Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Penfold92 last won the day on January 17 2008

Penfold92 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

472 Excellent

About Penfold92

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder
  1. Well after a long absence decided to come and see if anything new has been happening on the "stay" front? Any new angles of attack and if not what are the dates we are waiting on now? Last I remember the OFT were going down a different route, but I kind of got lost in other things and forgot about the case completely. Hope all the oldies are good and still around?
  2. Well it has been a long long time since I have been on here... So has there been any movement on the stays being lifted or any new angle since 2008? I have not heard a peek from the Court or DG and am wondering if my case is even still in the Courts... Any ideas anyone?
  3. Thanks for that, but the fact I was not told on sign up and it is not in their terms is surely "unfair"? Also what review of credit industry are you referring to? Thanks, Penfold
  4. Hi guys, I have had a Vanquis card for about a year now and generally pay the balance off every month. Recently I have noticed that they are charging me cash interest every month. When I called them up they said that even though I have paid the balances every month I have new transactions added and unless there is no balance for two months in a row the interst will continue... Can someone please tell me how this is allowed and how this is surely an unfair term? In fact I cannot even find this in their terms and conditions... Any advice would be appreciated, Penfold
  5. Thanks for that, not sure I can make a counter claim as the case is closed as far as the Court is concerned so yes will continue paying and claim seperately I guess...
  6. Ok, well was small claims Court and the Judge agreed that they had probably breached the DPA, BUT because I had not mentioned DPA in my POC's he could not takt that into account. I now have ICO letter confirming breach was probable and in particular the sixth principle. So if I had that letter and DPA was mentioned in my POC's I probably would not have been lumbered with charges at the worst...
  7. It will not get to Court...(IMHO) they are trying to find ways to make you accept a lower figure... Ask yourself will they win even if only 6 years? and stick to your guns... Good luck, Penfold
  8. Hi, I don't know if anyone can answer this, but hoping maybe one of our law students or experienced battlers may be able to help... I lost a case and was asked to pay Court Costs to the defendant. New information has now come up, but the new information cannot be related to my original POC's... Does this mean: a) I need to continue paying and take seperate Court action b) Can challenge them on this new info and stop paying and ask for my money back that I have paid so far c) Makes no odds to anything Thanks, Penfold
  9. I agree, although the DPA compensation does allow for "proveable damages" and I'd say being ordered to pay court costs is pretty provable wouldn't you? We'll see, but I do agree that they need to be held accountable, however, petty they feel the case may be. A SAR is a Legal request and they chose to ignore it and then supply extra personal info in witness docs that I never saw before...Would love to hear the Judge's view on that! Can I request the same judge that I had before? He saw my point and realised that NW got away with it all by my missing out the breach of DPA on my claim form.
  10. Well many many months on I have finally had my reply from the ICO and they state in their email to me that: "As I understand it, you are concerned that you made a subject access request on 29 March 2007 to NatWest but without a fee. They responded on 3 April and informed you they decided to waiver the fee on this occasion. However, you did not receive any information within 40 days. You then made another request with the fee on 19 July 2007. You received some information in July 2007 and then again in January 2008. After taking NatWest to court you learned they had more information about
  11. Woolwich settled my claim a few days before Court hearing, so I would not expect to hear anything from them before that stage. Good luck, Penfold
  12. they settled prior to getting to the hearing date
  13. Well I have written to them, but in the end will prob agree with you on this one.
  14. Should add damage was front bumper ripped off from front right corner, no side damage whatsoever to our car, third party front left and ALL down the side...So think physics now guys and girls...if our car hit them then momentum would suggest our car (being smaller and lighter) would turn and we would then hit side on side....If bigger car hit front right and their momentum is stronger (which it would be) they would continue through and rip the front bumper off and have side damage...
  15. Ok I will try to explain... Wife left work and approached roundabout, left lane goes left and straight, but as is also main road to M1 was backed up and stationary. Middle lane goes straight and wife in that lane going straight. Right lane goes right and thrid party in that lane. Wife in a Clio and third party Lexus 4X4. Wife exits and goes straight Right lane also does and then cuts in front and takes the front right corner of car out and continues going straight and comes to a stop after dragging our car along with it in the straight exit. So firstly, we never accepted any lia
  • Create New...