Hi all Since most people using CAG (including me) have got themselves for whatever reason into a spot of bother I do wonder why there are so many posts where people seem to worry endlessly over their "Credit Rating" listed by Experian etc. I would advise anybody to think VERY SERIOUSLY why they need credit - especially if they have had any trouble in the past with any type of debt. With ordinary Bank Cards (Debit cards) you don't need to carry large amounts of cash on you and these cards can be used in all cases where a Credit card can be used such as making online travel reservations / purchases etc etc. It doesn't take too

Hi Guys, Ok this is what Martin Lewis's website is stating as the reason why there is a chance you may be able to reclaim charges as a result of the Supreme Court ruling last November. Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 (UTCCR) The chief judge of the Supreme Court thought it important enough to say this ruling didn't stop people challenging fairness under 'Regulation 5' of the Unfair terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (which the Supreme Court cases did not cover) – we believe this was a deliberate hint to look at this option. Here's what Regulation 5 actually says: 5. – (1) A

hahahaha you do make me laugh that poor kipper lol you are most welcome as for what you have been doing ive no idea but you are now a photosucket genius just like me both the image and the link to all images works for me ive even logged out and come back on to check the world is now officially your oyster - or at least anything concerning photosucket haha

It is sometimes difficult to judge the timing of pronouncements by the OFT and therefore their significance in regard to the latest two cases. But I wonder if they are concerned that in Mcguffin v RBS the judge took the matters of what enforcement means so far from what the OFT [ and us] thought, that they felt they had to remind the financial institutions of the dangers they run should they not follow the OFT gudance. [i am thinking that the Court appears to give creditors a green light to issue default Notices and threaten legal action ]. It seems awfully easy to hoodwink these Judges. In the McGuffick case the Judge agrees with the

Consumer Credit - European Directive - BIS

Below is a complete defence produced for a dodgy default notice. It has all the postal regulations and the reasons this is a legal requirement prior to taking further action. Did you after this "imagninary" default notice, receive a termination notice and Letter before Action ? A default notice needs to show the amount of arears, a specific date not less than 14 days AFTER service to remedy the breach and the breach incurred. If they decide to "recreate" such a document then they should be able to provide a computer log record backing up the production of the original. That log however will not show the amount of days allow

YB, sorry to be so unyieldingly THICK, but whilst I do understand the 'not individually negotiated' aspect of the argument, the above has lost me a bit. Mind you I'm still trying to download the relevant bits of UTCCR,CCA et al...

See...the bankers do not pay tax...and if the government dares to tax them, they just say, OK, we're moving out. Bonus Tax May Drive Financial Firms Out of the U.K., BBA Says - BusinessWeek Yes please, do move out. We don't need the securitisation industry or your Credit Default Swap industry, we were doing very well without them but now the whole country is bankrupt. Angela warns, it would be the "height of irresponsibility" to loose the banking industry, I say, it was the height of irresponsibility to have them in the first place! She laments the loss of our other industries, but doesn't say to the government, spend the money o

Irrespective of what anyone says or thinks, the regulation as they stand say: Section 61(1)(a) prescribes that a regulated agreement is not properly executed unless a document in the prescribed form containing all the prescribed terms is signed by the debtor and the creditor or hirer. So signature or no signature on a supplied copy, without it there is no agreement. There will be further coming out on this at some time: We are currently looking into the issue of copies of documents to be given under the Act and the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983. We will issue further guida

NEVER sign a letter always print and always send anything to them recorded delivery so you have proof it was received Send to compliance department at welcome financial services ruddington fields business park ruddington nottingham ng11 6nz they have 14 days to send you the cca and 40 days for the sar (although my sar was much quicker) hope that helps

Im in.

Now let me see. What day is it? Ah yes thats £237. Im cold, thats £100. I guess i had better send a letter. £ 200. Pretend van £ 200. Phone call £ 99 Lets see 237.00 100.00 200.00 200.00 99.00 Total £ 836.00. Damn, i dont like that figure. Lets make it £ 1,000 just for the fun of it. They are **** people. Dont pay them a penny.

It has also been revealed today that Cabot gave me the wrong "last payment/acknowledgement" date. They claimed it was 23/11/2003... but Barclaycard revealed it was 11/03/2003. This means when I was contacted at the start of March by Cabot it was a last ditch fishing exercise to see if they could "extort" the money out of me. I queried the entire debt and they changed the last payment date to make it seem like they could collect the debt without being in breach of the Limitations Act. Double whammy dealt to Cabot... all with amazing assistance from the OC, Barclaycard.