Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • 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

First Trust Bank sold my 2005 debts to Asset Link Capital


pete263
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2432 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

Hi, In 2005 I developed long term illness and had to give up working.

 

To cut a long story short I owed my bank (First Trust) approx £300 (I cant remember the exact figure) for a couple of direct debits that came out of my current account at the time.

 

I also had a credit card (again with First Trust) and the balance on that was approx £600.

 

I contacted the local Citizens Advice, got a payment plan set up with a token payment of £1 per month for the current account and credit card. ( I have paid every month ever since)

 

At the time the Bank agreed to charge no interest on either the credit card or current account, although sadly I do not have this in writing anywere.

 

The bank has now sold the debt onto Asset Link Capital and I have had a letter from them asking me to setup a payment plan with them but the £300 current account debt has now grown into a £1100+ debt!

Its obvious the bank has been charging interest on this account all along.

 

Interestingly, the credit card debt has not had any interest added to it.

 

Im at a total loss as to what to do about it and would be very grateful for any help.

I do not mind paying off genuine debt that Im responsible for but to charge that amount of interest is criminal.

 

PS. After reading through some other cases is it feasible for me to request a CCA for the Credit card debt and I dont think a CCA would help with a current account?

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore debt collection communications.

 

Send a Data Protection Subject Access Request to First Trust for copies of all records on the current account and credit card.

 

 

In the request letter, ask for copies of all file notes, all statements of accounts and in particular any records regarding to an agreement made in 05/06 for no interest or charges to be added. If you click on subject access request there is a link to the standard template letter.

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 OTHERS

 

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply,

 

I have a Subject access request from October 2014 from them ( a friend at the time was advising me on financial matters) and I can find nothing in the notes regarding interest or charges being frozen. To be honest I cant make much sense of them as its a printout of 150 so pages titled CACS report, I did find the name of the person from the CAB who dealt with this back then but after ringing them she no longer works for the CAB.

 

Should I request another SAR? Sorry if I seem a bit confused but my illness makes it very difficult to process information at times.

 

If worst comes to the worst what is my best course of action for resolving this, CCA the credit card and token payment for the current account?

 

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, no point sending another.

 

You could write to the Bank asking them for confirmation that back in 2005/06 following intervention from Citizens advice that interest/charges were removed and no longer to be added to the account.

 

Don't mention the debt being sold and the issue.

Get the Bank to confirm what they agreed at the time.

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 OTHERS

 

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

so you received a letter of assignment.

Did the bank continue to send out annual statements before selling the debt on?

Does the new demand have a breakdown of how the debt is formed?

 

With a SAR it is supposed to be intelligible so what you received didnt meet the requirements on a SAR as they are supposed to send explanatoty text with their reams of figures.

 

 

That is a stick to beat them with but they wont be sending you it now but you have good grounds for a complaint when you ask again and get the same type of data.

 

 

That should get them a ticking off and hopefully a refund of your tenner (I know but even a small victory is still a victory).

 

you can ask Link for a breakdown of the amount and they will have to chase it up with First Trust or they wont be going anywhere enforcing the debt.

 

 

So, ask link for a breakdown first and then SAR to First Trust if they cant provide anything meaningful

 

I bet some of the original charges were unlawful so you will be able to reclaim these from Link.

 

 

They wont have paid that much for the debt so if they have to pay you say £100 that is probably more than the debt cost them and they have no way of wriggling out of it, the liabilites go with the benefits to them.

 

 

If you are lucky you get back the charges plus interest so the end result is that they will owe you more then the origianl amount, your debt is cleared and you get some cash. Wouldnt that be a result.

 

For the moment you pay the £1 a month if the assignment is real as per the original agreement. they will ahve to go to court to vary that and they might not have the correct paperwork to back up their decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much for your answer, its a weight off my mind.

 

 

Found the exact figures for the debt and the current account was £417, the credit card £661 so on the current account there has been nearly £800 interest.

 

The SAR is pretty unitelligible as you mentioned, no explanatory texts or anything, just a bunch of codes and figures really.

 

By the way, I had PPI and insurance on the credit card so I dont know why it was never settled through the insurance.

 

The bank never sent me annual statements and the new demand from Link only has a total figure, no breakdown at all.

 

I'll follow your advice now and firstly ask link for a breakdown and SAR the bank,

 

 

should I offer to pay Link the £1 per month immediatly or wait until they give me a breakdown? Also, when I get the SAR back how do I know what charges are unlawful?

 

Thanks for your patience and for the advice :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

cash cowed blind

quite honestly id just stop paying both of them

 

 

link never own enforceable debts anyway.

 

 

a DCA is NOT A BAILIFF

and has

NO SUCH LEGAL POWERS.

 

 

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

also 1st trust were an irish bank

are you still in Ireland?

why are you blindly paying a English DCA for an irish debt???

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

doorstep hassle?

 

they are NOT BALLIFFS!!

 

where this come from...

not been talking to these muppets have you

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

Thats true dx and I'll keep that in mind :wink: Going to try it re: ericsbrother and see how I get on..

... I'll keep you's posted and let you know how it plays out.

 

 

Just finished the letter asking for the breakdown so that'll get the ball rolling.

Cheers for the advice everyone, it IS appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, I also have a copy of the agreement for the credit card and PPI is included in it, is it worth my while contacting the original creditor about this or should it be LINK?

I didnt have the card for very long so cant imagine Id be owed very much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

always the OC

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...