Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • 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.
  • 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

RBS Credit Card / Triton / Green & Co.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5402 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, first post, but i've been reading the site for a while so let me start by saying thanks to everyone for all the really useful info.

 

In dispute with RBS over wifes personal credit card account. Ran into difficulties at the start of the year (we have our own small retail business, and things have been less than easy recently) and missed / late with a few payments. RBS initially reasonable (all on the telephone, nothing in writing), but when April minimum payment (x 2 actually, to catch up a bit) was made (on time, by the date on the statement received) RBS claimed agreement made by telephone had been broken and passed the debt to Triton. Complained to RBS that the only written payment request had been the statement received and had been complied with (and told Triton to desist until complaint was dealt with). RBS refused to listen, and further threats received from Triton.

 

Disgusted with the attitude displayed by RBS, but continued to make monthly payment to RBS via internet banking to show goodwill (despite RBS refusal to accept it over the phone, noted & witnessed). RBS continued to deny complaint and refer to Triton. (P.S. has anyone else noticed that the rear of the Triton letters suggest payment by Credit Card, surely a breach of OFT guidelines?).

 

Now really annoyed. CCA request to Triton. No response in 12+2 days, but just afterwards a letter was received from Green & Co. threatening legal action on behalf of Triton. Politely told them what to do with their 'client', and pointed out that a CCA request was outstanding and the account was in dispute. (many thanks to the thread I copied a suitable letter from, couldn't find it again today..) Received a surprisingly fast response stating that they had not received 'full instructions' from their client and referring back to Triton. Have now made a complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (who are actually going to follow it up!!) regarding their unprofessional conduct in sending threatening correspondence while not being in full possession of the facts and while the CCA was outstanding (or in allowing their name to be used on template letters by Triton, as I strongly suspect). May not get anywhere, but it will give them something else to think about!

 

Anyway, correspondence was received (within the 30 days) from RBS Cards with the standard letter claiming compliance with the CCA request, and enclosing a copy of the front of the application form (signed by wife), current Ts & Cs and the most recent statement (I've seen an identical letter elsewhere on these forums). As far as I could see from the other threads, this application form, although signed by the debtor, does not even come close to constituting a 'properly executed' agreement, and was in fact missing virtually all of the prescribed terms. Wrote back and pointed out their failure to comply, and that they would be committing a criminal offence if the 'properly executed' agreement was not forthcoming prior to the 30 day expiry date of 18th July. (Again, thanks to someone who put a suitable response on another thread).

 

This morning received a letter from RBS Cards which effectively claims that they have complied, quoting "Regulations 3(2) and 7(1)(b) of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983"; suggests that they 'see no reason to enter into further correspondence' 'about the alleged CCA breaches' and that I contact CAB or FOS if still not satisfied. The last paragraph is interesting however, and I quote it in full;

 

'In regards to the account being considered unenforceable by you, the Consumer Credit Act, S78, states the agreement is unenforceable if we pursue you through the Courts to enforce the outstanding debt. Currently, your account is being managed by a debt-collecting agent on our behalf and therefore we have not committed an offence and are entitled to pursue you further in regards to the outstanding balance for your credit card account. Your indebtedness on this account remains due and payable and we will be pursuing for the full repayment.'

 

Is it just me, or does that sound slightly desparate?

 

I'm pretty sure all of this letter is bull, but I'd appreciate if anyone could enlighten me as to the regulations quoted and whether they make any difference or not, before I report both RBS & Triton to trading standards / OFT / FOS.

 

I would like to point out that our purpose in this was not to avoid the debt, and in fact had RBS acted reasonably, we would be continuing to pay it to them as regularly as possible, but their entire attitude and that of their parasites (sorry, is it OK to use that word for DCAs in the forums?) has got us well into 'need to teach them a lesson...' mode, and I'm now determined to see the debt substantially reduced or written off, to do just that.

 

Many thanks for all the help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome Scotcat, you seem to be pretty much in control here, if you do require help then people will be only too haoppy to assist.

 

as for the paragraph:

 

'In regards to the account being considered unenforceable by you, the Consumer Credit Act, S78, states the agreement is unenforceable if we pursue you through the Courts to enforce the outstanding debt. Currently, your account is being managed by a debt-collecting agent on our behalf and therefore we have not committed an offence and are entitled to pursue you further in regards to the outstanding balance for your credit card account. Your indebtedness on this account remains due and payable and we will be pursuing for the full repayment.'

