Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'practice'.



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 23 results

  1. Yesterday in the House of Commons, Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill entitled: Parking (Code of Practice) Bill received its 2nd reading. The support that he received was overwhelming (and thoroughly deserved) and the Bill now passes to the Committee stage. Rougue private parking operators have cause for concern. Yesterdays debate is worthy of reading: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debat...ailiff#g1160.0
  2. Letting Agents Registration and Code of Practice Comes into force 31st January 2018 ***Scotland Only*** The Housing (Scotland) Act 2014 made provisions for the mandatory letting agent registration, regulation and training requirements in Scotland. Housing (Scotland) Act 2014: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2014/14/contents/enacted Part 4 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 2014 makes provision for the registration, regulation and training requirements for letting agents in Scotland. They include a mandatory register of letting agents, a ‘fit and proper’ person test, training requirements, a code of practice to which all letting agents must adhere and enforcement through the new First-Tier Tribunal. The Letting Agent Registration (Scotland) Regulations 2016 sets out the training requirements that those applying to join the register of letting agents must meet and additional information required for registration. This was laid before the Scottish Parliament on 22nd December 2016 and comes into force 31st January 2018. The Letting Agent Registration (Scotland) Regulations 2016: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2016/432/introduction/made Letting Agent Registration Guide: https://www.mygov.scot/letting-agent-registration/who-needs-to-register/ The Register of Letting Agents will be a list run by Scottish Ministers that will make sure every letting agent is suitable to do the job and has met minimum training requirements. --legal obligations relating to letting agency work and the rights and responsibilities of tenants and landlords --handling of tenants’ and landlords’ money --arranging and managing a tenancy --managing repairs and maintenance --customer communications --complaints handling --equality issues The Letting Agent Code of Practice (Scotland) Regulations 2016 were laid before the Scottish Parliament and will come into force on 31st January 2018. The Letting Agent Code of Practice (Scotland) Regulations 2016: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/sdsi/2016/9780111030912 Those engaged in letting agency work must also comply with the Letting Agent Code of Practice. The Code of Practice is set out in The Letting Agent Code of Practice (Scotland) Regulations 2016 and contains general duties including: --complying with relevant legislation --providing accurate information --applying procedures consistently and reasonably --dealing with complaints --ensuring compliance by employees and subcontractors --handling private information sensitively --not to unlawfully discriminate --carrying out services in a timely fashion and with due skill and care Housing and Property Chamber First-tier Tribunal for Scotland: https://www.housingandpropertychamber.scot/
  3. I rang the GP surgery due to having problems with the online booking system, this particular bad mannered receptionist talked down to me in a demeaming manner, telling me to use the online booking system at 7.45am in the morning. I tell her the online booking system is showing the next 3 weeks as not available to book an appointment and question her why? Her response to use it 7.45am in the morning or ring for an appointment at 8am. I tell her I can't because I'm travelling to work that time, she responds thats the only option and she gets more and more agressive during the call, like she's on a power trip. I tell her I'm making a complaint. I ring back after a few days, its the same receptionist, she takes my details (d.o.b), I ask to speak to the Practice Manager, she tells me 'We don't escalate calls to the practice manager. you have to put it into writing'. She keeps on repeating this over and over. I feel I'm getting no where and she's looking for a verbal confrotation after realising its me who and she asks "is it about the complaint against me?" I say no, but she asks "so whats the complaint about about you want to tell the practice manager or is it about not getting your appopintment within the 3 day time limit (I was given it 3 weeks later!!!) She asks "is it about the complaint against me? or about your appointment in 3 weeks time" I tell her its neither, but she keeps interrogating me over and over. Her tone of voice is aggressive, she talking loudly and I can hear her colleagues in the background. She tells me "I can't give you the practice manangers details, put the complaint in writing" and she's questioning me time and time about what issue is about (she's trying to find out why I want to speak to the practice manager, so she can pre-empt and try to cover her tracks before the practice manager receives the complaint. I can hear her colleagues in the background and tell her, she's breaking confidentiality/privacy by talking loud about my matter in from of her colleagues (she's buzzing of the power trip in front of her colleagues". She tells me I'm breaking confidentiality by talking to her in the presence of my family because she can hear them in the background!!! She tells me the call is recorded and we are not getting anywhere and she will end the call. I say her attitude towards me is bad, she's not professional and she's now talking over me, interrupting me constantly, then she slams the phone down. My health is not good at the moment and this effected my health....what can I do now to put her strong complaint in and get this receptionist dismissed because of above and she's openly discussed my issue with her colleagues and she went through my notes when she took the call, trying to find out if she could find out why I wanted to speak to the practice manager. Please help.
