Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
  • 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
  • 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 2464 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 2464 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...