Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Aesmith - Thank you for your recent interest in my issues.  Input on people's topics can be most useful from specialised experts or those that have similar experiences.  Some people really struggle with knowing what to do (I certainly do) - so it is most useful and helpful and reassuring when solid sensible advice is offered.  I have found there to be some very kind, helpful, supportive and legally knowledgeable people here on cag over the years - who give sound legal advice for people to roll up their sleeves and follow up on.   Of course, sometimes it can be quite challenging sifting the wheat from the chaff.  I don't have lawyer or barrister.  I sometimes attend pro-bono legal clinics for help.  And sometimes have access to barristers via a pro-bono service called Advocate.  Both ad-hoc. Pro-bono means 'free'
    • The Judge was wrong. The keeper is only INVITED to say who was driving, there is no obligation for them to say.
    • Member of the Question Time audience asks Richard Tice about Donald Trump.    
    • I hope Lord Frost is OK. Islamists and the woke Left are uniting to topple the West ARCHIVE.PH archived 18 Apr 2024 19:12:37 UTC  
    • Ok you are in the clear. The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 for two reasons. The first is that in Section 9 [2][e]  says the PCN must "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges ". It does not say that even though it continues correctly with blurb about the driver. The other fault is that there is no parking period mentioned. Their ANPR cameras do show your arrival and departure times but as that at the very least includes driving from the entrance to the parking space then later leaving the parking space and driving to the exit. It also doesn't allow for finding a parking spot: manoeuvering into it avoiding parking on the lines: possibly having to stop to allow pedestrians/other cars to pass in front of you; returning the trolley after finishing shopping; loading children disabled people in and out of the car, etc etc.  All of that could easily add five, ten or even 15 minutes to your time which the ANPR cameras cannot take into account. So even if it was only two hours free time you could  still have been within the  time since there is a MINIMUM of 15 minutes Grace period when you leave the car park. However as they cannot even manage to get their PCN to comply with the Act you as keeper cannot be pursued. Only the driver is now liable and they do not know who was driving as you have not appealed and perhaps unwittingly given away who was driving. So you do not owe them a penny. No need to appeal. Let them waste their money pursuing you . 
  • 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

rss1979 v RBoS


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6447 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, had a stab at this some time ago but had to postpone due to family problems, anyway...........

 

22/06/06: 1st letter sent (value £339)

23/06/06: Call from branch confirming reciept and advising that customer services would respond with 10 working days.

 

Fingers crossed..........I have Capital One in my sights now!

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck!

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

opps

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning all,

 

Recieved a letter from RBoS this morning. I am not sure if they are responding to my letter or initial phone call.

 

Prior to submitting my first letter I contacted my branch to request they refund some fees, customer services registered this as a "customer concern" and said that someone would respond within 48 hrs. I did receive a call advising me that half the charge would be refunded (£15) and a they would waive a £28 fee due to debit in July. I was not happy with this and explained that I expected a full refund of these recent fee's. I also advised the branch that I would be sending a letter requesting a full refund of the other fee's soon.

 

I will copy the full letter bellow, most of it seems standard but there is some detail in there unique to my situation.........

 

Dear Mr .......

 

Thank you for your telephone call of the 12th June 2006 and I apologise for any dissatisfaction caused by the application of charges to your account.

 

We believe that out charges are fair, reasonable and transparent. We consider the the amounts debited to your account have been applied strictly in accordance with your agreement with us and our published tariff, which we are satisfied, complies with all applicable laws and regulations. We are also commited to ensuring the transparency of the information that we give to our customers about the operation of our products.

 

We have considered and responded to the Office of Fair Trading's statement of 5 April 2006. We do not accept the Office of Fair Trading's findings in relation to credit card fees. We are concerned that the Office of Fair Trading has publicly called into question the setting of charges applied to other products, including current accounts. The Office of Fair Trading has restricted its investigation to credit cards and made no attempts to consult with RBS or the industry in relation to other, entirely different products.

 

Consquently, against that background, we must differ with the views expressed in your letter. Despite this, we have taken the opportunity to review the charges that have been applied to your account and as an exceptional matter we have agreed to refund £15 and waive the £28 due to debit on the 20th July 2006 as a gesture of goodwill. Acceptance by you of this payment will be in full and final settlement of all claims you may have relating to our charges. However, our terms and conditions will continue to apply and any charges that accrue in the future must stand.

 

Again, thank you for taking the time and trouble to call and I hope that your complaint is now resolved to your satisfaction.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

Zoe Hardcastle

Service Quality Manager

 

My questions are.............

