Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

HFC again


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1942 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

One year on and they have been charging me for some months.

This time I kept all statements and sent off prelim in September.

 

Just sent lba off to discover they had written to me (got letter late) saying we settled in January 2008 and they regard the matter as closed.

Nice try but I still have old spreadsheet when I end up filing (just to prove I'm not stupidly claiming twice) and I'm going for contractual again.

 

It is almost £200 now without the court costs.

Will they pay up any sooner than last time or shall I see pigs in the sky?

It will work out at 6 months interest payments so I'm looking forward to it.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

They are getting precious.

We gave you your money back last year

- you can't ask us to repay again..............

Oh yes I can

- if you continue to charge me I can keep asking for it back :D:D

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...

Sent off a prelim letter back in March to following address

- can anyone confirm this is correct only I had a reply from PO box address.

 

Beneficial Finance

Camden House West

The Parade

B1 3PY

 

they advise that my first claim was settled the beginning of 2008 and was for all charges prior to then.

 

At that time I only went back 6 years

I am now going to put in a claim for charges prior to 1st claim made and settled plus all charges incurred to when I closed my account with them.

 

Does anyone think I am on a sticky wicket with this as I do have the spreadsheet showing I am not claiming any charges twice.

 

Should I just claim from the later date and then go back and have a third attempt again.

Going to claim PPI as well.

 

They put in the usual guff about being able to charge £12 as per OFT which I shall address in my LBA.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

No response to my LBA sent 3 weeks ago so going to file at court.

Can someone point me in the direction of any tutorial about filing using mcol and any 'arguments' I can use in my claim

- do I have to pay upfront or when it is assigned to a local court?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

See the Shelley threads in Barclay's successes forum or martin2006 thread

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

Wow - loved the Shelley thread. Not filing tomorrow - I did finally locate N1 info on this site - but will get Christmas over and then settle down to go to court - restitution interest rate will apply and the limitations act should go POC just in case - claiming back from 2007 up to 2012 so getting it right at this stage is paramount. I had also completely forgotten about the daily rate when filing at court. Thank you so much.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I think I have the daily rate worked out. They were charging me 25.9% and today charges and compound interest totals £3289.52 so my daily rate will be £2.07, right? I intent to file on Friday so daily rate would still be accurate enough right?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I use the following address for beneficial finance or send to HSBC at London address.

 

Beneficial Finance

Camden House West

The Parade

B1 3PY

 

 

Also when it comes to using their conditions in force from 2007 which company would I use - is there any point in trying to locate BF for then?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the POC I will file next week if anyonecan agree they look okay. Do I sent to beneficial finance or HSBC? I shall use HSBC terms and conditions having read some thread.

 

New POC Beneficial Finance

Claim No [ ]

 

IN THE [xxxxx] county court

 

 

 

BETWEEN

 

[Mrs xxxx xxxx]

Claimant

 

and

 

 

- HSBC

 

 

Defendant

 

 

 

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

1. The Claimant entered into an agreement (“The Agreement”) with the Defendant on or around xx/xx/xxxx, whereby the Defendant was to advance credit facilities to the Claimant under a running credit account, Account no xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ("The Account").

 

2. The Agreement essentially consisted of the Defendant providing the Claimant with a cheque book which would allow the Claimant to make purchases and receive cash advances on credit. In return the Defendant was entitled to charge interest at the published rate.

 

3. The Agreement was a Regulated Agreement for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

4. At all material times the contract was subject to the Defendant’s standard terms and conditions which could be varied from time to time.

 

 

Summary

 

5. Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerous default charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimum payment on the due date and or for exceeding the credit limit and or if a payment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in schedule 2).

 

6. The default charges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreement which were:

a) A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable: and

b) An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant.

 

 

7. The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly added to the Account.

 

The Charges

 

8. The standard Terms of the Agreement in substance provided as follows:

(a) The Defendant would provide the Claimant with the cheque book. The Claimant was entitled to use the cheques to make purchases and receive cash advances up to a credit limit (“the Limit”) set by the Defendant. The Defendant could unilaterally change the Limit by giving the Claimant notice in writing.

(b) The Defendant was entitled to charge interest on the purchases and cash advances at the published rate.

© The Claimant was to pay the minimum payment of 3% of the amount owed or £5 (whichever was the greatest) by the due date as notified in the monthly statements.

(d) The default charges August xxxx – September xxxx were £xx.xx, November xxxx – October xxxx was £xx.xx.

