Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Various Loan Brokers have taken various +£60 finder fees


TATES
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3440 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

Hiya

I have had the same problem with some of the same companies having never taken out a loan with them.

 

 

PT Loans have taken at least 3 payments of 69.95 from me in the past two weeks and

 

 

ML Loans have also taken 69.95

 

 

as well as the same from MLL Loans and OR Loans and

 

 

another came out of my account yesterday for the same amount,

but their name hasn't showed up on my account as yet as it's pending.

 

I got paid three weeks ago and

the day after I was paid there was almost 600 pounds gone to these companies and more since.

 

 

I am now behind on payments for other things and am really worried they will do this again.

 

 

It seems that every time I think I have any money in my account someone else has taken something.

 

I have contacted trading standards and

they say I have to apply to the companies for my money back but I haven't a clue who they are!

 

I noted that you had the address for PT Loans and ML Loans.

 

 

Could you possibly share those please?

 

 

Thankyou and good luck! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brokers are well known for passing around info. Most brokers are part of the same company too, so they get multiple bites from you.

  • Confused 1

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

own thread created

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

  • 2 weeks later...

GENERAL NOTES ON CHARGEBACK & Continuous Payment Authority & BACS

.....

We have been telling people to put a letter into their bank instructing them

not to make any payments under any circumstances to these companies

.

http://whatconsumer.co.uk/visa-debit-chargeback/- it works!

usually this shuld be done using the numbe on your debit card

.

banks MUST follow written intructions from their customers !

.

This fsa guide has now been updated:

.

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/pubs/consumer_info/know_your_rights_guide.pdf

.

Here's the text:

.

Cancelling a regular

card payment:

.

When you give your credit or debit card details to a company and authorise them to take regular payments from your account,

such as for a gym membership or magazine subscription,

it is known as a ‘recurring transaction’ or ‘continuous payment authority’.

.

These are often confused with direct debits, but do not offer the same guarantee if the amount or date of the payment changes.

.

In most cases, regular payments can be cancelled by telling the company taking the payments.

.

However,

you have the right to cancel them directly with your bank or card issuer by telling it that you have stopped permission for the payments.

Your bank or card issuer must then stop them – it has no right to insist that you agree this first with the company taking the payments.

.

Be aware, though, that you will still be responsible for paying any money that you owe.

and that CANELLING YOUR CARD WILL NOT STOP THE CPA

.

..

.

New june 2013

.

Regulator orders Banks and mutuals to review complaints about not cancelling recurring payments from November 2009.

.

Consumers who have set up a regular payment from their account will now be able to successfully cancel that arrangement

by contacting their card provider, the Financial Conduct Authority said.

.

The FCA has been examining how easy it is for customers to cancel Continuous Payment Authorities (CPAs)

due either to payday lendersicon or for other regular payments such as subscriptions or gymicon memberships.

.

CPAs, which are also commonly called recurring transactions or recurring payments,

are relatively easy to set up but can be hard to cancel, causing problems for consumers trying to manage their finances,the FCA said.

.

Now, following the FCA review of how the largest high street banks and mutuals process requests to cancel CPAs, they have agreed that they will ensure that when

a customer asks for a recurring payment to end, that will be sufficient to cancel the arrangement. They have also confirmed that should a payment go through by

mistake following cancellation by a customer the customer will be refunded immediately.

.

In addition to securing this commitment, the largest banks and mutuals have agreed to review every individual complaint they have received about the non-

cancellation of a CPA and to pay redress where payments have continued to be made despite the customer cancelling the arrangement. This applies to all complaints

since November 2009 when the Financial Services Authority, the FCA’s predecessor, began regulating banking conduct.

.

Clive Adamson, the FCA’s director of supervision, said: “It’s important that consumers are confident that banks are meeting their everyday banking needs. Today

customers can be confident that when they ask for a Continuous Payment Authority to be cancelled – it will be cancelled - and that it can be done easily.

.

“We recognise that historically this is an area where some customers have struggled but the banks and mutuals have responded positively to our work on this issue.

From now on we expect them to be getting this right. In addition, they have committed to review past complaints.”

.

http://www.ftadviser.com/2013/06/28/...J/article.html

.

Also mentioned your displeasure that as whomever took your money had obviously attempted this many times

probably activating your banks own anti fraud software - nobody had the decency to inform my you this was going on.?

.In the FSA's own words:

.

..

What should I do about a payment from my account that I didn’t authorise?

.

Your bank must refund an unauthorised transaction.

Money can only be taken from your account if you have authorised the transaction

or if your bank can prove you were at fault –

see below.

Contact your bank immediately if you notice an unauthorised payment from your account.

If you are sure you did not authorise the payment, you can claim a refund.

However, your bank does not have to refund you if you do not tell it about the payment until 13 months

or more after the date it left your account.

.

Your bank must refund an unauthorised transaction

.

------------------

.

Your bank may only refuse a refund for an unauthorised transaction if:

.

? it can prove you authorised the transaction

– though your bank cannot simply say that use of your password,

card and PIN proves you authorised a payment; or

? it can prove you are at fault because you acted fraudulently,

or because you deliberately,

or with gross negligence, failed to protect the details of your card, PIN or password in a way that allowed the transaction

.

-----------------------

.

How quickly must my bank refund me for an unauthorised transaction?

.

The bank must make the refund immediately unless it has evidence that one of the above reasons applies.

Your bank may ask you to answer some questions and fill out a form confirming what has happened,

but it cannot delay your refund while it waits for you to return the form.

If the bank has evidence that one of the above reasons for refusing a refund applies,

it may investigate before making a refund

but must look into it as quickly as possible.

If your bank rejects your claim for a refund it should explain why.

If the transaction was on a credit card, the refund may not happen immediately.

But the card issuer cannot charge interesticon or ask for repayment of the amount unless it can prove you are liable to pay

[/b]

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

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I just wanted to update you all, Merrywood have refunded all of my money £939.00!!!! Keep persisting guys, they will pay back after all, even though they shouldn't have taken it in the first place. Good Luck!!!

Edited by TATES
wrong amount
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

what have your bank said?

 

 

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

The number for BB loans (blue bean loans) is 02035985084 call this number initially and request a refund. They will say within 10 day but you will not see it. Then after 10 days or before call 01403215760 this is customer services and they will refund you the money ASAP.

 

The company is blue bean loan, the company number is 628234 they also operate as merrywood.

 

xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Bluebean Loans is a trading style of Orchard Data Solutions Limited, Registered address: 2nd Floor 145-157 St John Street, London, EC1V 4PY. Orchard Data Solutions Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority Company Number: 8059046, Data Protection Number: Z3427283'

aka orchard loans

'Merrywood Loans is a trading style of MDX Solutions Limited, Registered address: 2nd Floor 145-157 St John Street, London, EC1V 4PY. MDX Solutions Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority Company Number: 06896900, Data Protection Number: Z1795311 '

 

fingers in the same pies

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...