Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by banker_rhymes_with

  1. The removal of the Edit Button is by far the worst move. The rest is just window dressing. Cheers, BRW
  2. I have to disagree...it's not awful...it's REALLY awful! Where's the Edit Button gone? Which bright spark elected to make that disappear after a few moments, never to return thereafter? Cheers, BRW
  3. The upgrade is awful...everything is harder to read, harder to find and the Site is now even harder to navigate. Plus, I cannot Edit any of my Posts (the Edit Button disappears after a short while, never to return). If this is badly written, I apologise. Normally I'd come back and tweak my Posts until they were better to read and easier to understand. Bring back the Edit Button, and bring it back now! Cheers, BRW
  4. Hello Philip43! Yes, they would indeed. They have a Duty of Care to ensure any Controlled Waste they are responsible for is handled appropriately. Thus, they will, or ought to, ensure that the damaged Vehicles awaiting Categorisation are held at a suitable location authorised to store Vehicles and also handle Controlled Waste if such is effectively created when a Category A or B rating is applied. However, and this is key, they are in the clear if they take all reasonable steps. When the Breaker or ATF takes over the ruin, provided it is handed over via a Waste Transfer Note, and the agent collecting or delivering it is duly authorised to handle Controlled Waste, then the Insurance Company is totally blameless once the ruin has been handed over following the correct procedure. The Duty of Care issue has been satisfied, and the on-going responsibility then passes to the Breaker. The Breaker then has a Duty of Care to ensure the Controlled Waste is handled appropriately, and he/she will fail in that duty if they flog it to a punter for a Wad of Tenners to make a quick profit! No, not really. They are in the clear provided the Controlled Waste was sold via a Waste Transfer Note to the Breaker, and the Breaker had the necessary EPA Certification. The Insurance Company can wash its hands of the matter at that point, having covered its backside. Again, take care, because the Insurance Company won't like being accused of doing wrong, especially if it has all of the paperwork to confirm that it acted appropriately and within the Law. The group most likely to be in the poop, will be the Breaker. That appears to be the stage where the Duty of Care issue started to go out of the window. That, I regret, is not really relevant. If the machine was declared a Category B for a valid reason in, say, 2006, then I doubt you will get that changed. For example, if the Engineer did check for poop/sewerage contamination, and did find the levels were above the safety threshold. If such a report exists, then the Vehicle will stay Category B, and will remain classified as Controlled Waste. Yes, that is your main hope. Hence why I say go to VOSA first, and see if they can provide a letter to state that they have it recorded as being a Category C and needing a VIC. That might just be enough to get the Insurance Company to check again...but, as I say, if they do check and find that their Engineer did correctly assess it as being Category B, then it's also possible that VOSA will be asked to update their own system and change it to B from C. Finally, it would be worth checking the HPI details, to make sure there are not two Categorisations. Many cars are damaged twice, so you need to establish just how many times, and when, this Vehicle has been Categorised. It is not unheard of for a vehicle to be Categorised D a few years ago, and then C a little later. But once Categorised as B, then that should be it, because alarm bells will go off if that one reappears on another Claim. That was why the Register was set up in the first place...to stop Insurance Companies from paying out on the same Claim twice. They will know that Category B is bad news, so there should be no valid reason why a Category B would re-appear later subject to a further Claim...they will almost certainly instruct a loss adjuster to investigate to check for a potential fraud. I'm sorry to say that Category B ruins really are off the scale, so you are going to have some problems getting that one back on the road. Not impossible, but it will be an uphill battle unless someone spots there was indeed a simple typo. Another plan could be to just go with the flow. If VOSA say it needs a VIC, then book it in for a VIC! If it passes, then trot off to DVLA and submit a V62 to get a new V5C Registration Document. Then sit back and pray. If a nice new V5C appears a week or so later, then you are in business. The main complication could be Insurance, if they spot Category B. At that stage you can just say it is a typo and the vehicle now has passed a VIC and has a new V5C. Thereafter, use it and drive it, but do keep in mind that selling it could be a problem, because the value will be low given the Category B marker. The absolute key is the machine should safe. Forget the above if there is any doubt about that. Just cut your losses and put this one down to experience...a breaker will pay you something for it, and probably a lot more than the Scrap Weight of maybe £130 a ton. If it has lots of nice Parts, then you may be able to negotiate a higher figure. Another option there is to do a deal with the Breaker to receive back the key Parts, and put them towards a similar Car that needs repair. That way you avoid any EPA snags, and can sleep at night knowing you took effective action once the issues were known. Best of luck! Cheers, BRW