 

1) They have already refunded the £15 to my account and I expect they will not apply the £28 in July.....I did not accept this and certainly will not accept it as full and final settlement....However, as they have already credited the money to my account it appears that I have. What can I do about this?

 

2) Should I accept this as their response to my first letter?

 

3) Should I send the LBA now or wait for the 14 days to expire?

 

Thanks for reading all that.......I look forward to receiving your advice!!

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just write back saying your not accepting as part of your LBA and just count the refund as a partial refund and reduce the claim by it.

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i sent 1st letter of requesting 6 years bank statements within 40 days that was up 26th june zoe rang there had been a mix she was not allowed to get them for me from this branch it had to go some where else so it may take a little while longer then another phone call wed 28th the request had got lost in internal mail so have to start again i know they are messing me about hoping i get fed up (which i wont)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have already reduced the amount I requested in my first letter by £15.

 

My worry is that this will get to court and RBoS will defend by stating that the matter was already resolved.

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

not if you've wrote back saying that you don't accept and you will be carrying on for the full amount.

  • Confused 1

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update.

 

I have decided to treat the letter above as the banks response, even though it is dated 2 days prior to my initial request. It's interesting to note that the banks response refers to my initial contact as both a phone call and letter. I did contact the branch by telephone on the 12th of June to request that they refund some recent charges. As this was to no avail I followed up with a letter requesting a full refund (22 June 2006).

 

My draught response is listed below, comments please.....

 

Account Number: 1.........

Sort Code: 1.-..-..

 

Letter Before Action

 

Thank you for your letter of response dated 20 June 2006 and received 30 June 2006. I am disappointed that we are unable to reach agreement over this matter.

I note that your letter is dated 20 June 2006, two days prior to my letter requesting you refund charges levied against my account. It is not clear whether you are responding to our telephone conversation or my letter to RD, 22 June 2006 as you refer to both in your response. I accept your letter as notification of the banks position regarding this matter.

 

I understand that the regime of 'fees' which you have been applying to my account in relation to direct debit refusals, exceeding overdraft limits and so forth are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent Consumer regulations.

 

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

 

I am frankly shocked that you have operated my account in this way as I had always reposed confidence in your integrity and expertise as my fiduciary.

 

I calculate that you have taken £339.00. I am enclosing a copy of the schedule of the charges which I am claiming. I have already sent you a copy of this in my original letter of the 22 June 2006.

 

I am aware that you have already refunded £15.00 to my account 20 June 2006. I do not accept this refund as full and final settlement as it was credited to my account without my knowledge or agreement.

 

I require repayment in full of this money. If you do not comply fully within 14 days then I shall begin a claim against you for the full amount plus interest plus my costs and without further notice.

 

Furthermore, I shall submit a Consumer Credit Act 1974 complaint to the Office of Fair Trading upon the basis that you have failed to comply with the Office of Fair Trading's direction of 5 April 2006 and are therefore not a 'fit and proper person' to hold a consumer credit licence under the 1974 Act. If you do not understand what this means then seek advice from your legal department.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

RSS1979

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone offer advice regarding the above post please??

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah sounds fine to me!

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

22/06/06: 1st letter sent (value £339)

23/06/06: Call from branch confirming reciept and advising that customer services would respond with 10 working days.

30/06/06: Standard response recieved

03/07/06: LBA Sent

 

........................onwards and upwards..................

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

my second (first) repsponse..

 

Dear Mr. XXXX

 

Your complaint regarding charges has been passed to me and I am sorry we have failed to reach an agreement with you. Please accept my appologies for any unintended inconvieniance or upset.

 

I regrety that there is little that I can add constructively to previous comments but having reviewed your account, I can find no instance where charges have been applied when they were not properly due. The have all been associated with the lack of covering funds in the account at the time the items were presented for payment. Accordingley, the charges that have been applied to your account should stand.

 

That said, in the hope of forgoing a compromise and settlement with you, Zoe Hardcastle from our Wakefield branch proposed an offer of £44 as a gesture of goodwill and without admission of error or liability. This would be paid on the basis of a full and final settlement.

 

I know you have declined this offer but it is not to be increased. If, on relection, you decide to accept please contact Zoe who will be able to arrange payment.

 

I suspect that this is unlikely to be the answer you might have hoped to receive but nonetheless thank you for taking the time and trouble to contact us.

 

Your Sincerely

 

Tommy McLean

Manager, Customer Relations Unit

 

I am going to send another LBA as this is clearly the response to my letter. The previous letter must have been a response to my telephone call.

