Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Success with Satans bank using BCOBS


MARTIN3030
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3732 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

This has been posted elsewhere on the site,but its needed in here too.

 

A friend of mine was in despair following Santanderlink3.gif not only charging him for a failed direct debitlink3.gif,but then continued to add further daily charges.

He informed me that he had called them and emailed them,explaining that the charges were punitive since his only income is Jobseekers allowance.

The fees stood at £55 and were rising.

He asked me if I could help,and duly wrote him a letter.

I was finding it hard to understand,how a bank like Santander,were openly flouting their obligations.

My friend had pleaded with them and explained his situation.

Santander of course could see from the account too-that he was in reciept of benefits since they were paid into this account.

No excuses then...lets get to work.

 

 

 

 

 

Account number xxxxxxxxxxx Sort Code xx xx xx

 

 

 

 

letter before actionlink3.gif

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

I am very disappointed in your response to my complaints which were made to you today, and that you have chosen to ignore my request for hardship, I therefore have no alternative but to seek recourse through the county courtlink3.gif system. I believe that Santanderlink3.gif have treated me unfairly under the following BCOB rules of which Santander should be compliant with,since Santander is a firm regulated by the FSA.

 

Rule 5.1.1 R states “A firm must provide a service in relation to a retail banking service which is prompt, efficient and fair to a banking customer and which has regard to any communications or financial promotion made by the firm to the banking customer from time to time.”

 

Rule 5.1.4 G “Principle 6 requires a firm to pay due regard to the interests of its customers and to treat them fairly. In particular, a firm should deal fairly with a banking customer whom it has reason to believe is in financial difficulty.”

 

Santandar have been informed that I am in reciept of state benefits and that I need these to cover essential living costs including food and heat/lighting.

 

Santander have not at any point acknowledged that this is a hardship case despite me notifying you.You have levied charges of £55 in recent days,and have refused to refund these in your return call to me on 6th.June. For these grounds I feel that I have been treated unfairlylink3.gif.

 

In order for this claim to be settled without the need for court action I require that the full amount taken of £55 returned to me by way of a credit to my account.

 

 

If I have not received a satisfactory response within 14 days then court action will be commenced without further notice and further costs will be incurred.

A judgment for a breach of BCOBS is very serious and the FSA would be empowered to act.

 

 

Yours Faithfully

 

 

Mr V. Upset

 

 

 

 

Would the recipients of his email to Santander actually know what the letter was about ?

 

You bet they did!

 

 

He got a reply quite swiftly...in fact in the space of 30 minutes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Message:

Good Afternoon Mr V. Upset Thank you for your email.

I am happy to reverse the amount of £55, which have been waived due to exceptional circumstances.

To ensure no further charges are incurred on your accounts, we would ask you to monitor your accounts throughout the month. This can be completed through Online Banking, Local Branch and Telephone Banking.

I hope this information is useful and if you have any other queries, please do not hesitate to contact me via Secure Messaging or my colleagues on 0845 9724724.

Kind Regards,

 

The nice man (who knows his BCOBs from his bankcharges)

 

Santander Customer Services

 

 

 

So the message to all those who believe they have been treated unfairly,is to give them a taste of their own famous words when they fob you off with sorry we cant refund the charges..... "This may not be the reply you wanted"

 

Edit.

The banks get letters and emails from people threatening them with Court action every day.

We know this and so do they.So its essential,that you are willing and prepared to act on any threats if the bank do ignore your letter/email.

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

  • 3 weeks later...

I did this a few years ago, if you say you will accept a lower amount than what's owed they will be more likely to give you a refund. Since then though I have always lived within my means and never go overdrawn, five years and counting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Accepting anything less than whats owed is not something CAG would ever advise.

Of course they will be more likely to agree if you do.

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

  • 5 weeks later...

bcobs applies from November 2009

 

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

  • 1 year later...

for BCOBS on issue not related to benefits

click bcobs and read

 

 

also

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?829-Charges-successfuly-reclaimed-from-RBS-last-year

 

 

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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3732 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...