Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/02/10 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    No problem! I think Carlisle might be slightly north and east, but they do cover most of Cumbria TBH. Certainly cover the likes of Kendal, Cockermouth, Whitehaven and Aspatria. If they cant help, they almost certainly can point you in the right direction. If you have no joy with them PM me - as I work in the sector I may be able to find something out for you with regards who covers Carlisle specifically.
  2. 1 point
    Sent you a PM to look through. It is my defence.
  3. 1 point
    Welcome financial services Compliance Department Ruddington fields business park Ruddington Nottingham NG11 6NZ 07/02/2010 My Ref: PPICLA1 ACCOUNT NUMBER 3333333 Re: Complaint and request for return of Payment Protection Insurance premium and contractual interest. On the 00/11/2006I took out a secured loan with yourselves to the value of 8000 with total insurances of £2,856.72. When I took out the above loans, I signed for Payment Protection Insurance [PPI]. At the time I was experiencing some short term financial difficulties and I was told that I could not have the loans unless I agreed to take the insurance, furthermore if I was to attempt a claim it would be refused due to my clinically diagnosed anxiety disorder, which I have been taking regular medication for the past 9 years, this was mentioned at the time but the insurance was still forced on me with the understanding that I would not get the loan without it due to me being high risk, I am now shocked to learn the true motive was not in my interest but to gain a commision. I can confirm no claim was ever made under these policies. I now realize following the recent OFT and FSA investigations, that you miss-sold me these insurance policies, which I did not want and did not need. I believe I signed up for the insurance under economic duress and that your actions were unconscionable. I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I chose your financial organisation. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law. No attempt was made to ascertain if the product provided was fit for purpose, suitable for my needs or if indeed if I really needed it at all. No inquiry was made as whether I had pre-existing insurance for accident, illness or unemployment. I was not given a copy of the insurance policy nor were any rights to cancel explained. I believe you manifestly failed in your fiduciary responsibilities, your duty of care. Unless you can satisfactorily justify to me that the policy was fair and reasonable I am requesting a full refund of all premiums, and subsequent interest on these payments, that I have paid to date. As I believe I have been deprived of this money I also expect 8% statutory interest, the amount a court would award, to be added to each payment made. I look forward to a full and prompt response to this letter and for the matter to be concluded within 28 days or I shall be contacting the Financial Ombudsman to investigate my complaint. Yours faithfully, I know we have the exact figures of what you are due back and we could show off with these lol. . . at this stage I want to see what they offer and on the point of an offer or the next letter we will add the figures .
  4. 1 point
    go to the magistrate court that issued the enforcement tomorrow and tell them you want to make a formal complaint against the bailiff make them fully aware that you had to call the police and that you have taped most of the conversation as you were shocked that a bailiff could act in this manor when employed by a magistrate court ask for the name of the court manager send your complaint to him/her include the complaint letter you send to marstons i believe marstons have an agreement with the courts to accept payments over a 6 moth period while your there ask them for a copy of there fees for enforcement and there complaint procedure send a formal complaint to marstons include the complaint letter you send to the court and ask for a breakdown of there charges and a copy of there complaint procedure send everything recorded delivery and well done for getting it on tape
  5. 1 point
    Hi Yeats Sorry, should have said I meant supasnooper on the site team. Try the red triangle to give your thread a little bump to the mods and hopefully Snoops or one of the others will take a look when they get the opportunity. Reading your posts again its almost as if the DJ is pointing you to CPR and taking a firm position for strike out but waiting to see if you make the right move within your defence. Gez
  6. 1 point
    It can be risky if you loose. There will be mega costs involved if the other side defends. They register defaults because there has been a default. Whether that is just or not, is a whole topic by itself. If there was no Default and they registered one, then there would be a perfect case to get it removed without risk. An agreement being unenforcable, does not mean that there was not a relationship and that a debt did not exist, it just means that the OC cannot use the court system to force you to pay, unless money was not borrowed, then that again is another matter. The creditor can register the default and can update that default until it drops off of your credit file after 6 years. They cannot register multi defaults for the same debt.
  7. 1 point
    I would endorse the comments above about getting some good legal advice. The major issues are - 1. The CCJ which you were not made aware of. 2. The interim charging order which prevents you disposing of your property until it is either dropped or made final. 3. Whether by coincidence or by design an unsecured debt is being converted into a secured one. And this is happening just prior to a petition for your bankruptcy - which means primie facie that it won't be included in your bankruptcy [if the petition is successful and there is no evidence to suppose it won't be]. You have been caught in a particularly nasty trap I'm afraid. Which is why you need some good legal advice. You should mention the interim charging order in some detail to the judge at your bankruptcy hearing and ask for a ruling on whether it can be included.
