Jump to content

podgydad

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    285
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About podgydad

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. This topic was closed on 03/06/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group
  2. This topic was closed on 03/06/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group
  3. Thanks for the advice. When court proceedings are issued, does the defendant have to sign for the documents before they are deemed as served? You say we need to apply for a stay, what's the point if she's going to pay it? Sorry if that's a daft question.
  4. My girlfriend has received a letter from Marston's this evening, hand posted at around 9pm this evening, she was in, nobody knocked or rang the bell. It's regarding a heating oil bill from a previous property, this is the first she has heard about it. I'm assuming a CCJ must have been issued, but as I say, this is the first she's heard. The debt was around £800, they are demanding £1400. A fifa writ has been issued. Am I right in assuming that we can simply pay the CCJ amount to the original creditor and tell Marston's to do a running jump for their fees?
  5. This from the BBC story at the conclusion of the hearing. "There is every indication that my findings will translate to the historic terms," he said. "That could mean a decision on the historic terms in very short order - maybe within a month [of my decision]," he added.
  6. I'm confused. I thought this case was to determine if the OFT had the authority to rule on the fairness of the charges. The judge has said they have, therefore barring any appeal, why are the BBA talking about the court deciding on the fairness of charges? I also seem to remember that the OFT had investigated the banks charges but hadn't published their findings or am I mistaken?
  7. Perhaps the media should paraphrase these banking expert quotes in the following way "if the banks charges are deemed to be unlawful, the banks will be forced to find a lawful way of making a profit without using the poor to subsidise the illusion of free banking."
  8. That's how I understood it. As they have already concluded their investigation into the charging structure then they already have a figure in mind and would be ready to impose it should the ruling go their way. My guess is that the OFT told the banks that the fee they had in mind, and the banks threatened that should they try to impose that fee then they would challenge the OFT's jurisdiction in court.
  9. I though I read somewhere that if the court rules that the charges are penalties, then the OFT would not need to go back to court to determine that the fees were fair, as they would have already have the powers they need to force the banks to reduce their fees?
  10. Yes, we have just reclaimed £7k for a customer who was unemployed when they were sold PPI, Barclays initially attempted to claim she was employed as a 'home maker'. They paid out after the second letter
  11. FOS are slow but get results. I have found that while many companies go through the motions of defending a court claim they settle pretty early on when FOS get involved. For example Citi are renowned for defending card claims but settle when they get a complaint through FOS. The FOS route is cheaper and less stressful, it just takes a little longer.
  12. £7k PPI reclaimed on a Barclays loan. Barclays initially refused a refund on the grounds that the claimant was employed as a 'home maker'. Of course this was utterly ridiculous and they repaid after the LBA.
  13. I would have thought that if the OFT win round 1 in January the FSA will come under increasing pressure to lift the waiver.
  14. I run a claims management company and irony of ironies they just cold called me The guy on the phone blatantly misled me by telling me that the OFT's case would not effect my claim. I have reported them to the MOJ.
  15. That's interesting, we are having 100's of claims returned to us, some submitted as early as the 6th of June, however yesterday we received an offer from FOS making an offer on an Abbey claim. I have no explanation.
×
×
  • Create New...