Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Armsoft last won the day on October 13 2006

Armsoft had the most liked content!


706 Excellent
  1. Just remember, as soon as you go through the FSCS you lose 10% of what your owed (they only pay out 90% of amount owed). And you can't claim interest on it through them either.
  2. One thing to remember when dealing with the fscs you will only get 90% of what your owed
  3. Could I PM you what I was thinking to prepare, for some guidance? Thanks
  4. Would I be right in thinking that Small Claims Courts are fairly relaxed? Is the Judge going to expect my son to be legally minded? Thanks
  5. Yes, this is the final (and only) hearing, it's been allocated an hour by the judge, although DLA Piper have asked for two hours? The claim is for PPI and they agreed that they owed him the money, but also claimed he owed them money, so were going to use he refund to offset an outstanding balance. There reason for not agreeing to pay him the rest of the money s being put down to the terms of the fscs which came into effect after they offered him the full refund in jan 2010, so the argument is that when they finally realised what a cock up their accounts team had made they should have put him back in the position he should have been in with the original refund offer, rather than disadvantaged him by applying the fscs conditions. Be interesting to hear them bringing anything else up that hasn't already been disclosed (they've already dug themselves a big hole, but they are welcome to keep digging) In one of their letters to my son they even use the phrase "we are going to put you back to the position you would have been in had this accounting error not occurred" and have included that as part of their court bundle, I'd like to see them explain that one.
  6. My Son is in court on Thursday 2nd February 2012 as a Claimant against WFS, although he has had a letter from their solicitor today today to say that WFS will not be at court but their solicitor will be (is that normal?). We have their court pack (100plus pages) all sent in a very nice binder (thanks DLA Piper!) do we need to put our court pack in one too? WFS offered my son just over £3k back in January 2011 as a PPI Refund, but as the terms were that they would use it to offset an outstanding Loan (which actually did not exist and had been paid off in 2009) my son rejected it and spent months phoning them trying to get them to understand and accept their mistake (no luck there!). Having gone through the relevant notification processes upto and including 7 Day Notice of Intended Action my son registered in Court in June last year (Moneyclaim online), WFS finally paid just under £2.4k into his bank account late July 2011 but have since, through DLA Piper refused to pay him any more of his claim, and so it has finally got to the point where he has to turn up at court to plead his case. Has anyone any experience of being in the small claims court with DLA Piper that they would care to share (good or bad) along with any sound advice. Appreciated
  7. Just be aware, if you sign the FSCS paperwork you are signing away 10% of what your owed as FSCS will only pay you 90% (they keep the rest themselves), HTH
  8. Back on subject Has anyone any thoughts on any Case Law to support incorrect terms used causing unfair terms to be applied as a result? Looking to file the amended POC on Monday 3rd Any help/advice appreciated
  9. Thanks for the very valued feedback. My belief is that the court would take the view that as Welcome applied unfair (wrong) terms back in January with the original offer of settlement (there must be some case law to support this?) the fscs T&Cs do not apply in this case by default. DLA Piper who are representing Welcome seem to be relying on the fact that my son signed new t&c, although communication with them has been quite laughable in terms of what they do and do not know and what Welcome seem to be giving or not giving them (I almost feel sorry for them) Is anyone aware of any case law to support the ruleing out of new T&Cs on the basis of incorrect/unfair original T&Cs being enforced? Any help/feedback appreciated
  10. Having served a SAR on Welcome back in early July my son has all the account statements, he also has phone transcripts from them for this year with them talking internally to other departments agreeing that he paid the account off in 2009. He also has a couple of letter confirming receipt of the payment in 2009 along with one which clearly says that his account balance is Zero. Although the fscs has a legal standpoint, if welcome had applied the correct t&c in January then he would not have fallen under fscs in April. He has the paperwork from Welcome and the fscs with the refund calculations on them. Thanks for the advice/questions so far
  11. My son had a loan with welcome finance which he paid off in 2009, he submitted a claim to Welcome in December 2010 for a refund on his PPI and received an offer from them in January of a Full Refund (£3,100). He rejected the refund as the numptys terms were that they would use the refund to offset an outstanding balance on the account (the account was clear with No balance) This then resulted in him making loads of phone calls to them over the next few months to try and sort it out (without success) In April he received a letter from fscs stating that they were now dealing and asked him to sign a claim form as they said that they did not have his correct bank details. Unfortunately he signed the claim form (new T&Cs) before he spoke to me about it, this resulted in fscs offering him a refund of just 90% of what he was originally offered, but they still insisted that he had an outstanding balence which they would use the refund to offset. A few more months of Phone calls to them followed, again without success. In July this year, fed up with being mucked about, my son started a claim online (moneyclaim) for the full amount outstanding plus interest. A summons was served on Welcome, with a copy of this sent to my son, 3 days after it was served my son had paid into his Bank Account (without any warning) the amount that fscs had offered to him (90% of the claim) and he was contacted by their solicitor saying that they have paid him and they would be asking for the claim to be struck out. Welcome had met it's obligations under the terms of the fscs. The case has been moved to my sons local court (so is still active) and he wants to make a change to his POC as the solicitor is sticking on the point that they have complied with the T&Cs that my son had signed up for, but infact the offer made to him in January would have been accepted if there terms were correct ie; a cash payment to him rather than using it to offset a non existing outstanding balance. Is anyone able to give some advice on how this should be worded on the POC and of any relevant cases that could be referered to relating to unfair T&Cs etc. Any help would be much appreciated.
  12. My sons PPI claim through 'Un'Welcome Finance seemed to move to the front of the queue to be sorted when they received a Court Summons (he filed online at "money claim") and on the day that they acknowledged the claim they paid his outstanding PPI payment £2,300 into his Bank Account without even telling him. Interestingly they acknowledged the claim at court with the standard "we intend to defend All of this claim" so it looks like he will now have to wait the extra 28days they brought themselves before he gets the interest that they owe on the claim... HTH
  • Create New...