Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
    • Massive issues from Scottish Power I wonder if someone could advise next steps. Tennant moved out I changed the electric into my name I was out the country at the time so I hadn't been to the flat. During sign up process they tried to hijack my gas supply as well which I made it clear I didn't want duel fuel from them but they still went ahead with it. Phoned them up again. a few days later telling them to make sure they stopped it but they said too late ? had to get my current supplier to cancel it. Paid £50 online to ensure there was money covering standing charges etc eventually got to the flat no power. Phoned Scottish Power 40 minutes to get through they state I have a pay as you go meter and that they had set me up on a credit account so they need to send an engineer out which they will pass my details onto. Phone called from engineer asking questions , found out the float is vacant so not an emergency so I have to speak to Scottish Power again. Spoke with the original person from Scottish Power who admitted a mistake (I had told her it was vacant) and now states that it will take 4 weeks to get an appointment but if I want to raise a complaint they will contact me in 48 hours and it will be looked at quicker. Raised a complaint , complaints emailed me within 24 hours to say it will take 7 days till he speaks with me. All I want is power in the property would I be better switching over to EON who supply the gas surely they could sort it out quicker? One thing is for sure I will never bother with Scottish Power ever again.    
  • 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

Lantern Quick quid accounts


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1521 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

Well back again after a number of years following your success in getting unwelcome finance out of my life forever.

 

I have been receiving emails from lantern relating to a quick quid loan

I admittedly did not fully repay as I was at the time backed into a place where my only way out was to stop paying the payday loans and then deal with the fallout or lose everything.

 

Just at that Time I had loans with Wonga, Myjar, quick quid and pounds to pocket using one to repay another and getting deeper and deeper in.

 

Anyway Wonga wrote off their balance in full with no comebacks following a legislation change.

 

I sent quick quid a letter stating I was intending to defend the way the loan had been approved after a number of previous loans, Irresponsible lending, and received a letter saying they were looking into my complaint and received no further communication from them so forgot about them,

 

then sent their reply to Quick quid as they are the same company

they simply replied saying they would take me to court,

then heard nothing,

 

 

now fast forward four years and I start getting emails from Lantern,

I have not replied to any of them.

 

Firstly for one quick quid account and now they are saying I have 2 quick quid accounts totalling 2,900 pounds.

 

If I try to pay this it will put me right back to square one after managing to get back on my feet and clear all other debts, and start to rebuild my credit rating.

 

Any advice will be welcome.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

have you sent the OC an IRL complaint for these 2 loads.

 

ignore and bounce back the Email the block them.

 

QQ are aware of your correct address are Lantern?

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

I have not sent the OC an IRL I didn't know if I had to send it to Lantern as they have now bought the debts.

I also do not have all the information anymore about all the accounts and different loans I had with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Always the oc

Get both running now IRL and sar

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 not what i said is it....

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

The only information I have are the two loan reference numbers from Lantern so will have to issue the IRL with those I am assuming they are the Quick quid ref numbers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

why not ring QQ and ask for a list of loans by email PDF

and any other PDL co. you used!!

 

as well as a free sar to each

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

That would be quicker, I will ring them tomorrow, Thank you.

 

Could the SAR and the IRL be sent by email.?

 

 

Edit. Don't worry seen your advice in another thread I will send first class post.

Edited by Andyorch
Posts merged
Link to post
Share on other sites

well Quick quid have allegedly provided all the information from my DSAR on my account page on their website for me to down load,

 

when I try to log on ( yes the log on information is correct) it keeps coming back with,

 

this page can not be opened and they are telling me the information is only available for 7 days.

 

do I send another DSAR and specify hard copy's of the information?

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just received the following reply from Quick quid,

 

Customer Summary

Number of Loans 6

# payday 4

# OEC 1

# P2P 1

Number of Loans > 6 Years 2

All loans out of scope? N

Number of loans post 2015 0

 

 

 

 

We are in receipt of your complaint dated 25/07/2018 where you allege that QuickQuid irresponsibly lent to you. As a responsible lender, we have reviewed your lending as it relates to QuickQuid and Pounds to Pocket as these brands are both owned by CashEuroNet. Both brands will collectively be called CashEuroNet moving forward in this correspondence. In our assessment we look at:

• Affordability

• Creditworthiness

• Dependency

• Hardship

I’ve investigated your complaint and would like to bring your attention to the following points:

Under the Financial Conduct Authority’s rules, complaints cannot be made where they concern an event that occurred more than six years ago. Of course, we will still investigate your allegations as they pertain to any loans you have received in the last six years.

