Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by theoldrouge

  1. Just as expected You can now flesh everything out at the FOS using you own words For the record, for anyone finding this thread helpful who are the LBL Co involved?
  2. Loan Ref; xxxxxxxx Regard this as a Formal Complaint in relation to irresponsible lending, Unlawful charges, Car repossession, dealing with financial and mental difficulty in relation to the above referenced account . I bring to your attention that you have irresponsibly lent to me because you did not do appropriate checks. The charges that you have applied to the account are unfair and unreasonable in total you have added £884 in total charges to a loan of £1000. There are charges on the account that are not specified at pre contract stage and are excessive of reasonable costs. I also demand that you investigate the behaviour and practices of xxxxxxxx the third party company instructed with repossession of the vehicle, The agent knocked on neighbours doors to see if I was at home, demanded payment without proof of bill of sale, alleged attempted assault and refused to accept payment as his Manager clearly just wanted the car, removing the vehicle with no notification and no opportunity to remove personal belongings. Despite advising you of financial difficulty/unemployment/severe anxiety/stress/pregnancy/partially deaf. You did not treat me fairly and appropriately and carried on with recovery of debt in total breach of PRIN 6 You ignored messages of offering payments and asking what was happening with the account. I did advise you I was partially deaf and you kept on trying to call me as opposed to email/message. Due to the above I demand that you reverse/credit all charges and interest to the account and revert to the financial position before the loan transaction took place. I also demand substantial compensation for the unfair treatment I have received ,in breach of the guidelines, by yourselves, contained within both CONC, and the CCTA code of practice. Should you chose to reject my Complaint, then I will not hesitate to forward the entire matter to the office of the Financial Ombudsman Service. I look forward to your early, positive response.
  3. Yes, include everything after reading the links as advised but be very concise, don’t waffle they will reject it all anyway you flesh it out at the FOS
  4. Sadly once a valid dn has been issued and expired and not been remedied they can and will lift off a private drive, provided no damage is caused to the private property Annoyingly the Government decided to reject the Law Commissions findings regarding LBLs which leaves the DN as your only protection However, the FOS has beefed up its attitude to LBLs (been lent on imo) (see the link in the sticky, and read the sample case study) So your plan of action is Send a SAR to gather all the required information Read the FOS link and the CCTA guide from 4.7 onwards Compile a Formal Complaint Post it up prior to submission IMO you have a strong affordability case, and just look at the outcome in the FOS case study!!!
  5. I would send a SAR to both the broker and Moneybarn You are going to have to gather all the evidence that you can to be successful at the FOS if Moneybarn refuse to play ball
  6. Illegal? No, Corrupt? No, In breach of PRIN and the CCTA code? Possibly, dependant on your correspondence and arrangements with them - send a SAR What people have to realise is once you sign a BOS the car is no longer yours You have permission to use it whilst you comply with the loan agreement Your protection is the Default Notice should you get into arrears It is prior to or on receipt of this that you need to converse with the lender don't ignore it
  7. What was the exact agreement total? How much to the penny have you paid including any deposit ( or px allowance as deposit ) plus any extra payments you may have made? The number of monthly payments made is immaterial it's the total paid that matters
  8. Before you dismiss bringing a Formal Complaint .... I suggest you read this link from the FOS It requires time and effort to do your research but the financial reward can be substantial , not to mention putting you in a strong position for negotiation https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints-deal/consumer-credit/logbook-loans
  9. You say the dn was issued in August, so you received a copy then? Have CCP sent a final response to any of your complaints inviting you to go to the FOS?