  8. 1 point
    I did the letter from spec...feel free to add anything. Ok hope that helps Keep us posted on how you get on.
  9. 1 point
    ok questions time. 1. give me the judgement figure on the original ccj that you had to pay £10PCM for 2.have you always been paying to the OC and NO-ONE else? 3.give me the name on the judgement to whom you had to pay 4. in post 7 you mention the joining of two A/C's, pardom my understanding, but i take it this DID NOT happen, butthe judge order you to continue £10PCM? what date was this? general bits: NEVER EVER talk to a DCA on the phone, demand every thing in writing & NEVER EVER call them yourself. the DCA CANNOT use a CCJ taken out by an OC against you, they must BE NAMED on the judgement, it's binding legalities ARE NOT transfereable to ANYONE bar the co NAMED in the CCJ. you have paid £1920 on this judgement. more tomorrow on answers to above. dx
  10. 1 point
    Hi Fuzzgin, sorry if I'm sounding a little thick! Am I right in drawing the conclusion that you currently receive no benefits? If that is the case then I would have thought an application for ESA would be in order given your health. I think your question is can your current work be classed as permitted work if you apply for ESA? Sorry I don't have the answer for that but wanted to clarify so others might. You should have received a leaflet and info about permitted work if you have requested it. I think it is geared up more towards someone already on ESA who is then trying to do some work as a means to eventually reducing benefits. Rae.
  11. 1 point
    I will come back with further advice but in the meantime it's VERY VERY important that you establish if she was. is or was ever entitled to any other benefits which she failed to claim All too often people are accused & in to many cases found guilty of benefit fraud when in fact there has been no loss to the public purse because the accused has failed to claim other benefits to which they had been entitled sums which may even exceed the amount claimed to have been defrauded. AND if there is no loss to the public purse their is NO benefit fraud The disgraceful thing is that the DWP are fully aware of this (having lost just such a case in the HC) yet continue to pursue claimants who's only mistake is to claim the WRONG benefits & are not benefits cheats as claimed
  12. 1 point
    Hi Pipster Only just found this thread. If I was in your position I would do one of two things either nothing at all or write back to Restons 'without prejudice save as to costs'. I would say that they are obviously aware that the DN is defective and does not allow the required number of days for remedy and this fact alone will be a strong defence. If they are prepared to offer to withdraw before the hearing on friday and they suggest that each side pays their own costs you will consider the offer. Failing that you will meet them in court. Get some other opinions and then decide. I have had a quick catch up on the thread so excuse me if I point something out which has already been covered, but I have noticed a few items which I think are weak. The one point is that in section 24 of your defence you refer to CPR 6.26 regarding service of documents, but if you read it carefully it means that the DN would be deemed as delivered on Monday 20th which makes the DN correct. You refer back to section 22 which you then quite rightly state the Interpretation Act and this makes the delivery date Tuesday 21st and therefore defective. The DN was delivered before proceedings commenced so the CPR rules did not apply and the Interpretation Act is the correct and overiding Act to deal with DN's. If Restons try and trip you up on this be prepared and point out that the IA is the overiding act. In section 25 you state that the 14 days would end on Wed 5th and it should be Tues 4th. I would not worry too much about this but make sure that you understand before the day how to work it out. I will help you. I could not see if you still had the envelope and how it was delivered 1st, 2nd or UK mail. I notice that on several ocassion you refer to Notice of Assignment & Law of Property ACT but I do not believe that it has been assigned so it is not relevant. If I am right do not push this point and if they try to, do not debate it just accept it and say I have established that now thank you. I also notice that you seem to be concerned about the lack of information from the SAR and by all means point out that out if useful. However, I think you have recieved all the information you need. A defective DN and an application from with no prescribed terms. On this last point they will try and say that the prescribed terms were attached or overleaf. How will you handle that. They sent you a copy of an application form with a blank back which might be what you think you signed. But it is not for you to prove what was on the back or attached so do not let them bully you into guessing. The onus is on them to prove that what you signed contained the prescribed terms and from what I have seen so far they have not proven it to me. As I first said, if these points have already been covered then just ignore me. Pedross
  13. 1 point