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to send another LBA as this is clearly the response to my letter. The previous letter must have been a response to my telephone call.

 

Don't send another LBA. Stick to the guidelines here, and the timetable you have set. If no response when the 14 days are up start Court action.

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

Surely though, I shouldn't react to a letter that was sent before my initial approach?

 

There was a lot of confusion at the start of this process, I made an initial telephone call requesting some charges be refunded. When I hit a brick wall I made a request for all the charges using the libraby template. The response from my initial request came after I sent the letter and as it refered to a letter I assumed it was their response,............

 

Very confusing I know, if you read up it should make sense.

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read through the step-by-step process in the FAQs.

 

Prelim - LBA - Court.

 

You can keep sending duplicate LBAs for months - the only difference it will make is that you will run out of stamps. You told them in your letter that if they didn't respond within 14 days you would start legal proceedings - why did you say this if you aren't going to do it?

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

ok...........I think I need to explain...

 

May and June some charges were debited from my account

 

12th June - Called Bank to request those charges be refunded

 

22nd June - After no response to my initial call I sent preliminary letter to branch.

 

30th June - Recieved a letter from Branch dated 20th (before my prelim letter) refering to both a letter and a phone call and advising that only a partial refund could be offered (see above).

 

1st July - Sent LBA

 

8th July - Recieved standard letter from Tommy McLean in resonse to my preliminary letter.

 

So now I plan to send an LBA to branch, this is sticking to my original timetable and in line with the threats made in my letters.

 

Don't you agree?

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

So now I plan to send an LBA to branch, this is sticking to my original timetable and in line with the threats made in my letters.

 

Don't you agree?

 

No!

 

Did you not read the previous answers?

 

Regardless of phone calls, responses from the bank etc etc the situation is this:

 

1) You sent the bank a letter saying 'give me my money back within 14 days' - they didn't do this.

 

2) You sent them a letter saying 'last chance - give me my money back within 14 days or I'll takr you to court' - they haven't done this.

 

So the next stage would be to do what you have said you'll do - take them to court.

 

The letters you have received from the bank are completely irrelevant unless they've offered you a full refund, which they haven't.

 

Stick to the step-by-step guide and do what you said you'd do. If you had no intention of taking them to court when the 14 days were up then you shouldn't have put this in your letter.

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

Read through the step-by-step process in the FAQs.

 

Prelim - LBA - Court.

 

DONE!!!

 

You can keep sending duplicate LBAs for months

 

Not months, one week and only two.......the first of which was not sent after 14 days, but earlier as I made a mistake and responded to the wrong letter.

 

You told them in your letter that if they didn't respond within 14 days you would start legal proceedings - why did you say this if you aren't going to do it?

 

My ultimate intention is to proceed to court should they not pay up within the next 14 days.

 

I am not really sure why you have an attitude and comments like.........

 

If you had no intention of taking them to court when the 14 days were up then you shouldn't have put this in your letter.

 

really don't help anyone.......

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, I take this situation very seriously and understand that the way I conduct this claim could affect the next person that tries the same.

 

I am not playing games here.........a little mutual respect would be nice!

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not really sure why you have an attitude and comments like.........

 

If you say you'll take them to court in 14 days and then don't but send them another LBA they'll think you don't know what you're doing and that you aren't willing to take them to court - this will only make it more difficult for yourself.

 

You've asked the question, been given advice and are still asking the same question, how else would you like it to be said. It is not an 'attitude', merely trying to make it as clear (albeit blunt) as possible.

 

To clarify, 14 days from the date of your LBA - if full settlement is not received take them to court - that is what you said you'd do in your letter, so do it.

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

  • 1 month later...

HELP!!!

 

I am trying to complete the claim for on moneyclaim.gov.uk and have got to the "particulars of claim". There is a 1080 character limit and I can't really condense my wording down any further.........can I?

 

1. The Claimant has an account (number ******) with the Defendant which was opened in April 2002.

 

2. During the period in which the account has been operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

3. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges debited to the account are punitive in nature; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant, exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or relate to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

 

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law.

 

4. Accordingly the Claimant claims

 

a) The return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £339.00 and any interest charged thereon;

 

b) Court costs;

 

c) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from various dates to 24th August 2006 of £ £45.54 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of 7.458 pence per day.

 

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true

 

All help much appreciated!!

"If you owe the bank 100 pounds, you're the one with the problem. But if you owe a million pounds, the bank's the one with the problem."

 

Lord John Maynard First Baron Keynes of Tilton.

 

"If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

 

John Paul Getty

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...