. We would never of known until we tried to claim as insurance Co. have said they sent us no comfirmation. Quite unbelievable really, what do you think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Undoubtedly this should have been made clear. I can't recall when you took out the plan but, if it was aftert January 2005 you should have been given a "Key Facts" document before you took out the insurance that made this clear. The Ombudsman would certainly consider this to have been a material restriction of the policy that should have been brought to your attention at point of sale. If it was not, you should have a pretty water-tight case. Even pre Jan 2005 you should have been issued with a policy document that would tell you this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I can't recall anything or cant find any paperwork. The insurance company as I said, today told me that no confirmation was sent to us with regards to the policy, she also said they did not inform us the policy was for first 5 years, and told me to let FOS know this. To me it appears I am not the first person they have spoken to about this and I am sure, not the last. She said she would put this in writing for me to forward to the ombudsman.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...