  5. Hello Philip43! The danger is, if the Car is a Category B, then it is Controlled Waste until recategorised. This means that if the Environmental Secret Police get wind of this, then they will bang on your door, fine you for failing in your Duty of Care, demand the Waste is taken away by a suitably qualified Waste Carrier, then they will hang you up by your goolies until you tell them exactly who sold it to you... ...then they will bang on his door and fine him for failing in his Duty of Care, then they'll hang him up by his nipples until he tells them exactly who sold it to him... ...then they will bang on their door and, if a Breaker, will demand to see the Waste Transfer Note relating to the sale and hand-over of the Controlled Waste. When the breaker gets a sweat on because he knows he never issued one, then they will fine the Breaker senseless, because he failed in his Duty of Care to make sure the Controlled Waste was handled appropriately and only passed on to a suitable agent. Breaker or ATF, will probably be one and the same thing. So, tread carefully. I regret they won't listen to arguments, if it's Category B, then it's Controlled Waste, and you should not have it. So... OK, this is all paperwork, so it's quite possible that the Category B was a typing mistake. The fact that it is logged by VOSA as needing a VIC suggests it cannot be a Category B as far as they are concerned. It can only be a Category C on their system, because Category A and B are not vehicles but Controlled Waste so would never be marked down as needing a VIC, and Category D does not need a VIC. I'd start with VOSA, and see if they can help clarify what they know. Preferably get a letter from them confirming it's a Category C as far as they are concerned. Then take that information to the Insurance Company, and explain there must have been a typo, otherwise how else could VOSA have it logged as needing a VIC? What ever you do, it may not be the best plan to ask the Environmental people for an opinion! That's unless you like Prison food and having no money to leave to your children! I've only heard of it carried out by Salvage/Breakers who ended up with a Category B, that they found was far too good to be so Categorised, and managed to get the Insurance Company to liaise with their Engineer to reconsider and/or re-inspect and/or correct a Typo. I can't say I have heard of anyone not otherwise being in the business managing this, but that does not mean it cannot be done. Your best hope would be a typing mistake when the Category was first entered, provided there is other evidence to support that. But, as I say, do not lose sight of the fact that a shed load of onerous Legislation has been ignored, and that Act has some serious teeth. Cheers, BRW
  6. Hello Philip43! If you can take a look at my Post #14 above, the real spanner in this is not the ABI code, but the Environmental Protection Act 1991 (EPA) and the Duty of Care that imposes. So, take great care. The fines for handling Controlled Waste are onerous, not just for you, but for everyone in the chain. The person who sold it to you needed to have suitable EPA Certification just to handle and store the Controlled Waste - which is what Category A and B Cars become once an Insurance Engineer has declared the damage or contamination to be so great that repairs are neither safe nor cost effective. The Car ceases to be a Car, and becomes Controlled Waste at that point. So, technically, you have not actually bought a Car, but a collection of Controlled Waste all bolted together! To get it re-classified, you are, in effect, trying to get Controlled Waste turned back into a Car! It can be done, in some circumstances, but do read on... When the Category B Vehicle was handed over to you, the vendor had a Duty of Care to ensure he/she was passing the Controlled Waste over to someone who also possessed the necessary EPA Certification. To ensure compliance and to avoid a FAT FINE, a Waste Transfer Note should be issued, logged by the Vendor in keeping with their EPA Licence, and also logged by you, in keeping with your EPA Licence... ...er, but you don't have one of those, do you? ! Danger Will Robinson! If you then move the Controlled Waste, then you need a Waste Carriers Licence too... ...er, but you don't have one of those either, do you? ! Danger Will Robinson x2! You may see the fines building up? And they can be huge, really eye watering. However, the good news is that I am aware that some Cat B Vehicles are sometimes re-Categorised to C/D, and it's nearly always Flood Damaged examples where the original Cat B Categorisation was too harsh. The acid test is often contamination, such as sewerage. The Engineer has a gizmo that he/she can stick into, say, the seat padding, to read the level of poop contamination. If it's above a certain level measured on some scale of micro-poops, then it's unsafe for further use. There is no getting around that if so. However, if it was fresh water, then it may well have been safe to declare it a C/D, but the Engineer didn't bother to check for poop... ...although the hidden issues can be onerous: ECU and Relay problems, water in Engine and Gearbox etc. The problems may take a while to appear. Remember that you cannot compress a liquid, so if any water got into the bores and the engine was still running, or someone tried to start the engine when still Water Flooded, then then the effect can be catastrophic. The Engine goes - what is referred to as - Hydraulic, and can damage and bend Con Rods and cause major mechanical stress. If the engine is lumpy, beware...that sort of thing can even blow a Con Rod out of the side of the Engine Block depending on the stress caused. It's best to get to the Car as