Jump to content

QC15

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About QC15

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Hi, I rented an item with the option of purchasing the same, it was a minimum rental period and then there was the option to upgrade, return or purchase. I decided to purchase and thought I had paid my last instalment when the company informed me that I had only been renting the item, if I wanted to have purchased it I should have signed a hire purchase agreement. I could not find my paper work so asked them to forward me a copy which they did, it does state it is a rental (hire) agreement and that the goods belong to the company at all times, it also states the purchase price. I was never told at the outset that I needed to inform the company that I wanted to buy the goods after the initial rental period and transfer to a hire purchase agreement. My questions are these:- 1). Is there any redress in law for the company misleading me at the beginning. 2) If the company want to reclaim the goods what are my rights 3) Do they need a Court Order to take back rental goods. 4) If I stop payment the rental payments, where does that leave me, do I have any redress at all? 5) What about putting the sale price on the rental agreement? 6) Is the rental agreement covered by the Counsumer Credit Act as it does not state it is and if so what should I be looking for to render the agreement unenforceable. Many thanks for your help.
  2. Can somebody tell me if a credit card agreement before 2006 has to show that PPI has been purchased and if it does is there anything in the Consumer Credit Act 1974 relating to this or it is under some other regulation. Urgent assistance needed. Thanks.
  3. Hi wonder if you can help me, Egg have issued proceedings and I am waitng for a Court date, looking at the credit agreement that they supplied me it reads "on transferred balances put on the account before the 31 May 2001 on the terms and conditions it reads 30 April 2001, also on the credit agreement it states that the greater of 3% of the revolving balance put on the statements it quotes 2%, I also have an approved limit instead of a credit limit on my agreement. The Alexandra Slater case has been quoted to me but as it is unreported and I cannot obtain a copy, I believe that it can only be used in that case, to use it in others there would have to have been a similar case that was reported and I have not found out. The signature on the agreement looks like mine but it isn't, also the date is dated after I received my card and statements, also the default notice that they supplied me has the wrong arrears amount on it, I think I have more than enough to win the case, so why are they going ahead with it? Any advice would be gratefully received.
  4. Alexandra Slater -v- Egg Banking Plc - judgment 9 August 2010. Has anyone got any news on this one - apparently it seems that it has gone in Egg's favour, the case is apparently unreported so how does one go about obtaining a copy of the same. Any help appreciated.
  5. Hi, wonder if anyone can help, have agreed that I owe a judgment and have paid most of it but still have a couple of grand outstanding, have since learnt that the original creditor has sold my debt on, the credit agreement is unenforceable and the PPI which I didn't ask for has been credited to the new creditor, my question is how can they enforce the outstanding amount which I am not paying and more importantly what can I do about it.
  6. There seems to be a lot of debt management companies posing as Solicitors. Posing as a Solicitor is a criminal offence, they are putting their names to legal proceedings as well as issuing claim forms in the original debtor's name when the account has been sold on. There needs to be transparancy in debt cases, they say that MPs have to show transparancy well so should debt management companies. David Cameron and Nick Clegg have said that people losing their homes should be the last resort, well caggers on here know that is not true, people are losing their homes every day on unenforceable agreements that have been forged in a lot of incidences and are totally without merit. I am going to take up the mantle and campaign for this practice to be stopped, no one is saying that companies should not be able to recover monies that are owed to them but they should only be able to do so if they have the right paperwork, the harrassement that goes on by telephone has to stop as well. Debtors should be treated with respect. David Cameron and Nick Clegg said that the vulnerable in society will be protected, I don't see that with debt, the creditors will persecute someone to their death and indeed they have. I am going to make a difference to people's lives, I don't believe that people should get into debt and then try to get out of paying the same, I would never advocate that, the people I meet on this site have very genunie needs and should be helped. I would apprecaite any replies of people's experiences at the hands of these so called creditors, I am determined to try and change the law, my life has been hell through all of this and through no fault of my own.
×
×
  • Create New...