Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • depends what the fees are, typically nothing can be added once judgement is passed bar litigation costs. on document retention time limits etc at least 6yrs previous must be held though many hold complete info. as for acronyms and abbreviations ideally yes they should     
    • Still have to submit a statement either system....if they fail they can only give verbal because they failed to file and serve.
    • OP stated they had been arrested, but not charged (let alone convicted). They DON'T have a criminal record, but do have an entry on the PNC. That information stays on the PNC (Police National Computer) for life, but doesn't get released in a standard DBS. It only MIGHT get released for an Enhanced DBS (eDBS) check  ... but it would be incredibly unlikely. (The rational behind this is that eDBS's allow for 'information at Chief Officer of Police's discretion' ..... this covers the 2 'barring lists' and is also intended for the scenario where someone has multiple arrests or investigations, where safeguarding is a concern .... it was brought in after the Soham murders / Ian Huntley case, where the information known about the now-convicted child murderer may have prevented his employment in a school, had it been made available). So, for the sake of accuracy and completeness, arrests stay on the PNC for life, wont appear in a standard DBS, MIGHT appear in an eDBS, but in reality, would be the exception rather than the norm, and I can't see them being released  to a defense barrister. What then if the defence found out a different way, and brought it up in court?. Again, unlikely, but the important feature is that the judge would make sure they trod very carefully!. They MIGHT consider using it if there were other factors that allowed them to try to cast doubts as to the truthfulness of your evidence, but on its own : No way. Anyone MIGHT be arrested (if a seemingly plausible complaint been made against them)! The approach to take if it did come up is to be truthful. "Yes, I was arrested. It arose from a vexatious complaint. I wasn't charged, let alone convicted. That could happen to any one of us, if a vexatious complaint gets made" Far better that than lying, saying you'd never been arrested, and getting caught in a lie : that would ruin your credibility. I'm incredibly doubtful it will even come up, though.
    • we dont get N157 because its new OCMC but no court dont have evidence either.   Just seems a bit of a pointless wait but oh well
  • 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

CFO Lending - Sayonara


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2467 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

Luckily I have been free of payday loans for a few years now but feel sorry for people who are relying on this,redress. I am so angry that the FCA did nothing to protect them, and made sure that they were treated fairly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all,

 

I've been chasing CFO for compensation for years since I took out a load of payday loans I clearly couldn't afford.

I know I was stupid, but at the time I was going through really bad times, and wasn't thinking straight.

 

I originally complained to CFO directly early last year and got rejected, then in January this year they mailed to say I was affected by the redress programme and would be received some compensation back...

 

...Since them I have chased them every couple of weeks, with no positive response, and now I find they have passed everything over to Harrisons, and reading between the lines I am not likely to get a penny back!

 

Surely the FCA should have seen this coming, and put something in place?

 

Is there anything practical those affected can do, other than put it down to experience and be thankful it's another PayDay loan company that isn't preying on vulnerable people???

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have put in a complaint to the FCA which they have acknowledged.

 

 

My complaint is that why was it not made clear that the FCA made sure there was enough money to pay the redress instead of us being told we are getting money back to have the rug pulled from under us.

 

 

I am waiting their response

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately I can see this going nowhere im afraid. Its sad to see so many people not get the justice they deserve.

But CFO Is now dead once and for all... Lets see what the FCA say to Showergirl

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have,received an e mail from the,FCA this morning having passed stage one they are now looking into why it was overseen that no redress has,been paid. Will keep you posted on any further news

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The fca have decided not to uphold my complaint as both the FCA and cfo could not have foreseen that they would have gone into liquidation. Due to the data protection they can not disclose any further information so good bye to £800

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
The fca have decided not to uphold my complaint as both the FCA and cfo could not have foreseen that they would have gone into liquidation. Due to the data protection they can not disclose any further information so good bye to £800

 

They can't foresee if a company will go into administration - e.g.. the members/creditors can vote on it there and then but they certainly should have performed some due diligence when levying the fine. Strange that its looking like they are now insolvent - question is were they solvent when the agreement/fine was made and when did it turn.

 

External auditors make a living out of assessing whether a company is a going concern:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

What grates on me most in this situation is that not only will they not pay us the compensation owed under the redress scheme but they have the cheek on the administration page to say if you still owe cfo money and do not pay they will take legal action against you!

 

How are the laws of this land so bloody backward

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...