soon as possible after the Flood, to see the extent of the damage. Is the Air Filter wet for example, suggesting Water was sucked up the inlet plumbing? Is it wet on both sides or just the Air side rather than the Engine side etc. If all of this happened in 2006, such tell-tales will be long dried up and gone. Watch out also for smells, because Carpets are usually rubber backed, and that tends to trap water between Carpet and Floor Pan. The only way to get that out is to strip out the whole lower interior, and all Carpets, allow to dry 100% before re-fitting...otherwise the Car can start to smell like a bog after a while! So, yes, it can be done, but watch out for the EPA Fines. Indeed, I think imprisonment is an option, so the EPA Duty of Care aspect is the main issue. Get on the wrong side of that, and you are in a world of financial hurt. What has it been doing between 2006 and 2010? Remember that Cars do not like to sit around, things tend to seize up...brakes and clutch mechanisms for example. Finally, hmeah asked this: Sadly, Category D does not mean Stolen Recovered or easy repair, so this could be a story. Category D just means that the Cost of Repair did not exceed the Pre-Accident Value. A 2010 Ferrari wrapped around a Tree could be D if the £75,000 Repairs are less than the £110,000 value. Likewise, a 1995 VW Golf MK3 may be C if the stolen alloy wheels and tyres cost £450 to replace when the Car's value was £440. To remind you: ================ CONTROLLED WASTE: Cat A - CRUSH Cat B - Dismantle ================ Repairable Vehicles: Cat C - Repair (Repair Cost > Pre-Accident Value) Cat D - Repair (Repair Cost ================ Cat-Invisible - Insurance Repaired Cars! ================ Cars that are stolen and recovered without damage are not usually recorded, so a Category D rating may suggest some damage, say, wing mirrors knocked off, or broken glass or worse. However, there are many Cars stolen and recovered intact, because many are stolen with the Keys. That's because thieves now tend to break-in to houses to get the Keys because Cars are getting much harder to Hot Wire these days...it's altogether easier for a thief to steal the Keys first! Some are not recovered for a while, by which time the Insurance Company has paid out, so it's theirs to Sell On in effect. Just take care, and preferably take someone who is familiar with Cars and/or get an inspection by the AA/RAC or a qualified Motor Engineer. There should be many in the Yellow Pages for example, who may not charge that much to inspect the Car for you. There's not much you can ask for. The Dealer will not have any idea of what really happened, unless he/she bought it direct and was the first to handle it post Insurance Sale. Indeed, you could ask how he/she knows if it was Stolen/Recovered and what, if any, the damage was? That could be interesting! The Dealer may have taken an educated guess, i.e. he/she ran an HPI Check, which may have shown Category D on 01/06/2010, and a Theft Marker not yet cleared down dated 20/05/2010. It would be reasonable to think that it was Stolen, then Recovered, then offered for Sale. But it's a bit quick, so why was it offered for sale so soon? Likewise, if the dates were 01/06/2009 and 20/05/2009 respectively, then what happened to it between June 2009 and July 2010? It may be an idea to obtain your own HPI Check to see what it says. That might well be the lowest cost gross error check, assuming the Car is otherwise worth buying from what you have seen so far. It could be a bargain, or it could be a Dealer using the old Stolen/Recovered story to hide a Category D that was actually Damaged/Repaired and not Stolen/Recovered. Category D usually means some Repairs were needed, whereas a straight Stolen/Recovered with no damage will usually not need to be recorded and can just be sold. These are informally called Category X, meaning no actual Category. So, if it has a Category D, you need to establish why. There are bargains to be had, but get the thing checked out via an inspection if in any doubt. Same goes for most used Cars if you do not feel that you are experienced enough to be sure you can check it out yourself. I hope this helps. Cheers, BRW
  7. Hello Jamesx81x! The fact that they have Terminated is good, because that should cut them off from being able to re-issue a valid s87(1) Default Notice. I regret the best way from here is to point you at some reading: This Court case is the leading one at the moment when it comes to Default Notices: Woodchester v Swayne & Co [1998] EWCA Civ 1209 (14 July 1998.) Then these CAG Threads: Anatomy of a Default Notice Deminimis - Default Notices - Discussion The first Thread above links out to other Threads and Posts, so no need for me to re-list them here, I'm sure you will find them. However, one Thread that is always worth stating in any event, is this one: A Tale of a Dodgy DN The key is for you to get your head around the issue, because it will be you who has to write the letters that might just avoid Court or, if that fails, it will be you standing up in Court explaining the issue to a Judge...who may not be very sympathetic and/or may not have a clue what a s87 Default Notice is. It will be time well spent. Then come back and see if you need more help! Cheers, BRW
  8. Hello Hushpuppy! E-X-C-E-L-L-E-N-T! But keep at this all the way, keep reading, and keep sharp. Don't let them slither out of this. Have you read up on Costs? i.e. to put in your own Costs for all of the work done. Cheers, BRW
  9. Hello Folks! I urge everyone to stay on CAG. Stick with it. This Lowell issue is a monumental own goal, but if we break up, the Debt Industry wins. They get what they wanted. However much we disagree with this, and boy do I disagree with this, it's far better we stick with CAG and thrash this out here. Cheers, BRW