  4. I was surfing as normal and came across a very new code of practice from an LA in this case Halton Borough Council (HBC) dated the 17/05/2016 I have briefly read it and seems rather fair although at this time it is in it's draft format. Thoughts anyone? Link here >> http://councillors.halton.gov.uk/documents/s32725/Code%20of%20Practice%20draft.docx
  5. Hello, I'm after some insight into employment law please, as I'm at a total loss. I was employed last year on a 24 hour a week contract. (I've now worked about 11 months, so I'm well aware I'm under the two years needed to avoid being fired for any reason for making a fuss). However, every week since I commenced my employment I've regularly worked between 30 and 65 hours a week. I'm also paid weekly. I asked about holiday entitlement yesterday as I've already had two weeks off (10 days) but was only paid 4 of them as holiday. I was told that because my contract is for 24 hours a week my holiday is only pro rata. Taking in to account 45 payslips I've now had, the mean average working hours is 45hrs p/w. Surely I should be entitled to more than my contracted hours of holiday entitlement, or am I just ****ing in the wind?
  6. The following report has been issued today by Citizen's Advice: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/Global/CitizensAdvice/Debt%20and%20Money%20Publications/Thestateofdebtcollection.pdf
  7. Within the reply I received from the judicator was; "the business has accepted that its level of service was poor during their investigation of your **** fraud allegations and complaint. In this respect, the business has agreed to my suggestion that they award a payment of £150 for any trouble and upset caused" The above offer/award is only available to me if I sign to accept that it is a "full and final settlement of this complaint". Although this would not prevent me asking an ombudsman to make a final decision.
  8. Before signing my Pru pension claim form I did not know how much I would get. They clearly state prior to claim that the pension pot figure is a "quote" and could vary by 10%. In my case approx 4500 above or below their "quote". Theirs and the government literature advised me to shop around. They advised me to think before I decided. How can you shop around when you don't know how much you've got? How can you make a decision when you don't know what you've got? I complained. They didn't answer my complaint, they sent me £175 but no letter telling me what it was. I rang them to find out and they told me a letter was on its way. It never came. My retirement date passed, they made it clear pension was paid about five weeks after the signing of the forms. I was now losing money, still no reply on which to base my decision. I made a default decision. After about five weeks I was notified my pension was on its way. It was based on a satisfactory figure and I had crossed the rubicon. Now by magic the answer to my complaint appeared. Had I known then what I know now I would have made a different decision. I have taken it up with group CEO Mike Wells. I am £600 down on my default decision, GOK on taking it all! Watch this space. They are guided by the Financial Conduct Authority. Who was instrumental in setting up the FCA? You guessed it, the Pru!
  9. Hi Just some advice. Went to Mexico 8yrs ago. Hubby bought me ring and matching earrings consisting of white and blue diamonds. Had valued when I got home and all good. Last night I went to get them from my jewelry box as it was my daughters prom but they weren't there. I've ripped the house apart but can't find them. I rang my insurance company and they've accepted the claim and I've been told I'll be contacted by LMG to discuss my options. The ring and earrings were handmade to what I wanted. They've said LMG will try there best to replicate them and if not I can have a voucher for a jewelry store. I don't want earrings from a shop. I want mine replicated so I feel as though I never lost them but worried this can't be done. The earrings were valued at £1495 8 years ago. Do I have any other options?
