Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'european'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - you need to register to access the CAG library
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 19 results

  1. Hi, does anyone have any experience with EEO's? We gave the keys to a Spanish property back to the bank at the height of the crash in 2008, came back to the UK and started to rebuild, and didn't think much about it again - a "live and learn" experience. We have just had a letter from some UK lawyers acting on behalf of Banco Sabadell, with what seems to be a fairly generic letter, with a few details and some slightly strange language like "Banco Sabadell understands that your failure to make payments may have been an oversight on your part" - a 10 year oversight! They are claiming 85,000 euros which we assume is the mortgage, less proceeds of auction, plus various costs and interest. Letter gives us 2 weeks to repay in full, or respond to letter, to avoid "continued legal proceedings". The letter then suggests they may make a charging order against our UK property - "your credit rating will be affected negatively" They also suggest they will report the debt to UK credit agencies. Come to an agreement with Sabadell to repay the debt and they won't report anything to the credit agencies. And lastly they would seek a bankruptcy order to force a sale of any properties in order to recover the debt. I have read some slightly worrying things about European Enforcement Orders and how they can supposedly be used to carry out a judgement in another country in the UK without any appeal or legal intervention in the UK, providing the case in Spain was uncontested. Statutes of limitation don't seem to apply, due to (possibly unfair) contract terms in many Spanish mortgages. So, my understanding is that if the Spanish lender was granted an EEO that was uncontested, they could seek to recover debts originating in Spain by making charges against an individual's assets in the UK, including other property. I read a news clipping from 2010 where it seemed that this was happening to a couple from Wiltshire, but I can't find the result of that case. And I'm struggling to find any more examples since then. The letter seems speculative, and possibly designed to scare people into coming to payment arrangements, particularly if a number of years down the line there are people who have built up some equity again. But, it does mention an ability to make charges against assets, without mentioning any specific legal processes, which must mean an EEO, so it is slightly concerning. The irony of the Spanish banks all being complicit in inflating the property bubble and lending to anyone with a pulse, and then being bailed out is not lost on me..... cheers
  2. Hi, I have a question about last wills and testaments. I am a dual French/British citizen married to a British citizen and we have lived in the UK for almost 20 years. We own a house in the UK (as joint tenants). We want to write a will that will say to whom we want our respective share of the house to go to once we are both dead. We have no children and won't be having any. In my case, I want my share to go to my husband but I want to make sure that when he dies, if I'm already dead, my share goes to my siblings in France, who are French citizens, and not to my husband's family or new partner for example. Could someone please help me and let me know how I can make sure that his happens? Are there specific types of wills for UK people who want to leave their assets to someone in Europe? I have received very conflicting advice from some solicitors. Thank you very much in advance! Sonia G
  3. Hi folks and thanks for taking an interest. I have a consumer issue which I would like some opinions on please? Please forgive me if this is in the wrong place. On 18/07 I selected and booked accommodation for two nights via the Booking.com website for a place called Juras Mols in Bigauņciems Latvia. I was hoping for a few days away from consumer related hassle, ha ha, must have broken a mirror recently. The website clearly says on the accommodation page: 2nd Paragraph: “Guests can enjoy a sauna and a heated indoor pool. ….” 4th Paragraph: “Free Wi-Fi and free private parking are available. …” My children very much enjoy swimming pools when they’re not on the internet and my wife also enjoys saunas and so I booked on the basis of the information supplied. The general facilities tab for the accommodation shows: Pool and wellness • Swimming Pool • Indoor pool (all year) • Fitness centre (Additional Charge) • Sauna Internet • WiFi is available in all areas and is free of charge. All rooms include: “Private bathroom, Hairdryer, Ironing facilities ….” From the rooms available at the time I booked a “Standard Quadruple room with Balcony” containing 2 single beds and 2 bunk beds at a total price of €138 which I paid via a Visa Debit card though the web site. The description of the accommodation and facilities along with the claim on the web site of the 2nd best hotel in Bigauņciems gave me good expectations that the accommodation would suit our needs for an enjoyable break. (laughable really as when I got there, I found there are only 2 hotels in that location ). On arrival we were met by a member of staff, who showed us the common dining room and kitchen and took us to room Num 3 where we were shown the door to our ‘balcony’. This was in fact a metal fire escape leading to the ground. It had close growing conifer trees and overlooked the ‘hotel’ junk yard which I obviously photographed for the record. We asked about the “pool” as we could not see anything that might be a pool and were told that there was no pool and no sauna available. My wife later discovered on the second evening while having a conversation with a member of staff in Russian that there was a sauna in a room marked “Private”, but that (paraphrased), ‘we don’t use it because we have so many guests’. Later we were allowed to store our luggage for a couple of hours between check out and departure in the same Private room. We saw that it was being used as a store room with mattresses and bed linen and was obviously not available to guests. The staff clearly didn’t want us to photograph this room. The only sign of any ‘pool’ was an empty circular ‘plunge pool’ of not more than 1m diameter. Wifi: The facilities says, “WiFi is available in all areas and is free of charge.” The normal expectation of a reasonable person would be that this would provide access to the internet. (Isn’t there something about internet access being a basic human right?). In truth is was sometimes possible to get a Wifi connection, but it did not give Internet access in most parts of the building that I tried. It was useless to us, unless we were in the common dining area on the ground floor. Not a complete disaster, but certainly not what was advertised. We returned from the beach on the first evening around 9 p.m. we found the shower was broken, and judging by the condition of the broken fitting, was of a long standing nature. Not the biggest problem in the world to hold the shower head up, although more difficult for the children to shower on their own, but certainly not a quality experience. Soon thereafter my children complained to me that the hot water in the shower had gone cold. I checked and there was no hot water from the shower or sink. I went to the reception and was told that it was because too many people had used the shower and that the accommodation’s boiler wasn’t able to make enough, but that it would be ok in about an hour. We ate and I checked the water on several occasions up until midnight and it was always cold. I checked again in the morning when it was at best tepid. So I ‘enjoyed’ two invigorating cold showers. I checked again in the late evening following our return from a day trip and again the water was cold. I spoke with another guest who said that they had never had hot water on any evening of their stay. – I took their name and address. This property and the facilities available to guests had clearly been misrepresented. Due to the lack of the advertised facilities: Wifi, proper balcony, indoor pool and sauna etc., I photographed and noted all of the problems and kept a copy of the website pages. I contacted the booking .com customer services on my return and informed them that I considered them to be in breach of contract due to their misrepresentation of the hotel and requested a full refund and claimed damages by way of the cost of a trip to the nearest indoor swimming pool with a sauna. I said that: I believed it was an express term, of the contract for services, that the facilities described would be provided as part of my booking at this hotel. It was also an implied term that the service provided would be done so with reasonable care and skill. Under UK law there are a number of pieces of legislation that provide consumer protection from unscrupulous or negligent traders, namely the: Misrepresentation Act 1967, Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (amended 2014), Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 and most recently the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I note now from their website that they disclaim liability for pretty much everything and state that “any dispute arising out of these general terms and conditions and our services shall exclusively be submitted to the competent courts in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.” I said I would be most surprised if there was not similar provision for consumer protection from misrepresentation by a business under the Dutch Civil Code. I also believe that Article 6 of EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DIRECTIVE 2005/29/EC – the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive covers misleading business practices (“A commercial practice shall be regarded as misleading if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful or in any way, including overall presentation, deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer, ….”), is generally applicable in this instance. And in any event the Consumer Right Directive 2013 should still apply. First off they claim to have not received my email. Then they offered 25 Eur compensation without acknowledging or answering any point of my claim. Next they said that it was difficult after the event and again offered 25 Eur. They now claim that: it’s nothing to do with them as they are just an ‘advertiser’, that the hotel does not accept my complaint and again they offered 25 Eur. I have raised the matter on the ODR platform for what it is worth. I have asked Visa about a charge back and they have said, “It’s a very weak claim, but if you want to submit it we’ll take a look.” Misrepresentation of the fraudulent kind is fairly clear in my eyes. I’ve taken a look at the Resolver web site, but that talks about legislation relating to package holidays, which I don’t believe is appropriate for room only bookings. So, please: 1 Am I barking up the wrong tree or being unrealistic in expecting things to be as described? 2 Anybody know about the ‘harmonisation’ of consumer laws across Europe or the Dutch Civil Code? 3 Which is the most appropriate legislation? 4 Anybody had experience of the “European Small Claims Procedure” (I hope I've included the relevant link) Thanks in advance for any info. Dave
  4. Wonder if anyone knows whether of not Ebay has any obligation to comply with European law relating to online selling? I found this on German Ebay site : http://pages.ebay.de/help/sell/business/international-business-sellers.html which seems to be pretty concise. Here is the UK version of the same page: http://pages.ebay.co.uk/help/sell/business/international-business-sellers.html Both pages are the same other than the fact Ebay UK have deleted the information about "online dispute resolution" (ODR) which seems to be something that ALL online business sellers should be offering if they are selling online and are based in or are dealing with customers in EU member states. Also in relation to online business sellers "The Electronic Commerce Regulations (2002)" requires contact details such as email and phone number to be displayed in a "clear and comprehensible" manner. I wonder is a clickable link displayed in the bottom left hand corner of business listings truly reflective of providing the contact info in a "clear and comprehensible manner"? Wonder if anyone else has concerns about Ebay seeming to ignore EU law in pursuit of even larger profits?