  10. Letting DCAs onto CAG = Face Plant! Cheers, BRW
  11. Just seen this Thread. DCAs have absolutely no place on CAG in any shape or form. To say I'm disappointed is an understatement. CAG is sleep walking to disaster. Cheers, BRW
  12. Hello Mrblonde! Welcome to CAG. I think the price of Gold is a fairly good indicator that many people think inflation is coming, and it will shoot up when it starts to rise (and with it Base Rates). I think many will also agree that inflation has started to rise, but we are being spoon fed manipulated figures to try and keep a lid on it. Hands up all those who feel that most things are rising in price and/or you are getting less for your money? Fuel? Food? Basic Services? A few things have been kept down, and/or have been propped up to stop their prices shooting through the floor such as, for example, Cars. I think inflation will come back, and it will be a big problem. Indeed, the main concern I think is Stagflation, i.e. inflation in a stagnant economy. The banks are hiding a lot of the bailout money. The money has disappeared. Very little has appeared to help the economies affected (that'll be most of them then). This is because bankers at the top of the food chain, i.e. the Central banks, will have made another fortune or three, but the rest of us have seen almost nothing of the trillions pumped in to save the banks. However, at some stage, the bankers hoarding the bailout funds will be keen to start spending it. I think they are just holding back until the time is right, i.e. we are all flat on our backs panting for breath... ...then it'll be a fat banker waddle race to mop up our assets while they are still at knock-down prices, before the impact of this spending starts to kick start the inevitable inflation that will follow. Turnip Land If you can imagine an economy that makes only 100 Turnips per annum, that has just £100 of cash in its economy, then it would be no surprise that each Turnip is priced at £1 each. Turnips = £1 Then mix in a bank or two that loves to generate Debt to entice people make and buy things the people do not actually need, such as throw away Turnip dusters, and plastic Turnip display stands, and Turnip polish. The banks will encourage these activities, and will help the people of Turnipland by inventing clever financial products to sell to them, such as Turnip Insurance, and Turnip Bonds, and Turnip growers' pensions, and Turnip growers' Mortgages, and the Platinum Turnip Credit Card and...before you know it, the people of Turnipland will be getting further and further into Debt. Turnips = £1.20 each The Money Supply in Turnipland will keep rising as the people of Turnipland borrow more and more Debt into existence, so the price of Turnips will creep up in line with this (because the economy only produces 100 Turnips and yet the Money Supply grows each year forcing up the price of Turnips). Turnips = £1.40 each Soon the people of Turnipland won't bother growing Turnips, they'll be convinced that growing Turnips is a waste of time, they'll import them instead, and concentrate on making and selling top class Turnip dusters, plastic Turnip display stands and Turnip polish! Imported Turnips = 90p each 1st Class Turnip Dusters = 40p each 1st Class Turnip Display Stands = 75p each 1st Class Turnip Polish = 60p a tube Their bankers won't stop them, because by then they will be making more and more money selling fresh air dressed up as Financial Products, and raking in the interest on the growing level of Debt (the money to pay the interest being covered by new Debts that borrow even more money into existence...the Turnipland Money Supply banking balloon starts to pump up). Due to the magic of banking, the people of Turnipland will soon be racing around like busy little bees, convinced they have a thriving economy, and flat out building Enterprise Parks and Retail Parks all over their Turnip fields, so they can make, stock and sell more top class Turnip dusters, plastic Turnip display stands and Turnip polish! Pretty soon they'll not bother making any of that stuff, but will import these items instead (albeit 2nd class products that last 2 weeks only). Imported Water Injected Trans-Fat Turnips = 42p each 2nd Class Turnip Dusters = 30p each 2nd Class Turnip Display Stands = 32p each 2nd Class Turnip Polish = 10p a tube Everyone is instantly better off, because prices have fallen, albeit at the cost of quality. Their bankers won't mind one bit, because by then they'll be going great guns working in tandem with their new banking friends from across the water who will be telling them how easy it is to make even more money by selling things to other bankers (who they've never met) in other lands far away...then betting on the price fluctuations. They can't go wrong, all they can do is get richer, and laugh at the people of Turnipland racing around selling imported Turnips and related Turnip products, and engaged at the lower levels of the banking economy selling Turnipland Financial Products to each other. The bankers in Turnipland will get bolder and more clever, and will build up obscene levels of banking Debts, as they bet on larger and larger portfolios of invisible Turnip Backed Receivables, which they immediately Securitise and then repeat the whole process all over again, and again, and again, and again. Then, one fine day, the bankers over the hill who had been telling the Turnipland bankers what to do, and pretending to bet with them over the price of these clever products that none of the Turnipland