Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hmm yes I see your point about proof of postage but nonetheless... "A Notice to Keeper can be served by ordinary post and the Protection of Freedoms Act requires that the Notice, to be valid,  must be delivered either (Where a notice to driver (parking ticket) has been served) Not earlier than 28 days after, nor more than 56 days after, the service of that notice to driver; or (Where no notice to driver has been served (e.g ANPR is used)) Not later than 14 days after the vehicle was parked A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales." My question there is really what might constitute proof? Since you say the issue of delivery is a common one I suppose that no satisfactory answer has been established or you would probably have told me.
    • I would stand your ground and go for the interest. Even if the interest is not awarded you will get the judgement and the worst that might happen is that you won't get your claim fee.  However, it is almost inevitable that you will get the interest.  It is correct that it is at the discretion of the judge but the discretion is almost always exercised in favour of the claimant in these cases.  I think you should stand your ground and don't give even the slightest penny away Another judgement against them on this issue would be very bad for them and they would be really stupid to risk it but if they did, it would cost them far more than the interest they are trying to save which they will most likely have to pay anyway
    • Yep, true to form, they are happy to just save a couple of quid... They invariably lose in court, so to them, that's a win. 😅
    • Your concern regarding the 14 days delivery is a common one. Not been on the forum that long, but I don't think the following thought has ever been challenged. My view is that they should have proof of when it was posted, not when they "issued", or printed it. Of course, they would never show any proof of postage, unless it went to court. Private parking companies are simply after money, and will just keep sending ever more threatening letters to intimidate you into paying up. It's not been mentioned yet, but DO NOT APPEAL! You could inadvertently give up useful legal protection and they will refuse any appeal, because they're just after the cash...  
    • The sign says "Parking conditions apply 24/7". Mind you, that's after a huge wall of text. The whole thing is massively confusing.  Goodness knows what you're meant to do if you spend only a fiver in Iceland or you stay a few minutes over the hour there.
  • 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

Canada Square: want to Pay part of PPI win to a DCA **WON**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2062 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

A few months ago I enquired about PPI on some old Egg Loans I had in the early 2000's. This morning I had a letter from Canada Square with their decision.

 

On one policy did not have any PPI on it but the other 2 did and they have upheld my complaint.

 

It says the total redress is £4,256.55 but that out of that amount I am only getting £2,168.60 because of a Final Loan adjustment £1,849.17 is going to a company called Arrow Global Receivables who my loan was transferred to in 2011.

 

There is also a deduction of £2,365 listed as "Less any previous rebate paid" I was never paid any other rebate but perhaps this is something to do with my not paying off the full initial loan after entering the trustdeed?

 

To be clear I took out the loan in 2002, and increased it twice in the following year to about £11,000 total.

 

I then entered into a protected trustdeed in early 2006 which this loan was included in. The trustdeed was finished in 2009 and I had no idea that the loan account was still open.

 

I will attach a pdf of relevent info from the decision letter.

 

I know I am lucky to be getting anything at all given that I have been in a trustdeed but I just want to check that the amounts seem right and that them taking the other money off is right and fair.

 

Thank you for your help!

 

Also to let you know I did send a SAR to Canada SQ at the start of June but they didn't accept my inital change of address ID and then didn't get back to me for almost a month so the sar info will take longer to recieve. Should hopefully get it in a few weeks.

 

A trustdeed advisor (not my former trustee) has told me that she doesn't think that the payment to Arrow should be made considering I have completed a trustdeed.

 

She has advised me to call them to make it clear I have been in a trustdeed and get a reason for why this payment is being made to Arrow.

 

I am a bit worried about calling them and discussing the trustdeed in case it affects my chances of getting any payment at all.

 

At the same time it is a lot of money to lose if the payment to Arrow is in error.

egg letter.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

You dont ring you write!

 

And no they cant off set to a dca.

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

So are you saying that I should send a letter to Canada Sq asap stating I have completed a trustdeed and that they are therefore unable to offset any of this payment to a dca?

 

 

Why is it better to write then to call them, is it just to have a paper trail?

 

 

Also do you know if the "less previous rebate" part looks right if I never had any pervious payment from them?

Edited by Iona777
Link to post
Share on other sites

You write

Being able to or not is nothing to do with your trustdeed

I wouldn't mention it

 

Cant see how it still exists mind if it was part of the deed?

 

In a way they are correct but it should go to the original trustee to share out not all to 'them'

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

Thank you for your advice.

 

I still really don't understand the debt was never fully paid off under the trustdeed (I did complete the TD though) and my egg loan was sold to Arrow in 2011.

 

The Mond Case is being held currently to determine if trustees can reopen trustdeeds to redistrabute ppi payments to creditors or if that money should be reinvested in the debtor.

 

I think IVA's are different and all money should go to the creditors, the scottish trustdeed is up in the air at present.

 

I might call the FOS tomorrow and see if they can advise me further about the DCA payment and the less previous rebate issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update:

I decided to call Arrow the company to who Egg have told me they will be sending that amount of around £2000 to

they don't even own that account anymore,

they sold it to a group named Grove in 2014

 

when I called them they told me they held no record of my account

after speaking to someone from the team that deals with accounts in trustdeeds

they advised that anything as old as my trustdeed would have been discarded and not loaded on to their platform because there is no possibility of financal gain for them.

 

Both Arrow and Grove agreed that the only people who have any claim on a payment of ppi compensation would be myself or my former trustee who has already told them he has no interest.

 

I am drafting a letter to Egg now so will include this information as there is literally nowhere else for them to send this money than to myself at this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

so how'd it go?

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

  • 2 weeks later...

so now concluded as a win?

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...