Jump to content


Leaderboard

  1. ODC

    ODC

    Registered.


    • Points

      3

    • Content Count

      10,808


  2. supasnooper

    supasnooper

    Registered Users

    Change your profile picture


    • Points

      3

    • Content Count

      4,491


  3. fuzzybobble

    fuzzybobble

    Registered Users

    Change your profile picture


    • Points

      2

    • Content Count

      2,230


  4. scatz1972

    scatz1972

    Registered Users

    Change your profile picture


    • Points

      2

    • Content Count

      535



Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/02/09 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    There was an amendment in April 2004 The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) and the Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement) (Local Lists) (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2004
  2. 1 point
    There is another thread going about eggs termination of agreements. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/136848-termination-egg-credit-card-13.html I have asked egg on several occasions to tell me what right they have to terminate my agreement when there is no default and they have failed to answer. I have warned them I will issue proceedings to claim back the £2k they have taken from my bank since the agreement was terminated and would like to go ahead. I am not sure what to put in the POC and would appreciate some help. I want to claim back the money, ask them to return my balance to £0 and remove any black marks against my name. Just not sure what to do as it is not a simple money claim ? thanks in advance.
  3. 1 point
    You say LCS solicitors, these are the in-house 'solicitors' of 1st credit. As 42man says, they've probably got this by default. What hasn't yet been mentioned on here yet (although you may have read it elsewhere on the site) is never speak to these 'people' on the phone. If they phone you, whatever you do, do not get charmed into paying something off for this alleged debt, not even a quid, if you were to do so and the alleged debt is not quite statute barred it will set the clock ticking again. Also, if you manage to scan the paperwork up here, remove all identifying marks and that includes barcodes.
  4. 1 point
    Does your contract state you are employed as a housekeeper? How long were you working in the servery? How long have you been employed with them? Ell-enn
  5. 1 point
    Redundancy whilst on maternity leave would be a prima face case of unfair dismissal. I'm not uptodate on employment law but you should certainly complete an Industrial Tribunal appication form straightaway. the time liits used to be very short - and they may still be - and therey used to be unforgiving of late appications. The form used to be and IT1. I'll flag your post to the rest of the team
  6. 1 point
    HI Landy do not give up yet wait for the 24th Feb I'll say no more I "may" have some good news at least sparkie
  7. 1 point
    Hello and Welcome, watershed2100. Letter 'N' in the library is the CCA request, this should be sent with a £1 Postal Order and sent recorded, also don't sign the letter. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/20758-creditors-dcas-letter-templates.html Are your accounts with a Debt Collector ? Regards. Scott.
  8. 1 point
    CAPONE do not do properly executed CCAs. The above letter should see off the Leeds losers. They may come back and say what they sent does comply with your CCA requset which it probably does but the pile of POOH that they sent will in no way be enforceable through the Courts.
  9. 1 point
    Hi Mystic, sorry to hear about your issue.Firstly of all lets not panic and keep calm you have come to the right place . I am a novice on this site but with the help of this forum i have managed to win some battles, we still have time to put some spanners in the works. More experianced members will come along and help, but it would seem that they would have got a ccj by default, can you scan the interim order on to the forum (erase personal details) or can you find any details on it relating to ccj. Do not worry about sale of the house , that is upto the judge not the snotty debt company.And worse case judge will agree to a monthly amount, however we need to start acting to see if we can get CCJ set aside . Manc1
  10. 1 point
    Hi there, Welcome to CAG. I'm sure you'll get plenty of help from the members here. I'm sorry to see that you've been landed with this but there are several things that can be done. Have a read of this to get you by until I can get back to you later with more details or someone may advise you further National Debtline England & Wales | Debt Advice | Factsheet 15 Charging Orders In The County Court Alos do a search on the forum for Charging Orders - you should come across some useful info.
  11. 1 point
    http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/183077-swift-advances-mortgage-charges.html http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/181974-landy_alert-swift-advances.html
  12. 1 point