  10. They can't refuse your SAR request In order to repossess their car if they have a signed, stamped and registered bos plus a valid expired dn that is all they need You really need to negotiate a settlement or consider a time order , yes If the negotiating is via a professional debt advisor they must allow 30 days for the negotiation
  11. Absolutely the right way to go Yes it hurts to pay them more But an irl claim will likely get this back and a lot more You have reduced the interest rate on your loan, saved the cost and worry of a time order, and can now relax over your car Just remember you are now in control, the same can be achieved with all such creditors /dca's with time and effort Well done on getting this far
  12. They have made an offer Remind them in no uncertain terms that under CONC they are responsible for the conduct of their agents , (research and quote this) and negotiate a payment plan of their offer As dx says we really need all the details to understand the full picture
  13. The ideal would be a negotiated discounted settlement The cards in your hand are that you would most certainly win an irl complaint via the fos And the behaviour of Burlington Im not so certain that you would win on unfair treatment given that for a LBL company they have been pretty accommodating for the best part of a year If they don't agree to negotiate on a monthly payment of the 1500 then straight off to the fos Only if things get dicey consider a time order due to your other debt a t/o could get messy
  14. You have several grounds for complaints But getting a bos struck out once registered with the high court is of the upmost difficulty You would need either a very experienced pro bono or very deep pockets If you lost you are liable for the lenders costs Impossible to do yourself
  15. Yes you are going to have to put payplan in the picture Agree with dx that they are unlikely to try anything then whilst the matter is being addressed On the bright side here is an outcome of a complaint to the fos that may interest you https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decisions-case-studies/case-studies/my-lender-has-said-itll-take-my-car-because-i-cant-afford-to-repay-my-logbook-loan
  16. Yes ban ends 31Jan Time order would be good but Just suggesting a free urgent alternative to buy a 30 day stay BOS are still the Wild West of lending Law Commissions proposals were dropped by the Government However once you have secured your car you have grounds for complaints IRL, unfair treatment ,etc Problem is once you sign a bos you have effectively transferred ownership of your vehicle
  17. Hate saying this but your lbl is linked to a personal loan agreement not an hp agreement they can just lift the car you don't have HP protections They must of course follow CONC when dealing with you I would get the car locked away in a garage and contact urgently stepchange Northern Ireland and get them to agree a repayment plan with CCP Under the CCTA logbook loan code ( section 4.8)CCP will then have to halt recovery procedures for 30 days if stepchange are involved
  18. Very much as expected HSBC is of course doing this to mitigate the fine from the FCA Much as Barclays has done https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/fca-fines-barclays-treatment-customers-financial-difficulty The question is whether £25 to £100 is sufficient redress When the facts come out this I very much doubt
  19. No wonder HSBC have set aside £ 227 million to deal with this, seems that the problem is systemic amongst the banks We await the full details, but it seems to me that £25 won't cut it! A small detail buried on page 30 in Barclays’ full results for H1 2020, published on Wednesday, July 29 2020, shows that since February 2018, the FCA has been investigating whether the group implemented effective systems and controls with respect to collections and recoveries and whether it paid due consideration to the interests of customers in default and arrears. Barclays and HSBC refuse to comment until the investigation is completed
  20. Very Interesting, from the latest HSBC Interim Report These payments clearly relate to this HSBC will not comment further until the investigation is complete Various HSBC Group companies, including HSBC UK, are subject to an ongoing investigation by the FCA in connection with collections and recoveries operations in the UK. HSBC UK is cooperating with the investigation. There are many factors that may affect the range of outcomes, and the resulting financial impact, of this matter, which could be significant. At 30 June 2020, a provision of £227m (Dec 2019: £220m) was held relating to the estimated liability for redress payable to customers following a review of collections and recoveries practices in the UK, including HSBC UK. During the first six months of 2020, redress payments and incurred operating costs totalled £9m. The provision has been estimated based on a number of customer cohorts who may have been impacted and a number of assumptions which are highly judgemental. The provision has been adjusted to reflect latest available information, but remains subject to significant judgement. Operating costs for the programme have also been reassessed, and the provision has been increased by £16m as a result of these factors. Work to identify relevant data continues, and there is significant uncertainty surrounding the total number of customers affected and the amount of any redress to be paid. Redress is expected to be completed during 2020. Work to identify relevant data continues, and there is significant uncertainty surrounding the total number of customers affected and the amount of any redress to be paid. Redress is expected to be completed during 2020.
  21. These letters relate to very historic collection/recovery "service failures" concerning current accounts, credit cards and loans I have not had an account or debt with HSBC since 2008 My gut feeling is that it maybe connected to the use of their fake inhouse collectors Payment Sevices (PSB), Metropolitan and DG Solicitory but I will know more when they reply to my letter demanding details
  22. Just bank the cheque 100% genuine Banked mine, cleared, money in account ready for a bottle of something on HSBC for Christmas Have written to HSBC requesting details of their "failure " and will decide on the details of their reply whether to press for further redress
  23. Be very careful what you are signing You do not pay for collection Photograph from every angle with date of photos
  24. I wanted to see exactly what happened between the OCs receipt of your VT letter and their sale to Link It would also be useful to see your agreement To explain a little about PCP CCA 1974 was obviously written well before the inception of PCP Although there have been a couple of reported county court cases re excess mileage charges(decisions have gone both ways) there is no case law on which to rely The lenders seem reluctant to push forward with this, relying instead on S99(2) Right to terminate hire-purchase etc. agreements. (1) At any time before the final payment by the debtor under a regulated hire-purchase or regulated conditional sale agreement falls due, the debtor shall be entitled to terminate the agreement by giving notice to any person entitled or authorised to receive the sums payable under the agreement. (2) Termination of an agreement under subsection (1) does not affect any liability under the agreement which has accrued before the termination. hence the pro rata mileage (liability accrued (excess mileage )prior to termination), and the FOS seem to use this in some unfair excess mileage charges decisions. However, my argument would be that your agreement was terminated as was your right on x x date, with no arrears and a nil balance and should be reported as such The excess mileage charges do not crystallise until after this date, when an invoice ,as such, was issued by the OC (the original agreement having been terminated by you ) so if you are not happy with a default on your file for 6 years this may be a way forward but lets see the info first
  25. Something doesn't add up here re the default Can you post up the Comms log please
  • Create New...