Jump to content

BubbleCat

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    296
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

  1. Sorry to hear about your plight with BH. The information you have recieved off here is absolutely the right way to go. You have two issues (a) BH fudging the DN info (b) Info held by the credit reference agencies. Personally, I would chase the SAR to BH, as once this is cleared up you have the ammo to bounce back at the Credit Ref Agencies. If BH do not comply you can also use the recorded delivery letters as proof to the Cred Ref Agencies too.
  2. We are almost at the end of ths battle, I hope . The new owner contacted us just to verify a few things i.e. genuine mileage etc.,and told us he had puchased the car from auction for just over £8,000. We have recieved a letter from BH's solicitors SCM, advising us the account is now settled in full and to take the letter to a County Court to get a Certificate of Satisfaction. I was a little confused at this to begin with. I looked at the final court order and realised that although it stated the car was to be returned, it did not say anything about what was to happen to the proceeds of the sale of the car:whoo:LOL. Just got one more thing to do on this, so there is another installment to come CAGgers
  3. I have seen the origin of this post many many times and it still brings a smile to my face. I had a similar experience when my Dad died, but it was for the Poll Tax (yes many years ago!) I did go to the local press and got an appology from the local council via the paper.
  4. Hi Everyone - It's been a long time. Well this case is now all done and dusted and it's only fair after all the support and help you all kindly gave, for me to give you the events. When our Solicitor first contacted a Barrister, after house insurers agreed to cover cost, the barrister came back with a less than 51% chance of success. This immediately stopped the funding from house insurers. However, I bounced back at the Solicitor as I did not feel the Barrister had considered all the facts in the matter. The Solicitor put a list of our concerns, which we felt had not been considered, back to the Barrister. It turned out the section of the CCA I should have used was section 56. There were some other parts of the Consumer Laws which were partly used, but not as significant as 56. The Barrister agreed to ask the court if an amendment could be made to the original submitted evidence. Really luckily, the Judge agreed. This was only because BH had made a cock up and had tried to change it during a hearing, which the Judge was not impressed with. So this then changed our prospective outcome to 51%. Our Solicitor was brilliant. He contact the house insurers and got them to agree to allow the funding, which they did. There have been quite a few small directions hearing, our Barrister was boarderline in contempt at one of them arguing our case, until we got to the final in mid June. We were looking at potentially having to pay over £20,000 if things did not go in our favour. There was lots of legal jargon, which we found confusing but our Solicitor was whispering what was going on in small bites. I did get told off at one point as I aired my view a little too loud while BH's Barrister was stating her case she said she did not appreciate any noise. The Judge had not heard me luckily eek!! The court accepted that in a letter I had sent in May 2007, did actually terminate the agreement on the date of that letter. The argument of the DN, our Barrister told us, was not applicable because of the complicated case it was. The outcome was the car was to be handed back and we had to pay £6,000. I asked the court to order the car be collected by BH within 14 days of the hearing, which he agreed to. I have had to chase BH to get them to fetch the car, which meant they were in breach of the order. I asked our Solicitor if there was anything we could do as they had breach the order, but he has advised to put it down to experience. Since all this began our financial situation has taken a dramatic downturn as we too have fallen victims to the country's financial depression. So this left us worrying about how we would be able to pay the £6,000. Our Solicitor said "No-one can have what you have not got". He advised the would be fools to try and recover as it would mean they would be throwing more money at the courts with no real prospect of recovering anything. So we now just have to wait to see what happens with the money side.
  5. Good question about the date - there are no dates on the info they have sent at all - think it's about 5 years old
  6. No cash withdrawals were made as far as can remember There have been missed payment & default charges accumulating I have done a SAR request in the past, but they kept saying they could not trace and account? Suppose I will need to go down the SAR route again. This would disclose any cash withdrawals and addtional charges, BUT would it tell me about the PPI?
  7. Hi Clemma - Like the new picture ! I thought it maybe - Not sure if there is PPI - suppose would need to contact them with an offer of payment and asking if PPI? am open to suggestions as to what I need to do from here?
  8. Well thank you again peeps - It looks like this one is going to be stayed. I did what Atwozee suggested in getting them to provide the proof in court. court have written to me to ask if I have received the documents I requested and I have sent a reply back to say they have not complied.
  9. **** WON ***** Well after this disastrous situ, I got my self clued up. Pulled a very comprehensive letter together with all the info which should have been used under the Health & Safety Act 1974 and low and behold they have sent me a cheque (which I am very happy with) as full and final settlement. These legal eagles were hoping I was going to be one of the many who would just sit idly back and take what they were saying - what a surprise they had If anyone does have any H&S Q's please let me know and I'm pretty sure I can help after this.
  10. Does anyone know if this one is enforceable Please?
  11. UPDATE On 24 June my house insurers confirmed with a local solicitor they will fund the case for investigation. This is limited and depends on if council consider the case has a more than 51%of success - So fingers and everything else crossed. Thanx for the continued support peeps - it is much appreciated and Hopefully others may benefit from this. X
  12. Hi Joan, You poor thing. I do hope you make a quick recovery. Hope all went well.
  13. Note the 'if successful' - There is a paper going through parliament, which will restrict these cowboys. Carry on ignoring them - let them keep wasting time and money on keep sending.
  14. Hi Roger, You could address fact they have not complied with directions to provide original documents and non proof of service of DN. Stress these must be available for inspection by you and the court on the day of attendance. Break it down into sections: i.e. look at the directions and compare what they have sent you - has this met the direction? If not be precise as to why it does not meet. It would not hurt for you to put what you want the outcome to be based on the evidence supplied, as this will give a basis for the court to consider along with the facts Routing for you on this The 'supposed' credit agreement is merely an application form.
  15. I have spoken to a lady called Rebecca at the court today. she confirmed the Claimant had filed their AQ & asked when mine was filed. I advised her it was in March. She said I have to wait now until the two AQ's are married up. Thing is I had a letter from the court 2 weeks ago to say if the claimant had not submitted their AQ by 13 May, then the case would either be stayed ot struck out. What Cohens have done is filed their AQ in the 11th hour and sent me the letter asking me to settle. I'm thinking they have realised the supposed 'agreement' which is dated 2004, is insufficient and trying to get me to agree before the court looks at the case. Thing is they have provided pages of statements and I'm a bit concerned the judge may rule in their favour. I'm going to attach the supposed DN, which I have now found. I missed it cause it's from Mercers Monkeys.
×
×
  • Create New...