bankers understood anyway, will suddenly stop answering the telephone. The Merry-go-Round will suddenly stop. The Imports of Turnips will stop. The Imports of Turnip dusters, and plastic Turnip display stands and Turnip polish will stop. The cash tills in the Retail Parks will stop. Everyone will be looking at each other and wondering what to do. Nobody can remember how to grow Turnips, let alone make the daft products they all now seem to depend upon. Half of the people of Turnipland are now only able to sell Financial Products, the rest can only sell Imported Turnip products. The main thrust of the economy is now banking, which is far more important, of course, because that makes everyone in Turnipland richer and better off. Nobody can afford to buy homes any longer without a huge Turnip bank Mortgage, but they are richer and better off, because the size of their debts confirm this. The only way to pay those debts is via the magic of banking, as any fool can see. What's the solution? Easy, the bankers of Turnipland will simply persuade the Politicians to inject £5,000 into the economy, so they can pay the bankers over the hill £4,800. The remaining £200 pumps up the Turnipland Money Supply to get their stagnant economy rolling again, and the prices start to rise... Imported Water Injected Trans-Fat Turnips = £1.10 each 3rd Class Turnip Dusters = 45p each 3rd Class Turnip Display Stands = 52p each 3rd Class Turnip Polish = 21p a tube The people of Turnipland do not spot that the prices are rising and quality falling, and have not realised that the poor people in other lands do not trust the currency of Turnipland any more, ever since the banks in Turnipland started printing it! But, nothing seems to have helped. Everyone in Turnipland is still short of money despite the £5,000 bailout that the magic of banking has allowed them to borrow into existence, and injected into their banks to save themselves with. They find it hard to pay the new Turnip bank Bailout Taxes, and even harder to cover the rising cost of Imported Water Injected Trans-Fat Turnips, 3rd Class Turnip products and the now essential Financial Products of their ultimate saviours, the Turnip banks. Nobody likes the taste of the new cheaper Water Injected Trans-Fat Imported Turnips, and everyone has lost interest in polishing them and dusting them, and placing them in a pointless stand before eating them. Soon the people of Turnipland find it even harder to pay their Turnip Mortgages, and to keep up the payments on their Platinum Turnip Credit Card (issued from over the Hill and far away and not locally as they all thought)...soon they are in Arrears with everything, and their businesses are going to hell on a handcart, because nobody wants to buy anything they have to sell...let alone eat it! People start to lose their homes, and see their businesses go belly up... ...then the bankers from across the hill creep in and start to buy up everything in sight at knock-down prices! After all, the bailout balance of £4,800 they engineered goes a long, long way in Turnipland! What do you think will happen next... Imported Artificial 100% Trans-Fat Turnips = £ ? 4th Class Turnip Dusters = £ ? 4th Class Turnip Display Stands = £ ? 4th Class Turnip Polish = £ ? Turnipland Housing Market = £ ? Watch this space! Cheers, BRW
  13. Hello Jeezman! There are two issues here: (1) The original bank Account Agreement, and any Terms that applied when you signed up for this, or didn't sign up, as the case may be. If they wish to apply bank Charges, then they need to have an Agreement that allowed those Charges, or stated that their Terms could be varied. Ask them where the Agreement is, and can they let you have a copy of any Terms that applied at the time the original bank Account Agreement was made. This Account will not have a fixed end, so they are correct in one sense, that it is open ended. (2) The Overdraft is another matter, that's for Credit, so is Regulated by the Act. Most Overdrafts are Fixed Term Agreements, i.e. the banks will say they agree to it, subject to a review every 3, 6 or 12 Months etc. I think they are as confused over this as their letter suggest they are. The key split is the bank Account and then the Overdraft, they are not really the same thing, and need to be looked at in their own right. One does not extend Credit whereas the other does. There are some long Threads on CAG that discuss the Overdraft and CCA issues, so I recommend you read those from front to back. Cheers, BRW
  14. Hello S! Just take a look at some of the other M&S Threads on CAG, and see what was sent to them, then compare it to what they have sent you. But anything that says things like, after you have completed this Form, send it back to us, or a Heading that suggests it's a mailed Application, then these all give the game away. The DCA should just be sent a bog off letter, such as a CCA Request and a curt note to say this AC is in dispute, do not visit, no not call, and do not write unless they have something new to say that concerns the issues in dispute with M&S. A DCA seldom has anything to say that is worth taking seriously. Cheers, BRW