 

Penalty

 

9.The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage which would have been suffered by the Bank in relation to the Claimant’s transgressions.

 

10. In the premises the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thus unenforceable at common law.

 

The Regulations

 

 

11.At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations.

 

13. At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Charges were unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to the requirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant.

 

14. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contention that the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion of the Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms.

(1)The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated.

(2)The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract.

(3)The Charges exceeded the costs which the Bank could have expected to incur in dealing with the exceeding of the credit limit, late payment or returned payment.

(4) Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimant for their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within the ambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfair term.

(5) As the Bank knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement.

(6) As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges.

(7) In the premises, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to the customer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of the parties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Defendant in a way which was inequitable.

 

15. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that the terms’ imposing the Charges are not core terms under regulation 6 of the Regulations and relies on the following matters.

(1) The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms which define the main or core subject matter of the Agreement.

(2) The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in other words, whether or not the relevant services were value for money).

(3) The Charges are correctly described as default charges by the Defendant in the key information provided to new customers.

 

16. By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the Regulations.

 

17. The Defendant wrongly applied Charges to the Account totalling some £xxx.xx between xx/xx/xxxx and xx/xx/xxxx. Particulars appear from Schedule 2.

 

18. On xx/xx/xxxx the Claimant demanded repayment of the sums wrongly applied.

 

19. The Defendant has not repaid them or any of them.

 

And the Claimant claims;

 

(1) A declaration that the sums totalling £xxx.xx have wrongly been applied to the Account. These charges are older than the normal 6 years but are claimed by virtue of s32 (1) c Limitations Act 1980 as per Kleinwort Benson v Lincoln City Council.

 

(2) Payment of the said sum of £xxx.xx and interest in restitution of £xxxx.xx as per Sempra Metals v Inland Revenue Commissioners.

 

(3) Interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 25.9% per annum on the amount claimed (daily rate of £x.xx) until judgment or sooner payment.

 

(4) Court costs of [ xxxx].

I believe that the facts stated in these particulars, comprising of x pages, are true.

 

Dated

 

 

 

Signed

 

 

Schedule 1

Schedule 2

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

send to bennys

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

Okay I think I've found it.

 

I have to send POC within 14 days of issue date.

 

Foolishly I somehow did NOT 'tick' the box stating I would send detailed particulars to the defendant.

 

Is this going to be a problem and cost me money?

 

I then need to file an N215 Certificate of Service which I will do at the weekend.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you submit an abridged version of the particulars above Sally ?

 

Andy

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

  • 1 month later...

Gracious, such a long time since the above post.

 

Successfully sent my POC and filled in questionaire and received theirs back.

Yes I did sent it recorded delivery and part of their POC seems to indicate that they had not read mine as it states my claim is statute barred as more than 6 years have expired and I went straight to legal proceedings without engaging with them. Oh really..............

 

.... It also states I have not disclosed any reasonable grounds for my claim as it fails to comply with requirements of CPR 16.2 and/or 16.4.

Should I be looking at this last bit and what does CPR stand for.

 

They have also written to me saying to stop wasting any time I should discontinue my claim with each party bearing its own costs.

I am thinking this is just a standard letter.

 

last week was the deadline with AQ so just waiting for court to be assigned as HSBC have agreed it can be my local court.

Not too long to go now then.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

CPR = Civil Procedure Rules

 

Link is down at the moment

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part16

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

  • 5 weeks later...

Some time ago I was advised by them that my claim and rights of action are being transferred to HSBC UK using a court sanctioned scheme.

Hight Court hearing is the end of next month so it's all on hold then whenever then.

 

Am I right in thinking this is not likely to result in my claim being kicked out of court.

Was transferred to my local court just before this letter arrived too.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice of Allocation next with the court directions and trial date

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

  • 6 months later...

Well finally I have a court date and will be paying further court fees and getting my court bundle to relevant parties next week.

Apart from correspondence, T & Cs, bank statements do I need to print out the legal pronouncements I will be relying on given that I have gone back over 6 years as well as Sempra Metals or are these not necessary except when I turn up on the court date.

 

I did offer to settle with a few hundred off the total but they have not responded to my 2 week deadline. Ahh well, if you don't try.....................

 

Would the judge be pleased if I put a numbered contents sheet at the front of my bundle? Thanks for taking time to read this.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...