 

You're right it does seem odd, hopefully one of the legaleagles can shed some light on it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PGH7447,

 

Thanks for the quick response, its great to know that there are people out there taking an interest. Yes, I just wanted someone to confirm if the regulations RBS quote are what I think they are;

 

i.e. they allow the provision of current as opposed to original Ts & Cs etc., but in reality make absolutely no difference to the fact that there is no 'properly executed' agreement provided, only the application form, and that as such, they have not complied with the CCA request.

 

Cheers,

 

Scotcat65.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think that in the absence of their being able to produce an agreement, they are trying to pull the wool over your eyes.

 

If they have been unable to supply a copy to you of the executed agreement they should be writing off the account, as they have no legal contract with you with your signature on it.

 

I’m going through a similar instance with Citi Financial Europe Plc who are claiming that they’re current Terms & Conditions are an executed agreement – think they are dreaming.

 

I would possibly consider contacting your local trading standards department stating that you are being harassed to a degree, and that the company is persuing you for an alleged debt for which there is no contract. And that their non-compliance with the statutory period (if its expired) means that the company has committed an offence.

 

Next step is to at the same time, contact your local MP, as know that are a group who are particularly unimpressed with the tactics of RBS. Andrew Miller MP is the one who seems to be heading this group.

 

 

Hope this is of help.

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Enron,

 

Thanks for the suggestions & advice. Interestingly, Citibank are next on our list, as they've completely ignored an offer to settle, a valid CCA request (they credited the account with the £1, which I think may be misappropriation of funds...) and have been intensely irritating with their phone calls.

 

Being generous to Triton / RBS, (as I was unsure if it was calendar or working days), they have a few more until the 30 is up (although I'm not holding my breath for a properly executed document), so I'll wait until then before contacting Trading Standards etc. I might give them a final chance to provide it, just to try and force a 'yes or no' response (and be as reasonable as possible) in the meantime. Do you happen to know if it is my local trading standards, or the one where RBS cards are based, that should be contacted? (I believe the FOS and OFT can be complained to through their websites).

 

I'll keep in mind the MP you mentioned. Our own is the Speaker, so he's probably too busy completing his expense claims to be bothered (and the local MSP is his son, so not much use either...!). I guess however there might be a bit more interest given the upcoming by-election nearby....

 

Cheers,

 

Scotcat65.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll have to contact your MP for him to do anything on your behalf, just know that Labour MP Andrew Miller is involved with someones complaint off of here and is party to a number of MPs that are planning to raise the issue in court.

 

Citi are probably the worst financial institution it has been my misfortune to deal with. Deliberately misleading a customer when they are unable to produce an executed agreement - but hey didn't really expect anything else after going through litigation with them for penalty charges.

 

I would suggest contacting trading standards to get phone calls to halt if you have verbally and in writing requested them to cease. And if that doesnt work, proceedings to get an order for them to cease......

 

After calling their complaints line in Salford they said calls would end, subsequently I received 3 silent calls from them, and eventually a person asking me if I agreed with their letter stating that Terms & Conditions were an execueted agreement. The guy even had the balls to ask me if I wanted to give them another number when previously I had said to them that I want their calls to end.

 

Citi are bugging me a little, so speaking to TS on monday about it.

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi, everything had gone very quiet on this, but then, suddenly, a couple of calls from 'Westcot Credit Services', followed by the usual threatening letter with rather a lot of red print.:rolleyes:

 

Whooooooo..... We're absolutely shaking in our boots....not. We have a good colour printer too so I think we'll see if we can 'out red ink' them with the response. A full page width heading of 'Warning - Criminal Offence Committed' should at least get their attention.:-)

 

Obviously RBS are trying a last ditch effort to scare us into submission. Is it just me being naive, or do these disgraceful tactics still actually work with some unfortunate people?:(

 

If some nice person out there could possibly confirm (and possibly provide a link to a suitable template, I know, I'm being lazy), I think the next step is probably to S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) them for the original agreement (which they obviously don't have or they would have provided it at the CCA request), and take it from there when they default on that. Am I correct?

 

For general interest, we got a response from the Solicitors Regulation Authority which effectively said that they didn't intend taking any action as the correspondence from Green & Co. was not considered 'threatening' enough and they felt it was appropriate for a solicitor to act 'robustly' on instruction from their client. They also said there was no evidence that a 'template' letter had been used by Triton without proper oversight by Green & Co. Mildly disappointing, particularly on the latter aspect, which we feel could have done with more scrutiny, but we didn't expect much from what is probably just another 'old boys' club. Did get the impression though that had Green & Co. sent the same letter after Triton / RBS had defaulted on the CCA request, things might have been different, so it might be worth others in a slightly different situation having a go. We've certainly had no further correspondence from the pet lawyers.

 

Cheers,

 

Scotcat65

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...