  10. Hi, I contacted SHELTER SCOTLAND regarding Calling up notice in Scotland and they gave me a very good information .Below i have paste the information from Shelter Scotland for fellow Scots who's been threathend Repossession by the Bank. Dear .............. Further to our telephone conversation I have the following information for you. I note that you wish to challenge a Calling-up Notice on the basis that RBS have so far failed to provide you with a breakdown of the money due by you. There are two legal provisions to consider at this stage. There are two legal provisions to consider at this stage. Firstly, under Section 19(9) Feudal Conveyancing and Reform Act 1970, upon receipt of a Calling Up Notice, a debtor may request a ‘statement of the amount as finally determined.’ This must clearly be in response to the debtor having received the Notice, as opposed to a general request for information, Bank of Scotland v. Flett 1995 SCLR 591. The creditor must respond within one month from the date of serving the Calling Up Notice (s19(9). Should the creditor fail to comply with the request, the Calling Up is of no effect. Should they provide the statement as requested and within one month of service of the Calling Up, the notice will take effect. The debtor nevertheless has the opportunity to attend court or be represented, and she may have a Pre-Action Requirement defence as follows:- It is also possible to raise court proceedings for suspension of a Calling up Notice, however this would be where the existence of the debt is disputed and not for a dispute as to the level of the debt, and the breakdown of the various component parts- interest, charges etc. Secondly, under Section 24A(2) of the Feudal Conveyancing and Reform Act 1970 which covers the Pre-Action Requirements creditors are now required to provide the debtor with clear information about:- (a)the terms of the standard security; (b)the amount due to the creditor under the standard security, including any arrears and any charges in respect of late payment or redemption; and ©any other obligation under the standard security in respect of which the debtor is in default. The Applications by Creditors (Pre-Action Requirements)(Scotland) Order 2010, Article 2 states that (2) In providing the debtor with clear information for the purposes of section 5B(2) of the 1894 Act and section 24A(2) of the 1970 Act— (a)information about the terms of the security must include a description of the nature and level of any charges that may be incurred by virtue of the contract to which the security relates if the default is not remedied; and (b)information about the amount due to the creditor under the security, including any arrears and any charges in respect of late payment must be broken down so as to show— (i)the total amount of the arrears; and (ii)the total outstanding amount due including any charges already incurred. (3) For the purposes of those sections “charges” do not include any expenses for which the debtor is personally liable to the creditor by virtue of paragraph 12 of Schedule 3 to the 1970 Act, as read with section 11 of that Act(1). (4) The information required to be provided to the debtor by virtue of those sections must be provided as soon as is reasonably practicable upon the debtor entering into default. It is not entirely clear whether this requirement to provide clear information applies both before expiry of the Calling up Notice and after expiry. In any event, it would be advisable for you write to RBS or their solicitors requesting this information before service and after expiry. Should the creditor fail to comply with the Pre-Action Requirements the action would be incompetent. If you receive court papers you should take legal advice as soon as possible. Helpline Adviser T: 0808 800 4444 Shelter Scotland Glasgow Advice Service 1st Floor, Suite 2 Breckenridge House 274 Sauchiehall Street Glasgow, G2 3EH
  11. CCTV code of practice - revised http://ico.org.uk/about_us/consultations/our_consultations Responses to this consultation must be submitted by 1 July 2014.
  12. As from 1st February 2011 those Log Book Loan companies that are members for the Consumer Credit Trade Association have to adhere to a new code of practice, this new code of conduct covers debt collection, enforcement of arrears and innocent purchasers of vehicles with previous log book loans attached. Log Book Loans Code of Practice 5. THIRD PARTY PURCHASERS 5.1 Members shall afford innocent purchasers of vehicles, that are subject to a Bill of Sale, the same protection as afforded under the Hire-Purchase Act 1964 Part III - „Title to Motor Vehicles on Hire-Purchase or Conditional Sale‟, but only insofar as title shall transfer to the innocent purchaser in the event that the Member failed to register his interest in that vehicle with a relevant Asset Finance Register Company within 24 hours of execution of the agreement. Trust this helps, good luck.
  13. alalia

    Practice managers

    Hiya, I was just wondering. when you make a complaint to a GP surgeries practice manager, do they have the right to tell you who to take it higher to, but then send your emails off and open a case up with YOUR complaint themselves? Is this a breach of confidentiality? Surely it is up to the complainant if they actually want to take the complaint higher. I hope that made sense lol.