  5. Hi guys, Just had a quick thought and wondered if anyone could clarify if there may be a legal avenue here. I noticed that many providers of services to the DWP make use of this fund. Is there a case to be made that t he use of sanctions and the behaviour of some of these companies is at least not in the spirit of the European Social Fund agenda? I don't really know much about European law, I understand though that you generally have to exhaust things here before going up a level but surely there must be a way to raise this there. I'm email my MEP about the behaviour of some organisations who run the work programme, but just wondered if any of you could give any insights.
  6. Good evening all, I'm after some advice regarding changes my employer has made to my working day. Following the ruling in 2015 regarding travel to work time for mobile workers being counted as "working time", my employer has brought in changes at work from the beginning of this month. I work in the utilities industry, and my job involves me travelling around from site to site carrying out my duties. These sites include both company assets and customer properties. At the end of the working day, it is required that I return to my base location. Up until now, my working day starts at home and finishes when I clock out at base. We have always been paid from when we leave home until when we clock out at base. Travel home time has always been unpaid and our own time. From 1st October my company has now changed this to the following: We now clock in as normal at home, yet we now only start getting paid from when we reach our 1st job or after half an hours travel, which ever is the shorter. We then clock in again to start our "paid time". We then continue as before and clock out at base and then travel home in our own time as before. For the majority of my colleagues, their first job is over 30 minutes away from home, meaning that we are now having to do an extra 30 minutes a day for the same pay. This has in effect increased our working week by up to 2.5 hours. Having checked my contract, it states that I work a 37 hour week Monday to Friday, however after this change I will now have to do 39.5 hours a week for the same pay. My contract also states that any overtime is on an "ad hoc" basis only. The company have stated that the change to the EU law has brought in this change and that it is therefore not negotiable because it is now the law! Having trawled the internet, I cannot find anything which says that this ruling governs pay as this should be a matter for UK courts, not EU. Do I have any grounds to challenge this? Thanks in advance. MP.
  7. Does anyone really know what's going to happen..
  8. Employers can read workers' private messages sent via chat software and webmail accounts during working hours, judges have ruled. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) said a firm that read a worker's Yahoo Messenger chats sent while he was at work was within its rights. Judges said he had breached the company's rules and that his employer had a right to check on his activities. Such policies must also protect workers against unfettered snooping, they said. The judges, sitting in the ECHR in Strasbourg, handed down their decision on Tuesday. Countries that have ratified the European Convention on Human Rights, which include Britain, have agreed to abide by the ECHR rulings that involve them. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-35301148
  9. Does anyone know when the European directive entitling everyone in the EU to have a bank account becomes law in the UK ? Will it mean the end to banks asking a customer to close an account and go elsewhere ?
  10. The EU requires non-members of the euro to reduce the bank compensation scheme from £85,000, £75,000 because the value of the euro has dropped, as of 1st January 2016. What the hell has it got to do with Brussels what the UK government gives its people in compensation. Don’t you just love being a member of this rotten undemocratic club???
  11. Hi there guys I hope you can help I ordered an item, worth around £7500 via barclays sepa bank transfer from a company is Sweden. The company is legitimate and not a [problem] - however they failed to send the item after around 5 months. They are not cooperative in refunding either. I heard from a friend that there is a way to obtain a cancellation/refund/chargeback from Barclays (or any other bank) if an item is not shipped & the company is legitimate despite having done a bank transfer... can anyone tell me if they would do this or share their experience or guide me as the best way to approach this situation, im going to try to pop in on friday and see what they say. I have the online order number and full details for the company (the company staff in Sweden are actually fluent in English !) Thanks you guys...
