Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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 
        • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Section 75 and Charge Back..>Whats the difference and how to utilise them


stu007
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2457 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

SECTION 75 (Only)

 

Protection when buying Goods using a Credit Card - Section 75 Claim

 

By law, if you've spent between £100 and £30,000, providers should refund you if there's a problem with your purchase. But this vital consumer protection, known as "section 75" claims after the relevant clause in credit law, can be denied to customers, even after a refund has gone through.

 

This is due to a little-known loophole that means section 75 claims can be reversed.

 

Other borrowers complain that drawn-out compensation claims have left them without any goods or their money back under Section 75, due to the lack of a legal time limit when resolving claims.

 

The Financial*Ombudsman*Service, which said it receives a significant amount of Section 75 complaints by consumers each year, said that even savvy consumers commonly misunderstand when they are due compensation.

 

Common misconceptions include that you are not protected if you use your credit card abroad you are and that you must need to take the retailer to court before making a claim you don't.

 

Your refund rights under section 75

 

Shoppers who use a credit card are protected by laws dating back to the Seventies, which apply to goods or services bought online, in person or over the phone.

 

Under Section 75 of the*consumer credit*Act, the credit provider is equally liable with the provider of goods or services where there is a breach of contract or misrepresentation.

 

When a credit card provider makes a refund, it is surprisingly common that it doesn't claw back any money from the retailer, essentially this is because the credit card company may regard it as more effort than it's worth.

 

But what banks don't tell you is that any reversed transaction can be charged back, if a retailer raises a dispute.

 

There is also no legal time limit for card providers to consider claims, meaning a Section 75 dispute can last several months.... or even years.

 

However, in practice, as card providers are regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, then they must respond to complaints in accordance with their policy.

 

So if there is no response then it is best to raise the issue as a complaint to try to force a response.

 

Many Section 75 claims turn into lengthy disputes - especially where it is difficult for consumers to prove how their purchases have failed to be supplied as promised.

 

Section 75 Rules

 

Under these conditions, the lender will have equal liability for misrepresentation or breach of contract by the merchant.

 

Purchases must be between £100 and £30,000

 

Goods or services must be bought using a credit card - or any purchase involving pre-agreed credit, such as a point-of-sale loan or some store cards

 

The amount of credit provided to the consumer towards the purchase must not exceed £25,000

 

There is no time limit to make a claim, but the statute of limitations is six years (five in Scotland) - the deadline for pursuing a claim in the courts

 

Added rules around section 75

 

The retailer has 45 days to dispute a reversed transaction, and a further 60 days to gather evidence

 

There is no time limit for card providers to consider your claim, although you can take your case to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) after 30 days

 

Claims might be rejected if there's no direct relationship between the borrower and the shop...if you pay money into a PayPal account, then buy an item and pay for it using the payment platform.

 

 

 

Protection when buying Goods.pdf

 

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chargeback (Only)

 

How to Use Chargeback - (The value is Less than £100)

 

What is the Chargeback Scheme?

 

Chargeback allows you to ask your Card Provider/Bank to reverse a transaction if there's a problem with something you've purchased using your credit or debit card.

 

Chargeback is not enshrined in law but is a voluntary agreement between credit card providers and card issuers who set the Scheme Rules, which participating Banks have subscribed to.

 

Chargeback is not covered by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as it is a voluntary scheme. (see above)

 

Chargeback can be used in circumstances where you have paid for goods or services and the value of those goods or services is Less than £100. (and cannot be claimed from your card provider using Section 75)

 

The following Cards offer Chargeback Protection:

 

Credit Cards

Visa

Mastercard

American Express

 

Debit Cards

Visa Mastercard

Visa Electron

Maestro

Visa

 

Pre Paid Cards

Visa

Mastercard

 

When can chargeback be used?

 

Chargeback can be used in cases where:

 

--Goods or Services you purchased don’t arrive.

--Goods or Services you purchased arrive damaged.

--Goods or services you purchased are not as described.

--The company you purchased Goods or Services from ceases trading.

 

What are the Limitations on a Chargeback Claim?

 

--For a claim to be successful there must be a Breach of Contract.

--There may be Time Limits for a Claim to be made so always ask your Card Provider/Bank for clarification.

 

Are there any Time Limits on making a Chargeback Claim? YES

 

To make a Chargeback claim you will need to contact your Card Provider/Bank within their time limit.

 

Generally it is 120 days, which starts from the day that you become aware of an issue with the Goods or Services purchased.

 

There is also an overall cut off point of 540 days for Visa Chargeback. Therefore, your deadline for requesting a Chargeback is 120 days from discovering you have an issue, or 540 days from the transaction date, whichever comes first.

 

How to make a Chargeback Claim

 

The first thing you need to do is to try to resolve the issue with the retailer/merchant by contacting them for a refund and if the retailer/merchant refuses the refund you can then start a Chargeback Claim.

 

Ensure you have all your evidence then contact your Card Provider/Bank and inform them you wish to make a claim through the Chargeback Scheme.

 

Give full details of the specific transaction you wish the refund on via Chargeback.

 

Provide details of any correspondence you had with the seller/merchant to try to get your money refunded including letters, emails etc.

 

Some Banks may ask you to complete a claim form.

 

Be aware that when Contacting your Card Provider/Bank via there Customer Service Department they may not be aware of nor understand what a Chargeback Claim is. If this happens just be polite and ask to speak to a supervisor.

 

What if my Chargeback Claim is Rejected?

 

If your claim has been rejected and you feel the decision is unfair complain to the Card Provider/Bank.

 

If they still refuse your claim then you have six months in which to take your case to the Financial Ombudsman Service who may or may not overturn the Card Provider/Banks decision.

 

Be aware that if your claim is rejected as the Chargeback Scheme is not a Legal Requirement you will be unable to take your Bank or Card Provider to Court to Claim the refund back.

 

How to use Chargeback.pdf

 

 

 

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/75A

 

[F175AFurther provision for liability of creditor for breaches by supplier

(1)If the debtor under a linked credit agreement has a claim against the supplier in respect of a breach of contract the debtor may pursue that claim against the creditor where any of the conditions in subsection (2) are met.

(2)The conditions in subsection (1) are—

(a)that the supplier cannot be traced,

(b)that the debtor has contacted the supplier but the supplier has not responded,

©that the supplier is insolvent, or

(d)that the debtor has taken reasonable steps to pursue his claim against the supplier but has not obtained satisfaction for his claim.

(3)The steps referred to in subsection (2)(d) need not include litigation.

(4)For the purposes of subsection (2)(d) a debtor is to be deemed to have obtained satisfaction where he has accepted a replacement product or service or other compensation from the supplier in settlement of his claim.

(5)In this section “linked credit agreement” means a regulated consumer credit agreement which serves exclusively to finance an agreement for the supply of specific goods or the provision of a specific service and where—

(a)the creditor uses the services of the supplier in connection with the preparation or making of the credit agreement, or

(b)the specific goods or provision of a specific service are explicitly specified in the credit agreement.

(6)This section does not apply where—

(a)the cash value of the goods or service is £30,000 or less,

(b)the linked credit agreement is for credit which exceeds £60,260 [F2and is not a residential renovation agreement], or

©the linked credit agreement is entered into by the debtor wholly or predominantly for the purposes of a business carried on, or intended to be carried on, by him.

 

Section 75 Legislation.pdf

 

 

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2457 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...