  14. Brighthouse stopped their "optional" insurance from 2nd September and started to sell their goods and insurances as part of one package. I guess they did this as many people were claiming back the money they had paid for the insurances Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations says that unfair commercial practices are prohibited. Brighthouse were previously saying the insurances were now optional but have since taken the optional away and are forcing customers to pay for the insurances whether they want them or not. This I believe is just another unfair commercial practice used by Brighthouse. Another unfair practice is that Brighthouse do not provide a value for the product and a value for the insurances, making it impossible for the average customer to make an informed decision in their purchase. (again, against CPUTR) I only know one customer of Brighthouse, she is a single mum who desperately needed chairs / couch. She managed to claim back the insurances from Brighthouse. There is very little money left to pay on her couch and she is looking to get something new for christmas but Brighthouse staff wouldnt sell to her unless she bought everything including the insurances. She is still probably going to buy from Brighthouse Wondering if anyone is going to attempt to claim money from Brighthouse from new agreements taken out after 2nd September? eg - if you have taken out a new agreement after 2nd September, maybe you could think about claiming your refund of extra money paid and use CPUTR? Brighthouse say they offer a competitive priced product. So you could get a price comparison from the high street and using CPUTR you can hopefully claim the difference in price? Just a thought:?:
  15. New Subject Access Code of Practice The ICO has published its new Subject Access Code of Practice. During 2012/13 the ICO received more complaints about subject access requests than any other topic, with over 6,000 complaints handled during this period. One in six of these complaints related to the financial sector, while one in ten related to the health sector. A link to the new Code of Practice is below: . http://www.ico.org.uk/~/media/documents/library/Data_Protection/Detailed_specialist_guides/subject-access-code-of-practice.PDF
  16. Payout for used car salesman, 52, fired for being ‘too old’ A used car salesman thrown on the scrapheap because of his age has won a multi-thousand pound payout. Gary Hawkins, 52, took legal action against the Black Country motor dealership Carcraft where he worked as manager after complaining he’d been told there were too many miles on his bodyclock. Speaking after a Birmingham employment tribunal backed his claim of age discrimination, he said: “I have struck a blow for middle aged men and women everywhere.” And the Sutton Coldfield businessman, who has a four-year-old daughter, laughed: “I didn’t even know I wasn’t part of the youth culture until they got rid of me.” He is remaining tight-lipped over the scale of the payout, but admitted it ran into thousands. At an earlier hearing, Gary said bosses at CC Automotive Group Ltd, which trades in Wednesbury as Carcraft, told him bluntly his career with the business was over because of his age. The company denied ageism and claimed the employee had failed to motivate his team and had not trained them properly. The firm’s “pressurised environment” was outlined to the Birmingham hearing. Gary said two managers were sacked in one day by a boss, while another resigned. The boss had been on “a high following the sackings,” he said. “He was looking for another to be dismissed. The third to be dismissed was me.” Gary insisted he was shown the door because of his age and had earlier been told: “You are too old at 52.” He denied his showroom performance had been shoddy and stressed there were regular team meetings, where ways of improving sales were discussed, along with training techniques. The company alleged there had been issues over a “number count” of customers and sales logs. Other roles had been offered to Gary, the tribunal heard, but he refused a move. The firm admitted, however, heads had rolled, with others losing their jobs. Tribunal judge Peter Rose QC asked the ages of other managers, past and present. Gary had been the oldest in his field, it emerged. He has since gained a new job as a manager in the car sales industry. His delighted wife Heather, aged 48, said: “Gary’s definitely not over the hill. He has three daughters and a son and they keep him on his toes. “Really, the whole thing has done him a good turn because he’s now got the best job in the world. More... Perhaps he could come here and give us the low down on this gutter company.
  17. Hi Bought a car (BMW 520) from carcraft Merseyside, 8months ago. They sold me a finance package with exorbitant interest rate (black horse) on the pretext that If i paid the whole sum within 14 days (which I was going to), I would not pay a penny in interest & by me signing upto this finance package, they Will get a commission. As I had nothing to loose, I agreed & signed in good faith.i was also promised that should I find it difficult to pay the full amount within 14 days, they will refinance within that period in a very competitive interest rate as they (car craft) had their own finance institution (which I later found out was a lie). Next day, I checked with my accountant & realised I could not buy the car under my company name, so decided to either return the car or refinance. They did neither but kept on delaying, whole all the time talking very politely & cheating with more & more lies. Few days later, they found out that my name in the finance agreement was misspelt & they panicked as I was keen to return the car unless they got me a competitive finance. They called me saying they have got a new finance package & showed an interest rate of 5.7% APR (original finance 26% APR) & got me to sign new documents. I later received a finance agreement from black horse for 26% APR & when I called black horse, I was told there was no refinancing & the second signature was mainly to amend the first agreement as the first signature was misspelt. I was upset & threatened to sue carcraft for unfair trade practice & inform black horse about their manipulative tactics to gain commission. They finally agreed to refinance and at that time of refinancing sold me an extended warranty for 3 yrs. I was not keen & the sales person promised that he will offer the 1st year standard warranty to be tagged to the end of the 3 year period . On that agreement I signed upto the warranty & he said his central office will send a letter to this effect. I did not receive any letter. After several phone calls, I made a formal complaint & received an arrogant reply stating that the sales person has left them & they can't confirm as this was a verbal agreement & I had no proof. PLEASE DONT GO ANYWHERE NEAR CARCRAFT.