  12. US court forces Microsoft to hand over personal data from Irish server Emails and private information from customers of US companies must be handed over – even if data is stored outside US So who takes priority here, the European Data Protection Act or the US Courts: [Careful if you have a weak heart, this will make you angry]. Privacy campaigners have warned that the decision, which would affect users of US internet services, shows "stark contempt" for European citizens and is in direct conflict with EU rules on data protection. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/29/us-court-microsoft-personal-data-emails-irish-server
  13. Hi everyone, I will try to keep it short. Came in the country last year and brought my car with me. The car is still under foreign license plate. I am renting a flat which has a parking spot allocated to it, the parking spot is private land and it is off the road too. Capital Carpark Control keep issuing me tickets for not displaying a UK Road tax disc. Can they do that? What I dont understand, the car has been parked there for a few months displaying a valid permit parking, so what exactly triggered the parking attendant to suddenly start giving me tickets for road tax? Can a private company issue tickets for something thats a matter of a public authority and on private land?
  14. Hi i am a new user ,last month i received a statutory demand, i applied for it to be set aside. I have been given a court date for 22nd of august, I need help on how to get this set aside, this is from a french judgement, i lost the case in france, i never understood what even happened. But to cut a long story short we had a charge placed on our property in france. We found it dificult to sell and eventually they told us it would go to auction the amount on the valuation was stupid. We drastically cut the price and managed to find a buyer, they agreed to the sale. They have now come on to us and say there is a shortfall and interest and costs. They also say they have a european enforcement order, we have been given no details of this from England or France. Does anyone know if we would be given details from the court? the first thing we knew was the statutory demand landing on the doorstep, it was served by a bailiff but we were overseas at the time. Any help please.
  15. Proposals to regulate buy-to-let mortgages in the same way as residential loans are set to be scrapped from the European mortgage directive. Negotiations for the directive were held in Brussels last week between member states, European commissioners and MEPs. Conservative MEP and shadow rapporteur Vicky Ford says it was agreed that buy-to-let will not be regulated in the same way as residential mortgages, as initially proposed. Ford says progress was also made on tough new rules for packaged products, proposed by the European Parliament last year, which would ban all products that require a savings account not directly linked to paying off the mortgage. Current proposals exempt offset mortgages but would see some deals designed to help first-time buyers banned, such as Lloyds Banking Group’s Lend a Hand range and Barclays’ family springboard mortgages. Ford says she is confident both buy-to-let and guarantor mortgages will be protected under the directive. She says: “We are back in a good place on buy-to-let. “On [packaged] deals, we have not won the argument but it is moving in the right direction. When I explain the product we are trying to protect, it is understood that we need to save them but we need to find the right language. I understand the problems around this because there have been some very opaque practices by certain banks and mortgage lenders, [packaging] insurance products with mortgages for example.” Association of Mortgage Intermediaries chief executive Robert Sinclair says: “We do not want to ban some of the innovation we have seen in the UK recently, particularly the new Barclays products which are really useful. They would be effectively wiped out under the existing proposals.” Link: http://www.mortgagestrategy.co.uk/latest-news/uk-wins-ground-in-european-mortgage-directive-negotiations/1067787.article
  16. When the current Work Programme (WP) was rolled out in 2011 it was said to cost £5 Billion, since when it is estimated to have risen to £7 Billion. It was not widely reported however that the European Social Fund (ESF) contributed £2.5 Billion, half of the original sum. One of the stipulations in the regulations of the ESF is that all recipients of ESF funding show the ESF logo and a statement to the effect that - 'This programme is part-financed by the European Union' - on all documents, letters, advisory leaflets etc. The DWP is a recipient of ESF funding, quite a significant recipient. Therefore it should include the logo and the statement recited above on all documents etc especially those related to the WP or other similar schemes. It follows that the WP providers are all also recipients of ESF funding. Failure to comply with any ESF regulation, including this one, is a breach of the regulations and may result in the repayment of funds and/or the levying of fines. The letter I got yesterday notifying me of changes to WP regulations had no ESF logo and no mention of ESF at all. I have other letters from them with like omissions. Other readers may wish to check their mail to see if the same breach is repeated in their case. Googling the ESF website will get the address of the nearest ESF Marketing and Publicity Office to you should you, wish to notify them of this breach. A letter to your local Jobcentre manager would not go amiss either.