    Thanks Supasnooper, have had a read of both of those and get the general idea - it's a lot to digest in one hit though and will take a few readings for it all to sink in. As my OH's DN was dated 6th Feb and received on 10th Feb with a DN date of 23rd I believe this to be one day short of the 14 clear days for the statutory deadline, thus possibly rendering it invalid? I'm hoping though that they fail to come up with enforceable CCAs for his two accounts anyway (the deadline was last weekend and nothing so far - account in dispute letter sent). So really the charges/PPI reclaim issue is our insurance for if they DO come up with enforceable CCAs. One other follow-up to the receipt of his SAR info from MBNA yesterday is that it's not all there (a bit like most of their staff, lol!). All they have provided is a huge wad of transactions - charges etc, but no record of any manual intervention, letters sent, phone call transcripts etc or anything relating to his history with them. This despite our having used a standard template from on here. I understood all this other info should have been included - so what would be our next step please? Also, if anyone could point me in the direction of the best spreadsheets to use for working out how much to reclaim, that would be most appreciated. I have tried the links to some of the spreadsheets and they don't seem to be working - unless it's just me! Many thanks, Landy
  13. 1 point
    hiya everyone just popped in for a while, thanks for everyone posting its helping me too keep positive fairyblue laters angel x:smile:
  14. 1 point
    Just tried calling the number from my mobile, (witholding caller id first lol) It rings about 6 times, then a click, then the BT recorded voice saying, "The person you are calling has hung up." So it does sound very like a DCA's automated dialer, where when you answer, it puts you through to dribbling teenager with a script of threats to read out to you.
  15. 1 point
    In theory, yes they could force a sale but it would need to be allowed by a judge. In todays economic climate, judges have been advised to help those who may face the risk of this happening, and would therefore set an order that the claimant could not sell the property. At the moment you are nowhere near that scenario. Let's concentrate on the defence for now Ok, just printed off the agreement paperwork and none of it fits back to front properly. If the account number is unrecognisable or not yours; and you can prove this (produce a statement with what you believe is your account number) then how can the agreement relate to you ? A cut and paste job possibly by MBNA ? - they have allegedly done this before. Also, do some research into bazaars sugestion of IP addresses and IP locations. There are a few more things I need to look at but will get back later
  16. 1 point
    Hi and welcome to CAG. First of all cancel the direct debit with the DCA, otherwise they'll just keep helping themselves to your money. Also refuse to speak to them on the phone. By phone they can bully you, and get you to agree to all kinds of things, then deny it afterwards if you want to complain about them to Trading Standards. If they do call, just say, "I require all correspondence to be in writing only please." Then hang up. Refuse to answer their so called security questions, and they'll be unable to continue the call. They can't keep increasing the amount either. As you're on disability you should only be paying them what you can realistically afford. When you send them details of income and expenditure, make sure you put everything down. Even pet food, etc. It's not hard to get the outgoings almost the same as the income. If you're sole income is benefits, then you shouldn't be paying them anymore than a token amount of £1 a month, as benefits are what the Government say is the minimum you need to live on. Send them this letter....... Your Address Creditor Address Date Dear Sir/Madam, Re:− Account/Reference Number ACC NO. I am sorry I am unable to pay the original monthly payments because . I informed you of this on DATE, and after seeking advice, I have discovered that I have disposable income of £XX. Since I have £XX total debt, your share of this pro-rata offer is £XX. Please find enclosed the first payment, and I also request that you send me a paying in book / account information so I can make further payments monthly. Please note that I will not set up another direct debit with you, as you have already taken 2 payments of £XX in the space of 12 days. Also, could you please consider using your discretion to freeze any interest or charges that might accumulate, which I am aware is the standard practice for socially responsible companies such as yourself. I have also enclosed details of my income and expenditure. Yours Faithfully XXXX (type, don’t sign) Also write to your bank raising a formal complaint, asking why they allowed two direct debits on your account in 12 days. Remind them this is against the direct debit guarantee, as you weren't given advance warning from Iqor in writing before the second payment was taken. Mention you'll complain to Trading Standards if they fail to refund the payment in full within 14 days. I'm having dealings with Iqor at the moment and find them to be a bunch of arrogant idiots, who don't follow guidelines on debt collection. It may also be worth sending them a CCA request if the debt is for a catalogue, credit card, store card, or loan. If they can't produce an enforceable agreement for the debt it will put you in a much stonger situation where you get to call the shots.
  17. 1 point