  15. Hello bankfighter12345! The reason for using a Postal Order, is to deny the enemy any more Data or information than they need to process your Data Subject Access Request or CCA Request (as applicable). A Postal Order does not require your Signature, so there is no risk of a clever DCA or banker lifting your Signature to make it appear somewhere else, like on an crabby copy of an Agreement for example (that hides any cutting and pasting that has gone on). Likewise, a Postal Order does not provide your bank Account details to a cunning DCA who may try to use that against you in some way. It's one less piece of your life's jigsaw that you can avoid letting them have by using a Postal Order. I would always make the Postal Order out to the Company concerned, and then cross it "AC Payee Only", so that it must be paid into a bank Account with the same name. Provided you retain the Postal Order's purchase receipt, I gather that you can still cash it in, should they return it to you for any reason, even if you have entered their name and crossed it. Obviously, only you would have the receipt, so that is not an option for anyone else to do. I hope this helps. Cheers, BRW
  16. Hello W! Check CPR, but I would think you have to comply with the Directions Order, until such time as you have managed to have the Directions Order cancelled or postponed. I think the Order still stands, and will still be needed if your Summary Judgment Application is not successful. So, perhaps give the Court a call to advise what has happened, and say you feel the Directions Order ought to be put on hold, pending the SJ Hearing. Cheers, BRW
  17. Hello Eagleforms! I think this is the fella: Southern Pacific Securities 05-2 Plc v Walker and another [2010] UKSC 32 Cheers, BRW
  18. The Big Day - NastyBank Lesson One ========================= The two NastyBank employees, Mrs Fiat-Money and Miss Stagflation set up shop in Classroom 9b, ready for the first Class of children. The ladies were glowing, having worked hard to put up the £4,000 NastyBank Presentation Stand, the 37x NastyBank Posters, and the £2,000 blue and red NastyBank Corporate Carpet now running the full length of the Classroom to draw the eye to the main focus of the arrangement, namely the £9,000 Portable NastyBank LED illuminated sign at the head of the Classroom. The NastyBank ladies then activated the NastyBank Corporate anthem ("Amazing banking for the masses" extended version), to welcome the first batch of Children to their desks. It was going well, so far, and was achieving the desired effect to encourage a worshipful respect for the NastyBank Presentation to come. Class II entered, wide-eyed, led in by their even more wide-eyed Teacher, Miss Gullible. The Children were directed to their desks, where each found a NastyBank welcoming pack, complete with a NastyBank Pen, a NastyBank Piggy Bank, and Portfolio of Young NastyBank Financial Products (NastyBank SuperSaver Overdraft Charges Tracker Wallchart and Corporate Brochures for the new NastyBank Younglings Credit Card with Hamster Logo, the NastyBank Younglings Bank Account with Sammy Snake Logo, the NastyBank Younglings Toy Insurance Scheme, the NastyBank Younglings Pedal Bike Accident and Theft Cover Insurance Policy and, finally, the NastyBank bedtime cartoon DVD featuring Mr Chubby the NastyBank bank Manager, Mr Multiplier the NastyBank Debt Expert, Rupert the Bonus who works in the City, stupid Eric the Debt Slave and Basil the evil Rougue Debtor that tries and fails to evade his financial responsibilities). The Presentation begins... Mrs Fiat-Money: Good morning NastyBank Younglings! No response. Mrs Fiat-Money: Today, Miss Stagflation and I will tell you all about the lovely bank we work for, NastyBank (Global Domination) plc "amazing banking for the masses." Little Timmy: Why have you made our classroom look like a Church? Miss Gullible: Now, now, Timmy, let the nice Lady speak and tell you all about their lovely bank. Little Wendy: My Daddy is a Doctor. He's really clever. He says bankers are W-Anchors. Are you two a pair of W-Anchors? Or is only one of you a W-Anchor. What's the other one then if only one of you is a W-Anchor... Little Ben: Wot's a W-Anchor? Little Jamie: It's something really nasty, my Mum yells "W-Anchor" whenever my Dad does a windy in the kitchen...I think it's something smelly, like poo. I wouldn't want my Pocket money to smell like poo, that wouldn't be very nice... Miss Gullible: Children, please be quiet! You must not use that word Wendy, I've told you about that before, your Mummy promised the Headmaster that she would not use that word in front of you ever again. Miss Stagflation: Good morning NastyBank Younglings! No response. Miss Stagflation: I'm the other half of Today's NastyBank Team who will tell you all about the yummy financial products you can look forward to when you sign up to our bank (holds up a NastyBank Poster)... Little Billy: Yummy? As in Wendy's Mum? My Dad says he think's Wendy's Mummy is Yummy and well worth a sha... Miss Gullible: Billy! That's enough. I've told you before you must not repeat what your Daddy the Builder says about the other Mummies. Please be quiet. Little Timmy: Is banking based on Fairy Stories? You've made our Classroom look like a Church. My Dad says Churches are all based on Pixies at the bottom of the Garden. Does your bank have Pixies? Mrs Fiat-Money: Children, aren't we having fun! But we must get on with our NastyBank presentation, or we'll run out of time and the School will have to pay a big bill if we go over our allotted time without authorisation. And you would not want the School to have a big bill, would you children... Miss Gullible: [thinks...WTF? I thought this was free?] Miss Stagflation: OK Chidren, let's talk about money and all the wonderful things money can buy if you come to our lovely bank to borrow it from us (holds up a large NastyBank Loans-R-Good placard)... Little Karl: Are you a dull? And Greedy? My Dad says all bankers are dull and greedy, and he'd like to see them all turned into soap. How many bankers does it take to make a bar of soap? I hate soap, Mum makes me wash with soap all the time, but I sometimes like orange soap if it's