  18. Shocking stories of bullying following their incompetence in correct billing. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-2232395/EDF-bullies-threatened-debt-collectors.html
  19. Citizens Advice says more and more people will soon be at the mercy of aggressive debt collectors, and that an industry not known for compassion needs reining in. By Jon Robins The sum of £13 might seem trivial, but for Kerry Goodwin it led to an unpleasant doorstep encounter with a bailiff demanding immediate payment of more than £500. The small sum was a fee incurred for late payment of a £50 parking fine in 2011. Goodwin, 29 and from Fareham, Hampshire, bought a parking ticket, thought she had displayed it, but on her return found a notice on her windscreen and no ticket to be seen. Fareham borough council gave her a week to pay up or return with the lost ticket. She searched for it with no success, returned within the week and paid up. But one evening just before Christmas a demand was posted through her door for £383 as a result of "late payment of the fine". Goodwin, knowing she had paid on time, ignored it. The next day the bailiff turned up at her house demanding £577. "He said he was either going to come into my house or take my car if I didn't pay up," Goodwin says. "I was nine months pregnant and standing there with my two-year-old boy. He was rude and intimidating." Goodwin managed to pay the money over the phone, and the council later confirmed she had indeed paid the fine on time, but for some reason a late fee had been added to her account. It said it couldn't find her to chase it up, though the bailiff seemed to have no such problem. Goodwin then went to her local Citizens Advice and, with its help, obtained an apology from the council and a cheque for £100. Citizens Advice is calling on the government to seize a last opportunity to tackle aggressive bailiffs through its crime and court bill, which is making its way through parliament. "Bailiffs are overstating their powers, seizing goods they are not allowed to take, and their fees are ramping up people's debts way beyond what they can afford to repay," says chief executive Gillian Guy. Citizens Advice is reporting a 38% increase in problems with private bailiffs working for councils, from 40,900 in 2007-08 to 56,300 in 2012. The group, along with other debt charities, has been calling for tougher sanctions and for complaints about bailiffs to be brought under the legal ombudsman's remit. In January the Ministry of Justice announced rules to curb the excesses of bailiffs, including outlawing late night visits. Joanna Kennedy, chief executive of debt charity Zacchaeus 2000 Trust, says: "We deal on a daily basis with vulnerable debtors who are harassed and threatened by bailiffs. Although we consider the MoJ proposals a step forward, we are concerned there is still no independent complaints procedure." Charities argue that the situation will get worse next month when changes to council tax support come in. The reform will "undoubtedly push thousands of vulnerable families into debt, where they will find themselves at the mercy of bailiffs," Kennedy says. "It is essential we have statutory standards for bailiffs dealing with vulnerable debtors and an effective complaints procedure for when these standards are not upheld." But in a consultation paper last year the MoJ appeared to take the view that an independent regulator was not needed. Shortly before Christmas, peers voted to support an amendment proposed by Baroness Meacher to the crime and courts bill to provide "protection for vulnerable people who have suffered unacceptably at the hands of a bailiff". She said the legal ombudsman was "able and willing" to take on this role. The amendment was debated and voted on in the Commons last week, but wasn't passed. The bill now goes back to the Lords tomorrow and debt groups hope there will be an opportunity for peers to raise the issue again. Citizens Advice also wants to give the debtor the opportunity to make an application to court to stay or suspend the bailiff's notice "on the grounds that the enforcement action being taken is disproportionate to the debt involved, and the debtor's goods are sufficient in value to satisfy the debts", says senior social policy officer Sue Edwards. "It's an industry-wide problem, which is why we want to see a proper licensing system for bailiff firms coupled with strong sanctions so that those who break the rules are struck off," Guy says. DOS AND DON'TS A bailiff should send a letter to inform clients of a visit, but it can be scary to find one at the door. Here are some tips: ■ Never open the door or invite a bailiff in – you can talk to them via a locked and secured door; ■ Make sure everyone is aware of the situation and that children do not open the door – but if they do, don't panic, as this does not count as peaceful entry; ■ Explain that you will not let them in and eventually they will go away; ■ Make sure doors and windows are locked; ■ Do not get into a fight with the bailiffs – this could be a criminal offence. Bailiffs can enter your home without permission if: ■ They are collecting unpaid criminal fines imposed by a magistrates court; ■ The bailiffs have previously gained peaceful entry; ■ They are county court bailiffs entering commercial property; ■ They are collecting income tax or VAT and have permission from the court. Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2013/mar/25/bailiffs-stamping-out-bad-practice
