Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Last June, 3.4m members received a £100 payment from the building society. Now they will be wondering whether the offer will be replicated this year.View the full article
    • Write to the IPC complaining that UKPC have not observed the requirements of PoFA . IPC  Waterside House, Macclesfield SK10 9NR Dear IPC, I am writing to complain about a serious breach of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 by UKPCM. I feel that as it is more a breach of the Act rather than not just  complying with your Code of Practice which is why I am bypassing your operator. Should you decide to insist that I first complain to your operator, I will instead pass over my complaint to the ICO and the DVLA . My story starts with being issued a windscreen PCN on 8/3/24 which was almost immediately removed and a second  PCN was then  sent by post on 13/3/24  [deemed delivered 15/3/24] which I did not receive and had to send an sar to have that particular mess revealed later  but that is not the reason for my complaint. UKPC then sent a Keeper Liability Notice dated 12/4/24 warning me that as 28 days have now elapsed, I as keeper am now liable for the charge.  This is in direct contravention of PoFA since the keeper does not become liable to pay until the day after the original PCN is deemed to have been given which would have been 13/4/24 -a Saturday ]. Not only does it not comply with PoFA but it fails to adhere to your Code of Practice and is in breach of their agreement with the DVLA. You will be aware that this is not the first time that UKPC have fallen foul of the DVLA and presumably yourselves. I have included copies of both Notices for information. You will realise the seriousness of this situation if this is standard practice from the UKPC to all motorists or just those where windscreen tickets are involved since the Law regarding PoFA is being abused and is unfair to misguide motorists. I await your  response which I understand will usually be within a week. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I would think that should be sufficient for the IPC to cancel your PCN though  you should await comments from the Site team before sending your complaint. Don't forget to include both PCNs.  
    • Hi DX, Sorry, fell asleep as I was up all night last night writing that statement. Yes, I attached the rest of the witness statement on post 50, bottom of webpage 2. That's the important part.  It looks like the lawyer who wrote Erudio's Witness statement does not work for them any more. So, I'll have another lawyer representing instead. Not sure if I can use Andy's hearsay argument verbally if that happens.... I did not put it in writing. Apart from not sending deferral forms, my main argument is that in 2014 Erudio fixed some arrears mistake that SLC made and then in 2018 they did the same mistake, sent me confusing letters. What is the legal defence when they send you confusing material?
    • Chinese firm MineOne Partners has been ordered to sell land it owns near a US nuclear missile site.View the full article
  • 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

Welcome Finance PPI Offsetting advice needed Please


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2069 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

Hello

 

Not been on the forum for a while. I hope everyone is well.

 

I recently made 4 sperate claims for PPI to Welcome for unsecured loans taken out in 2001/2/3/4.

I successfully claimed for 2001/2 loans through Aviva as the underwriters of the insurance.

These have been settled and paid to me.

 

I’ve received correspondence from WF about the 2003/4 loans.

They have upheld my complaint on both and the sum due is around £2.5 K.

They have also said however that my account was sold to a third party with a balance of over £3K and that the intend to re-purchase the account and apply my compensation to that balance.

They have sent me a form to sign to agree to this, which obviously I’m not going to do.

 

Firstly

I’m unable to verify the amount they say is outstanding on my account.

 

When my SAR arrived it contained all of the loan agreements and 3 printed statements pertaining to the first three loans but not the final one which I obviously defaulted on.

 

When I queried this they said they had sent everything that they held for me.

How they’ve managed to arrive at how much was owed when they’ve said that 4th statement didn’t exist is one thing.

 

The amount does seem high to me as the 4th loan was for just over £4K and I was paying it (albeit it an agreed reduced rate) until at least mid 2008.

 

Is there any further I can go with this or it the end of the line?

I’ve read about Welcome offsetting on some other threads so I’m not hopeful.

 

Also

I assume the paperwork they’ve sent is with the intention of resurrecting the debt if anyone is daft enough to sign and send it back.

 

Are they likely or even can they resurrect the debt on the back of the successful claim without the signed paperwork?

 

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've not paid in 6yrs the debt is SB'd so cant coneback

 

As for the offset

There is little you can do about it sadly

Other than complain its not fair

You could mention they are sb'd

But an OC can do so even if it is

 

I will assume you are in E&W and not Scotland

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

Thanks for the quick reply.

 

That’s pretty much what I thought but just needed it confirming. Oh well. Strangely I don’t recall ever being pursued for this debt by a third party after I defaulted

 

And yes I’m in E&W

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably because you moved?

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

Incidentally has anyone ever asked WF in this situation for proof that they did ‘re-purchase’ the debt and are indeed the legal owners? I’ve been thinking about how difficult it must be to track such a debt down after all that time. Not only that but surely there is no guarantee they will be able to re-purchase?

 

Not straw clutching just genuinely curious about why they are so confident they can easily re-purchase a debt and if people are being put off taking it further because they think it’s a lost cause. Surely they would need to prove ownership of the debt to justify keeping any compensation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

twill be easy for them to track it down

 

you could ask them to provide a notice of assignment under the law of properties act 1925 before they do so.

and they must produce it too.

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

  • 1 month later...

Hello

 

I thought I’d just report my partial success with this matter after taking it to the FOS. I’ve not had the paper work through yet, just a phonecall with an adjudicator at the FOS.

 

As I understand it the amount awarded and subsequently being used to offset the original debt was in respect of loans 3 & 4 joined together.

 

As loan 4 was a rollover and partially used to pay off the balance on loan 3, the FOS have advised WF that they shouldnt withhold the PPI refund due in respect of loan 3.

 

WF have agreed and will be making an offer of just short of £600.

The amount used to offset is now just over £1000.

The difference is because the PPI was front loaded and loan 3 paid off early with loan 4. I hope that makes sense?

 

The adjudicator advised that as offsetting is standard and accepted I’d be unlikely to be successful with pursuing that angle for the balance. I can of course take it on to an ombudsman if I wanted to. I won’t be though.

 

So whilst my offsetting complaint wasn’t a success, it was worth taking it further and having the sums looked at properly. I just thought that this info may be useful to others pursuing WF for multiple claims.

 

Thank you again for the advice. I will make a donation to help you great people keep helping the rest of us. Take Care

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...