Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
  • 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
      • 160 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 and the dreaded Moorcroft


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4760 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

Evening all,

 

I owe the AA best part of 9k in loan agreement I took out a few years ago, the money was obviously put up by RBS, and when I fell on hard times I contacted the AA regarding this and have an agreement with them to pay a sum of money every month that I can manage.

 

They are happy with this etc, started getting letters from Moorcroft and got another one today basically saying we acknowledge receipt of your payment of £xx but we are now responsible for this debt so please contact us with an offer of repayment before we instruct lawyers to come and get you! etc etc.

 

Fairly standard letter I guess, but slightly worried as heard alot of bad things about Moorcroft. A few questions,

 

1. Do Moorcroft now own this debt and what does that mean for me?

 

2. Do I write to Moorcroft and tell them Im dealing with the AA?RBS and no one else?

 

Any help will be greatly received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

unless they have a NOA and have sent you such or the oc have said in a leeter they have sold it

you prob just have the standard attempt to extract more money out of you.

 

what letters have you had of resent and what does your cra file show about the debt?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the swift response

 

Firstly whats an NOA?

 

First letter was just asking for me to contact them, which I duly ignored. Then get this one and as far as Im aware Ill keep dealing with AA/RBS until they tell me otherwise!

 

Would a bemused letter to moorcroft be constructive ( should read, shall I write moorcroft with a bemused letter just to wind them up :) )

Link to post
Share on other sites

NOA=Notice of Assignment,that the debt is being sold to another party.

It seems odd that Moorcroft are chasing when you are already making repayments under an existing agreement with the original creditor.

Have you missed any payments or else reduced the payments agreed previously ?

Yes write to Moorcroft and say that you consider your agreements that are in place with the OC are still effective,and ask them to provide information as to why they are now handling the account.

That you will only be dealing with the OC until they advise differently.

Ask them to send a copy of their complaints procedure.

Also remind them of their responsibilities under codes of practices to which the are subscribed to including CSA and OFT.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems odd that Moorcroft are chasing when you are already making repayments under an existing agreement with the original creditor.

 

You also need to send a copy of your letter to the OC to find out what they're playing at; since Moorcroft can only have got involved after instructions from them.

 

If the OC has sold the account, you have no guarantee that your payments are being deducted from it. If they haven't sold the account, then you could CCA Moorcroft to see if they have the authority to collect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi to both of you and thank you both for your input.

 

Its nice to get some feedback, in the wilderness that is debt!

 

Firstly I am keeping my end of the bargain up and paying what I'd said I'd pay and havent missed a payment. With the NOA Im guessing it would be quite an obvious thing and I'd know if i'd got it etc.

 

Ill draft a letter up to both Moorcroft and RBS and see where I get.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Wrote a letter to Moorcroft basically outlining the above,

 

Along the lines of what are you doing writing to me, my debt is with RBS/AA Loans.

 

Also one basically saying leave the phone calls out please

 

And got back

 

We acknowledge there receipt of the above correspondence and have put you account on hold whilst we communicate with our client and we will let you know the outcome.

 

Thats fine but Im wondering what the AA?RBS will say.

 

Anyone else had a similar letter and what they got next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...