the one that smells of Mangos. My Sister prefers yellow soap, provided it smells of lemon, my Mum prefers... Mrs Fiat-Money: Little boy, I'd love to talk about soap, but it's a teeny weeny bit off the presentation, and I just know you would all like to hear about Mr Multiplier the NastyBank Debt Expert and his magic Money Box? Little Timmy: Is the DVD a Fairy Story? My Mum says her bank charges are fure fiction. She uses the W-Anchor word a lot when she gets her bank statements. I think from what my best mate Jamie says, that means anything you send us must smell like Poo. That's nasty, and I'm going to tell my Mum you are trying to pedal poo to us... Miss Stagflation: Children, Children...let's talk about the magic NastyBank Web Site. Have you all been on the Internet to see Web Sites? At NastyBank we have a really special Pay-Per-Click Web Site, it's in our special NastyBank colours, and it's a magic place full of promise and wonder... Little Ben: Is that like my Mum's favourite Web Site? Miss Stagflation: I'm not sure, which Web Site does your Mummy visit? Little Ben: It's called CAG. Miss Stagflation: [thinks...oh cock!] Little Timmy: My Mum's visits CAG, she says all her friends on CAG say banks are vermin. She says CAG helps to eradicate vermin. It's really good at it, apparently. Little Jamie: My Dad thinks CAG is the best thing since sliced bread. I trust my Dad. My Dad says never trust a banker. Why should we visit your Web Site if it costs me Pocket Money and smells like poo? Little Wendy: My older Brother likes CAG, he says it's saved him far more money than any bank ever did, and it's free. Is your Web Site free? I thought you said it was Pay-per-Click, that's not Free is it, not if you have to pay per click, that'll be expensive, especially if it's like the Web Site my Dad visits when Mummy is at Yoga, the one I'm not supposed to tell Mummy about, that isn't free either. Mrs Fiat-Money: [thinks...I think we should be leaving!] Miss Gullible: [thinks...I'm changing banks straight after School, after I've kicked out this pair of NastyBank W******!] =============== CAG Quiz: (1) See how many times you can spot the word NastyBank in the above Fairy Story? (2) Is this what you want in the Classroom?
  19. CFC = Cabot Fan Club (to clarify, Mrs Hobbit said CFC not CTC). Cheers, BRW
  20. Thankfully, one of the above will never happen. However, the other is happening: For Schools - NatWest MoneySense Do you want a banker in the classroom with your children explaining how fun and funky Debt is? BBC NatWest Guidance Not Impartial BBC Have Your Say - bank Advice The banks are the last people on this planet who should be allowed anywhere near our children to brain wash them into becoming future Debt Slaves. The banks are wholly incapable of running banks efficiently, so are manifestly unqualified to give anyone lessons in finance and budgeting. The banks should not be allowed access to our Schools to infect Children with their manipulative Debt Industry propaganda and blatant bank branding and self-promotion. What Children Need: A sound basic education in Maths, so they can at least stand a chance of understanding the basic figures. Wholly independent lessons in Money Management and basic Budgeting. Wholly independent lessons in understanding the pitfalls of Debt, and how it is essential to limit Debt to the absolute minimum and, when it cannot be avoided, how to select the cheapest Debt possible. Wholly independent lessons to understand the true costs of Debt in all of its various forms from: Overdrafts, to Credit Cards, to Loans, to HP and to less obvious Debt such as Interest Free Finance that is no such thing, and all the unnecessary insurances and other financial products that have little real value or benefit. Anyone employed by a bank is incapable of giving such advice, and should be shown the School gates on their way out. Spread the word, and keep bankers and other Debt Industry pedlars of Debt out of our Schools. Cheers, BRW
  21. Hello Pumpytums! Seems OK, there's plenty they are short on, in terms of letting you have all the details, so make them get a sweat on to present their Claim properly pleaded. While you are waiting, dig out all of your letters, and see if you can track when the Overdraft was set up, when renewed, and how long was it renewed for, i.e. the Fixed Periods the Overdraft was Authorised for. Then have a good look at the s76(1)/s98(1) Enforcement/Termination Notice. Did they allow enough time after Service. Did they at any stage mention the word default in relation to these sections... ...you may see where I am heading with this? See s76(6) and s98(6). Overdrafts are traditionally and Contractually repayable on demand but, if you are a Consumer, then they are also Regulated when operating within their agreed Fixed Term. If unauthorised, then there is no Agreement, Regulated or otherwise, so any Debts would be immediately repayable, without Notice. It would be the same as walking into a bank, taking a bag of cash and wandering out...they are entitled to demand that straight back, and without Notice! Oi, give that back now! The key, therefore, is to establish that the Overdraft was covered by Regulation, even if over-limit, it's still Regulated. Likewise, given the 2006 CCA Changes, if the Overdraft continued beyond any Fixed Term, but they allowed it, then they should have confirmed Interest Rate and Terms etc. Assuming this was Regulated, then to call in any money, i.e. demand Early Payment, they need to issue a s76(1) Enforcement Notice. They can do this without using any default as the reason. So, if they have mentioned it's because of a default, then they could well have