  17. Its thought that the move is to offset income losses following the recent caps on European roaming and call charges http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/bills/article-2226168/O2-roaming-charges-mobile-network-doubles-text-prices-outside-EU.html
  18. Hi - I'm currently quite in some predicament as by the looks of it I have to start 2 separate court actions relating to the same item... In a nutshell: Sold an item of quite some value (bit more than 1k) to a retailer of these speciality items in the Netherlands (I'm a private individual). The transaction has nothing to do with Ebay and was completely independently negotiated. As an alternative to Paypal we agreed for the buyer in the NL to pay the money into an escrow account run by a solicitor practice in Germany. Following confirmation from the solicitor practice in Germany, that the escrow deposit had been received, I sent the item via courier (UPS) in July 2012. According to UPS tracking the item was received and signed for 2 days later. 5 days after receiving the item the recipient claimed the item to be damaged (claiming the packaging was intact externally and he had no time to unpack it earlier). Based on his comments and images sent, I raised an enquiry with the booking agent who forwarded my claim to UPS. UPS requested an on-site inspection of the item; - which the recipient refused. As UPS rejected liability in the first instance, the booking agent's goods in transit insurance based their rejection on UPS' decision. I have requested the recipient since mid August 2012 numerous times (in compliance with the terms and conditions set out by the German solicitor company holding the escrow deposit) – to return the item to me in order for me to agree to release the money in the Escrow account back to the him. Since my first request in August 2012 he has not returned the item to me and instead come up with various insinuations and accusations apparently justifying why he is going to keep the item at his premises till further notice (unless I provide him with an unlimited guarantee to release the money in the escrow deposit account to him, no matter in which condition the item is returned to me - in which case he could send me an empty box and still try to force me to release the money to him). Hence I have already sent a letter before action to the courier booking agent and only received an acknowledgement letter from their solicitor missing any date by which they intend to respond as well as missing any additional information I requested from them. Separately I'm now in the process of filing an European small claims case (ESCP) against the buyer in NL in order for him to return the item to me or for him to pay the item. I'd be very grateful for further advice - eg. regarding the UK small claims time-scales (the CPR only state a reasonable timespan) tomorrow the 14 day deadline set in my letter before action has been reached yet due to their acknowledgement I was told by someone with a legal background I would have to provide them with another 14 days before filing the claim? When submitting the claim, does it have to be accompanied by a covering letter - if so - are there any templates on here? Further can anyone advise me regarding successful self-representation in court as due to circumstances I cannot afford a solicitor? There had been a similar thread some time ago ("DHL Courier Service - lost items - no re-imbursement") and due to not having enough posts I cannot contact the OP and others who had been successful in similar cases directly... Also regarding the ESCP - where would I have to file it? I'm hoping to be able to file it here rather than in NL based on 'place of performance of the obligation in question' - however I'm not sure if returning the item qualifies as that..??? Further regarding claiming costs of proceedings - as I cannot foresee which expenses I might have during the course of the ESCP can I just state an estimated amount? - the guidelines available for download don't specify it more in detail! I'd be grateful for responses from anyone with personal experience of the ESCP!!! Also - would it help to put pressure on the person in NL to file a criminal report for embezzlement (and may be attempted fraud as a few of his statements/claims were quite dubious to say the least - however I haven't much tangible evidence for that) with the police - if so here in the UK or in NL? Many thanks
  19. I bought a yoghurt maker from amazon UK, It was from Amazon not some one selling on amazon. It is a severin yoghurt Maker with 14 jars. I received it this morning and when opened it I discovered that It had a European 2 pin plug. Not a British standard 3pin plug. And no adapter or any thing was included, so can't use it. No where in description on there website does it state that it comes a euro 2pin plug. Can they legally sell kitchen appliances like this with just a European 2 pin plug. I have searched on Google and came up with this THE PLUGS AND SOCKETS etc. (SAFETY) REGULATIONS 1994 REQUIRES most electrical appliances intended for domestic use to be supplied pre-fitted with a standard 3-pin plug that is independently certificated as complying with British Standard BS1363. There are some exceptions to this such as electric cookers intended to be permanently connected to the main wiring in a house. Items fitted with a non-UK plug (e.g. a 2 pin Europlug) may be supplied provided they have been fitted with an approved 3 pin conversion plug which must enclose the fitted plug and can only be removed with the use of a tool. Should the yoghurt maker have been supplied with just a 2 pin plug and no adapter or any thing. Is there any way to safely use yoghurt maker. My husband says he will cut off 2 pin plug and re wire a 3 pin plug but im not sure about this. As im not sure it would be safe would it and it would void warranty. So if after doing this we plug it in and find machine does not work we would not be able to return it. Is there a adapter that we could buy that would be safe. Should I just return yoghurt maker to Amazon. And If it is illegal to sell such a appliance like this with just 2 pin plug who would I report it to. Is it trading standards. Any advice would be much appreciated thanks in advance
×
×
  • Create New...