    This same old tripe from RWC. If they are saying that the debt is a simple assignment under the Law of Property Act then they cannot take legal action against you it would have to be the Original Creditor. If of course it is an ABSOLUTE assignment then the ARE the Creditor as defined by S189 of the CCA 1974. That means the have the same rights and DUTIES as the original creditor. However they are still obliged under S 175 of the CCA to pass your CCA request to the original creditor. They are strictly true that even if the debt were UNENFORCEABLE then the debt may be still owed just that they could not force you to pay it if you refused. The real clue is in the last line where they are offering a reduced settlement. They could not do this if the alleged debt was only a simple assignment. I hope that makes sense
  18. 1 point
    Sidhe You could remind both that they CAN be sued for harrasment
  19. 1 point
    Hi Choco, I know it is a frustrating business all this but stay with it, even though it may take more time many believe, indeed as does Marc Gander believe, that the final outcome will be in favour of the consumer, although one can not say this for definite. Let me try to explain the legal arguments for you. Ever since bank charge reclaiming began there have been two legal avenues for claimants to pursue. One is that these charges amounted to a penalty and therefore under common law (not statute) these charges would have been legally unenforceable so you could have claimed a refund. With the exception of Royal Bank of Scotland plc (owners of Natwest) the judge has found in favour of the banks on this point. As the OFT does not want to appeal on this point these charges therefore are not unenforceable penalties, so that particular legal avenue, for most, has been closed. The second legal argument which only consumers can rely on is that these charges are unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 or UTCCR's. These regulations were introduced to ensure more fairness for contracting parties. The judge found against the banks on this point back in April last year which meant the charges could be assess by the OFT for fairness. If there had been no appeal this would have meant the OFT reducing the charges to a more fairer level. However the banks were allowed to appeal. The appeal hearing concluded at the beginning of November last year and the judgement is still awaited. I don't think anyone really knows when the judgement will come through but I for one am waiting eagerly for it, to say the least, as Im sure millions of other people are. Try not to be too disheartened and remember if you have put in a court claim there is a little bit of compensation for the wait - an increase in your statutory interest, which in actual fact for some is quite a lot of money. Hope this has helped, TheyrCriminals
  20. 1 point
    Hi there. Subbing to this. Good luck I am sure you will be fine though. One thing as soon as you can try and delete all your personal info. Sometimes the mortgage companies are looking around. olives xxx Sorry meant to say delete personal info off the letter xxx
  21. 1 point
    Bathgate, I think it would be worth your while writing back to the FOS to justify how they came to this conclusion - Possibly as a FOI request. The House of Lords in Wilson set out exactly what 'unenforceable' meant. See Lord Nicholls at paragraph 49: So in my view the HoL has said unenforceable = inoperative. From well established principles: where a Act uses the same word in different places it has the same meaning in every case unless it expressly says otherwise and that words have their plain english meaning. The Oxford English Dictionary says 'inoperative' means "Without practical force, invalid". It would be very interesting to see how the FOS justify their position. Dad
  22. 1 point
    Sounds good, I would also be tempted to state that the original creditor has not completed a section 78(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 request submitted on xx/xx/xxxx, s78(6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 is active preventing the original creditor from enforcing the agreement at all either with or without a court order until it has completed the request. Heres the documents you'll need relating to this: http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/telso/1-8.jpg http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/telso/Image2.jpg http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/telso/Image3.jpg I can give you an uncensored copy of page 1 if you wish by PM, which specifically lists Citi Financial Europe Plc as the creditor.
  23. 1 point
    Have a read of these on DN's. I would advise and indeed implore all members to read through x20's thread on dodgy DN's and one of b_r_w's brain dumps on the subject. x20's dodgy DN post - A Tale of a Dodgy DN banker_rhymes_with brain dump - Default Notice period - 7 CLEAR days ? And yes, you have correctly identified the penalty charges made by MBNA.
  24. 1 point
    I am sincerely sorry to hear that bad news, I can understand your feelings at the moment..........if the reason was of your activity on the forums makes me even more upset and angry....I do feel for you but then again....the same happened to that HBOS man Mr Moore and again shows the morality of Banks in general..................folks should demand their salaries be paid in cash and to hell with the greedy Bankers. I repeat I am sorry to hear about your dismissal. regards ...sparkie