    Now she knows the error which she has made, she should inform them of her change of income without delay; this will work in her favour. The size of the penalty would depend on a variety of factors: how long she has been claiming while earning in excess, how much benefit she has received that she was not entitled to, whether they feel she has deliberately defrauded the benefits system or it was a genuine error, and if she did deliberately defraud whether the motivation was out of desperation and need or whether it was out of greed. These are all things they take into consideration. An IUC is not always the scary thing it is made out to be. She doesn't have to go to the IUC, she are not obligated to go. However this will not stop their investigation. I always say to people to go, see what it is about, and if you want to seek further advise once you know what it is about, then you simply tell them you want to leave and seek advice from your solicitor/welfare rights officer/other third party. You can leave the IUC any time you wish. Whether you go or not is your decision, it isn't one anyone can make for you. You can take someone with you. You can take a solicitor or you can take an advisor such as a Welfare Rights Officer, CAB worker etc (you can find these people through your local council, it is a free service and it is not in any manner associated with the departments which pay your benefit or investigate benefit fraud). You can also take a friend or family member with you, so long as they are not part of the investigation. Anyone who is not in an official capacity (family friend for example) cannot speak for you or ask questions or guide you in your answers, they can only provide moral support, or they will be asked to leave. Things to take with you: Bank statements of all accounts you have Tax Credit Award notice Childcare contract/receipts for childcare Rent agreement Council Tax Bill Payslips Employment contract Anything else related to your finances or related to your communication with them about your benefit (letters from them to you, or copies of letters you have sent to them, if you have them) You do not have to take these with you. However it will show the investigating officers that you are as keen to get this sorted as they are, and that you are not trying to hide anything. They may have accessed this information already, but not always. If you have them with you, they can eliminate other possibilities if they haven't yet accessed that information. In an IUC, it is taped. You are entitled to a copy of that tape upon request. The copy they will keep for their records will be placed in a sealed bag, which you will witness. They are not allowed to intimidate you - and they wouldn't be so daft to as it is on tape. Some of the questions may seem accusotory or uncomfortable, but they are there to get to the bottom of things. The people who conduct the interview will begin by explaining how the interview will go - they will advise that you are under caution, advise you of your right to remain silent, ect and advise you that the interview will be recorded. They may show you a copy of the form you completed when you applied for benefit, and ask if you understand the conditions of your claim (the need to report a change of circumstances, increase in income etc). They will ask if you have anything you wish to declare that is not on your form. They will tell you what they suspect you are doing that is fraudulent, and they will invite you to respond to this. You may be shown evidence they have gathered in the course of their investigation and be asked if you wish to explain it. Remember, evidence is not always cut and dry. If they show you something which is completely innocent but looks damning, say so. Don't be afraid to speak up. Tell them - explain. This is your opportunity to tell them your side. You must always remember also that you are not obliged to say anything. You can stay silent, as is your right. You can also request a break if you are finding it uncomfortable and you also have the right to leave at any time. If you feel nervous, your mouth can go very dry - ask for a glass of water if this happens, and they will accomodate this. They are not allowed to intimidate you in any way, and the interview is recorded, but only an auditory recording, so if the officers do anything that makes you feel uncomfortable for example: lean over you, speak up for the purpose of the tape. "Could you please step back a bit, I don't feel comfortable when you stand over me like that" they are unlikely to ask why it makes you uncomfortable but if they do, "Because you are a perfect stranger and I feel uncomfortable with you being this close to me" - that way it is recorded on the tape that although they said nothing intimidating, their body language made you uncomfortable. Please don't let this frighten you - it is unlikely they would stand over you, and if they did they probably would not realise they were making you uncomfortable - I am simply making you aware that you can speak up in the event that you do feel uncomfortable. The best thing to do is for her to contact carers allowance, explain that she has realised her error. They will implement the change. Then when the IUC begins, she can tell them she has realised her mistake. This will work in her favour. She will definately have to pay back the money she was not entitled to; this is a given. They may impose a penalty on top of that or they may not. The penalty like I said can vary, and yes prison is one penalty but for this to happen it would need to be proven in court. In cases of genuine error where not much harm has been done it is usually an admin (financial) penalty and in some cases no penalty and it becomes an overpayment recovery case rather than a fraud case.
  14. 1 point
    CCJ's are not appropriate for CCA request since they have been dealt with by a court. All other unsecured debts, send CCA request with £1 postal order by recorded delivery. 12 + 2 working days for delivery, the a/c's can be put into dispute if the CCA has not been sent. If you do get any documents sent you can post them up for checking by other forum members. If payment is due in the meantime, the recommendation is to make that payment but ultimately this is your decision. Hope that helps.
  • Create New...