AFFORDABILITY & CREDIT WORTHINESS

The investigation of your complaint considered all relevant information contained in your application. It was noted your monthly income was stated as £2300 per month. I compared your income to your total monthly repayment for each loan you took with us. From this I can see that the income you made during each payday loan with us was always more than enough to cover the amount you had to repay us for each loan and thus I cannot agree with you that your loans were unaffordable.

DEPENDENCY

If there was dependency we would expect to see constantly increasing amounts in order to cover the prior loan interest and principal. However, your loan amounts varied and actually decreased from the previous loan which shows that you were not relying on one loan to repay the previous loan.

You are claiming that you were dependent on loans. Yet if you were dependent on taking out one loan to repay the other then you would have taken out numerous loans, for equal or increasing loan amounts, and with very little time between paying off one loan and taking out the other. When I reviewed your loan history I see that you never had more than four consecutive loans with less than 15 days between loans.

HARDSHIP

I reviewed your file and noted that on 06/05/2014 you informed us of your financial difficulty. However, your file also shows that we did not issue you another loan after you claimed financial hardship.

CONCLUSION: COMPLAINT NOT UPHELD

Therefore it is for the above reasons we cannot agree that CashEuroNet irresponsibly lent to you.

As this is our Final Response regarding your concerns to the above referenced account, if you are not happy with this outcome I need to ensure that you are aware of the ultimate availability of the Financial Ombudsman Service. You have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge.

The Ombudsman might not be able to consider your complaint if:

• what you’re complaining about happened more than six years ago, and

• you’re complaining more than three years after you realised (or should have realised) that there was a problem.

We think that your complaint was made outside of these time limits but this is a matter for the Ombudsman to decide. If the Ombudsman agrees with us, they will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances (see below).

If you do decide to refer your complaint to the Ombudsman you must do so within six months of the date of this letter.

If you do not refer your complaint to the Ombudsman within six months of the date of this letter, the Ombudsman will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances.

The very limited circumstances referred to above include, where the Ombudsman believes that the delay was as a result of exceptional circumstances. I have provided you with a link to the leaflet for your information to assist you if you decide to pursue this further course of action. They can be contacted at:

The Financial Ombudsman Service,

Exchange Tower,

London,

E14 9SR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

get off to the FOS quick then

as QQ are imminently going bust according to press reports

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

Casheuronet will try to set off any refunds against the accounts they sold to Lantern. I've been through it and the Ombudsman made a decision for them to either buy the account back, or pay the refund to the third party. So to avoid that you should negotiate a reduced settlement with lantern so there's no debt to set off. That's a standard reply from QQ too, I think they just use a template and input your income and loan dates etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

in our guide already.

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

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 year later...

I have received a letter from QDR Solicitors acting for Lantern debt collection who in turn say they are acting for Quick Quid,

I have already sent a claim for irresponsible lending, only to be told first they could not find my details, then they sent a standard reply,

 

meanwhile Lantern have continually sent emails chasing money until I sent them a letter telling them I was claiming against Quick Quid and had been advised they would not investigate any claims until the administration period was over, which could take a while and that they were acting against FSA guidelines chasing me while the claim was still live and while their client was in liquidation.

 

Then I received a letter today saying if I do not respond in 14 days they will take me to court,

So why they fighting so hard for a client whos gone into administration think they have bought these debts and now have no one to go back to.

 

Any advise would be helpful im very very tired of fighting these people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

old and new threads merged...

 

they are not acting on behalf of QQ, the debt has been sold to them, read the letters carefully.

 

if its not a letter of claim safe to ignore .

 

if it is scan it up please to PDF

 

 

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

not redacted properly...removed

 

doesnt have a title of letter of claim

 - just an idle threat that doesn't say will anything

 

so safe to ignore.

 

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

This is exactly what they are designed to do. Try to look at every letter anew and react accordingly. Easier said than done sometimes - I have in the past sent some very unwise replies telling people to F off. Not my finest hour so I do get the stress it can cause. 

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...