  25. 1 point
    Oooo Blimey. Hello SIB. I have read your post and I am so sorry you are feeling this bad. Some words of comfort for you. I am on the other side of where you are at now. Maybe for differing reasons but the outcome is the same. I feel bad for using credit cards, some I knew i could not pay back but in blind panic, they served a short term purpose. Being and suffering with depression certainly hasnt helped as it made my spending spiral. I FELT SO ALONE COS i COULDNT TALK TO MY HUBBY AS HE WAS OBSESSED WITH MONEY, ALTHOUGH NOW HE IS OK SINCE WE WENT BR. The best piece advice I have been given is this. The only way to deal with debt is practically. Bankruptcy is a sensible and practical solution. Either carry on worrying and stringing out the inevitable so take control of the problem yourself. Its very empowering.I have never been a practical person as panic sets in at every opportunity but I have become stronger . We are talking to the OR in the morning. I think I am ok with it. We have enough money to live, I took control of the benefits and have them paid into a post office account, direct debs come out of the new account in which hubbys wage goes into. Its good to handle cash again so I know where I am. The worst thing is my 400 pound car might be taken but I doubt it as I have a special needs child. These companys dont care how bad you feel. They want money but you need to live so in order to do that you have to get practical. You'll be ok and I am going to follow your post. Take care poppet Hazel
  26. 1 point
    This is a better sign. If you filed a court suit then the case will have landed in Egg's hardline law department who no doubt want to show their macho muscles able to scare claimants into a climbdown. This has been demonstrated before, with lawyers talkiing tough but at the last minute deciding discretion is the better part of valour. All the easy reclaims were submitted to Egg bsiness managers. It has not therefore been proven that Egg business managers have undergone a sea change escalating from doves to determined hawks.
  27. 1 point
    Same letter,it does not comply with CCA good luck
  28. 1 point
    They will threaten him with all sorts but at the end of the day the best that they can hope for if they take him to Court is that the Court will award them a quid a month. Dont worry about them sending anyone round. They have NO LEGAL POWERS whatsoever and should they threaten this then we have a lovely letter telling them to BOG OFF. I assume he does not own the house.
  29. 1 point
    Hiya French, You two options FOS or Court, but bear this in mind if you chose the court option and your complaint is not upheld then thats it end off you cannot then go to the FOS. But if you took it to the FOS first and they did not uphold your complaint you syill have the court route to use. There is no time limit on mis-selling although the FOS can only go back as far as 2005 mearly because there was no Fos before this date but having said that if there is more than one policy and the loans where linked in some way for instance one is settled into another and the other was before 2005 then they would look into this. If you went via court then there is no time limit. I hope the above helps you. Regards Pompeyfaith
  30. 1 point
    No, i don't know. This is the only copy i have, can't seem to find a finalised one on my PC. I think it should be OK though.
  31. 1 point
    Alf....I would always recommend applying to set it aside, You basically have 18 days from the date you received it to set aside, if you set it aside outside the 18 days then I think it costs £30 to do this. (you can claim this back in costs).... You can find forms 6.4 (set aside) and 6.5 (affadavit) here in this link - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/86067-getting-statutory-demand-set.html If this was already disputed then this a wholly vexatious and an unlawful claim on their part, and I can tell you now a judge will NOT be pleased with Connaughts. (who are part of 1st Credit) Once you have filled out the forms, you need to get them 'sworn in' at your local court (ring them first to find out if they handle bankruptcies/insolvencies as some County Courts don't) getting them 'sworn in' is usually free at a local county court, at a solicitors it will cost £5 and at central London courts I have heard it cost £12. If it was me in your shoes I would definitely get this set aside. The debt is totally disputed. This has been raised with the original creditor but despite the bona-fide dispute the debt has been passed on. This I believe to be a completely vexatious and unlawful action and an abuse of the Insolvency service. The debtor is currently going through the process of reclaiming in excess of £1500 of excessive penalty charges. I believe this to be a frivolous and unlawful action as the demand does not state a county court on it, and nothing has been 'served'. Judge Boggis QC - RE AWAN - [2000] BPIR 241 'In my judgment, bankruptcy is one of the most serious forms of execution that can be brought against a debtor. In any bankruptcy proceedings it is, in my view, absolutely clear that the provisions as to service must be followed exactly. - JUDGE BOGGIS QC - SITTING AS A JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT I have