stuffed themselves because of s76(6). Their Contractual rights go out of the window if they have not followed the Act to the letter. Law trumps Contract. Likewise, to Terminate the Overdraft Agreement Early, they need to issue a s98(1) Termination Notice. Again, they can do this without using any default as the reason. So, if they have mentioned it's because of a default, then they could well have stuffed themselves because of s98(6). If they cocked-up the 7 days after Service issue, so posted 2nd Class and/or failed to allow the Statutory time, then the Notice would be defective, and would have similar effects as a defective s87(1) Default Notice that being, they blow the benefits the Notice is designed to obtain for them. If they blow s76(1), they blow the right to Early Payment. If they blow s98(1), and they then go ahead and Terminate, then that's a repudiatory breach of the Overdraft Agreement, and you would be entitled to a claim against them. They are allowed to issue a Combined Notice, so they are perfectly entitled to have the opportunity to stuff themselves in two ways via only one Notice instead of via two! Cheers, BRW
  22. Hello DoINotLikeThat! Remember there are two ends to this Stick, the making end, and the Terminating end. (1) The Making of the Agreement: This is all about the Agreement, and the issue can make or break their Claim against you. 1985 is right on the turning point when several major Sections of The Consumer Credit Act 1984 came into force, the key date being 19 May 1985. Do you know if your Agreement was made before or after that date? Also, many bankers around that time, even though they had plenty of time to get their heads around the Act, often failed to even mention that Agreements would be Regulated. So, that could be another angle. Was it even Regulated? They cannot escape Regulation, so I think they may need a Regulated Agreement to have been arranged at some stage, i.e. if the initial one was devoid of anything that mentioned the Act. This might be a good argument to use. Do look carefully at any re-created Agreements, to see if they are trying to insert Terms that post-dated 1985. Retrospective Agreement making via Time Travel in effect! (2) The Termination of the Agreement: How they handled this, can limit their Claim to just the Arrears so, in financial Terms, and depending upon the proportion of the Arrears due before Termination within the Full Balance they are claiming, then how they Terminated the Agreement can have very similar damaging effects to their overall Claim as the lack of an Agreement. This sounds like a Credit Card Agreement, or Credit Token/Running Account Credit Agreement, so it should be fully Regulated by the Act. In that case, if there is a Balance to be paid, then the only way they can jump out of the Agreement themselves, is to issue a s87(1) Default Notice. If you were not in default, then they cannot do anything in terms of demanding Early Payment, and must allow you to pay off the Balance, over time, in line with the agreed Prescribed Terms. They can restrict Credit and make a Card unusable in terms of building up further Debt, but any Debt already built up, must be allowed to be paid off over time, in line with the Agreement. This is key, and is the basic protection the Act gives to the borrower, i.e. the right to pay off such a Debt over time, without fear that the Creditor will have a bad hair day and wake up one morning to demand the full amount be paid out of the blue. On the other hand, if you have defaulted on some of the required payments, even then they still can't jump out, they are required to give you a last chance to catch up and make amends, and that requires that they Serve upon you a valid s87(1) Default Notice. If the Arrears they wanted were accurately stated on the Notice, and the Notice itself was drafted in accordance with the Act and Statute, i.e. the bit of paper used the correct Prescribed Wording and allowed you the correct amount of time to remedy the default (7 or 14 days depending on when it was issued) then, if you paid in that time, the Agreement endures and the default has to be regarded by them as never having happened. If, on the other hand, you did not pay, for whatever reason, then your failure to pay automatically hands them s87 benefits, which include the right to Terminate the Agreement, and the right to demand Early Payment of sums not yet due at that time (all sums that were not Arrears, that were only due in the future). This is where it gets interesting for you...if they failed to issue a valid s87(1) Default Notice, or cocked it up, and then went ahead and demanded full payment or sent you a letter that Terminated the Agreement (going to Court is a good sign that the Agreement has Terminated), then they have a problem. At that stage they have lost any entitlement to those sums that were not due before the Agreement was Terminated by them. All they can claim is the Arrears that were due before Termination and, they can only claim those Arrears if they have...wait for it...a valid/enforceable Agreement! So, while it is vital that you investigate the Agreement end of this, do not overlook the Termination aspects either. Read this case when you can, to get an idea of how an invalid Notice can affect things: Woodchester v Swayne & Co [1998] EWCA Civ 1209 (14 July 1998.) I do hope this helps. Cheers, BRW
  23. Hello Mightneverhappen! I think you would be wise to start a Thread of your own, otherwise this could get confusing between your issues and those of the Original Poster (OP), namely DoINotLikeThat. Post a link here, and I'm sure others will hop across to give you a hand. Cheers, BRW
  • Create New...