tried to call the named person on the demand 3 times (dates and times of calls) and have been unable to speak with this person who I believe does not exist. A statutory demand must show a named person or persons from the Creditor or their agent/solicitor whom you can contact directly. This is Rule 6.2 of The insolvency Rules 1986. This means that if the statutory demand doesn't give the name of a person you can speak to then it is not valid. If you try to contact the named person and they won’t put you through then it is also invalid. I gracefully request that the demand is dismissed, and in light of the frivolous and unlawful nature of this demand and the upset this has caused me and my family, I request the judge order the claimant pay my full costs and makes an indemnity award and orders the claimant to remove any adverse default information that has been put on my files. I also request that the judge grants a bankruptcy restraining order in my favour against this company. Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch) In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made:- 27 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner). You need to submit your costs 24 hours before the hearing.... You can claim back at £9.25 per hour for your research and work on the case Mileage at 40p per mile Postage Parking Claim back your time off work too....
  32. 1 point
    Hello SB! Make sure you make it clear that what they have sent does not satisfy your s78(1) Requests, so the clock on that is still ticking. That is good news. Obviously, they may come up with it at some stage, but MBNA have been known to lose Agreements, and one of mine never materialised. I knew it was unenforceable anyway from the copy I have here...but just wanted to see what they would come up with! Likewise, if you see anyone who needs help, just jump in and pass on the help. That's how CAG works, and the greatest pleasure is knowing how much it helps people, followed a close second by how much it annoys the idiot bankers. That being the same idiot bankers who have brought our once fine Nation to its knees. Cheers, BRW
  33. 1 point
    Hi there I had one of these vists a fiew weeks back, and it was because someone had reported me for having a partner living with me and i was looking after my friends baby 1 day a week while she was a college. I wasnt getting paid for doing this as she is a friend and a single mother who has just lost her husband. And my partner comes and stays for 2 days at the weekend, which he is allowed to do. Turns out it was a busy body neighbour that got her facts wrong. But if u have nothing to hide and tell the truth it will be fine and u have nothing to worry about. Let us know what happens.
  34. 1 point
    If the prescribed terms can be read on the T&C's, they will need to show they are part of the same document. If they can't show that, the T&C's aren't part of the same document, which will include the presribed terms, meaning the agreement is irredeemably unenforceable. (As it doesn't contain the prescribed terms) If they can show that, the agreement will be enforceable. The only way to know is to get them to confirm in writing whether these 2 are part of the same document/agreement. From what I've seen, it's unlikely this will be confirmed in writing. If that is the case, the only way to force their hand is to take proactive Court action to have the rights and obligations of the parties to the agreement declared by the Court, in that you can make an application, requesting the agreement to be declared unenforceable because of it's unlawful construction under the CCA, under s.142 CCA 1974. The problem with doing that is that they **may** turn up with the agreement and the Judge determines it is part of the same document/agreement and enforces the debt. That could result in costs being added to the debt and having the whole lot enforced against you. From experience on here (I don't have this issue with this company, but many others have, if you care to read the other threads on the forum) it seems very unlikely this would be the case, however. It would be worth reading the threads of others in the same position, though, as this company doesn't give up easily without putting up a formidable defence - only a claimant with sufficient experience and knowledge, with the support of CAG, would find themselves unpertubed by it all, IMHO.
  35. 1 point
    The interviews don't have a set time. They average about half an hour but have been known to go on for an hour or more. Most likely as you have nothing to worry about yours will be nearer half an hour.
  36. 1 point
    Hi vixta, been doing a bit of research into the cancellation rights aspect of your agreement. It would appear that the placement of the Right to Cancel within the agreement is of no consequence, but this could also turn on whether what you have been provided with, is indeed a true copy of the reverse of your agreement. These are the sections of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 that deal with cancellation rights: The only possibility of making it unenforceable because of the cancellation rights is did you receive a copy of the cancellation rights after the agreement was executed? If not, you could go for unenforceability under Section 127(4). Did you see my earlier post concerning the Default Notice?
×
×
  • Create New...