  20. Hi, hope this is the right place to post. I received a threatening letter from a DCA shortly after they bought my debt. Letter was a threat to put a charging order on my property. I've since discovered from reading the OFT rules on unfair practice that a threat that a legal action eg a charging order before any court has made a judgement is deemed unfair. Can anyone tell me or point me to other threads of how I go about reporting this to the OFT. I have copied the original letter from the DCA and they have since sent me a screen print of correspondence sent to me which shows they sent this letter and that they themselves refer to it as a 'Charging order threat letter'. Any help on how to report these amoeba appreciated
  21. As the title suggests. I recently asked why Sefton council continue to use such a disreputable firm as Jacobs Certified Bailiffs to collect on council tax arrears even when the person(s) being persued hvae tried to make reasonable repayments and repayment scheme with the council. Their reply was that they had a duty by law to the residents of the borrough to collect on unpaid council tax as quickly as possible. They also deny having any knowledge of any instances where there have been complaints, upheld or otherwise, against Jacobs Certified Bailiffs acting on their instruction. I would like evidence that there have been complaints made against them to Sefton council, I am positive it exists. Any one here made a complaint and what was the outcome/reply? I currently have a list of [EDIT] violations, mainly [EDIT] . I will post the thread when i send if off and start getting replies etc...
  22. I note that the BPA have published their new Code of Practice on their website, It is interesting to read the maximum charge of £100 is mentioned time and time again. However, I am at a loss to understand how amounts such as this can be an accurate pre estimate of loss particularly when the Department for Transport has issed the following statement. Charges for breaking a parking contract must be reasonable and a genuine pre-estimate of loss. This means charges must compensate the landholder only for the loss they are likely to suffer because the parking contract has been broken. For example, to cover the unpaid charges and the administrative costs associated with issuing the ticket to recover the charges. Charges may not be set at higher levels than necessary to recover business losses and the intention should not be to penalise the driver. At the end of this rather long an boring document clearly designed to try and justify the existence of this questionable industry , it states that courts action or debt collectors should be used to try and recover unpaid charges. In my opinion, the above DfT statemnt combined with the recent case in S****horpe case will deter them from using the courts and of course we have been ignoring debt collectors since the Duke of Edinburgh was a boy. So is there any real change other than the long overdue clamping ban in England and Wales and the fact that the keeper/owner of the vehicle now has the opportunity to IGNORE.
  23. As published by BIS in May,the codes will include; a good practice customer charter explaining how the loan works and the costs involved; a commitment to inform customers three days before money is withdrawn; increased transparency about loan repayment so that consumers can make informed decisions and are not surprised by hidden payments; more help for customers in financial difficulty by freezing charges and interest; robust credit and affordability assessments to ensure loans are suitable for the customer’s situation; and effective compliance monitoring by the Trade Associations to root out poor practice in the industry. 1. A Good Practice Customer Charter to be published by 25 July 2012 setting out in a clear, concise and user-friendly format what customers of payday and other short-term loans should expect from their lender. This Charter will: · highlight lenders’ key commitments to customers, including clear information about how the loan works, the price per £100 borrowed as well as the APR, and charges for extending the term of the loan (‘rolling over’) and default; · explain how lenders will communicate with customers and how customers can contact them; · explain how they assess if customers can afford a loan; · explain how to complain if there is a problem and signpost customers to sources of free and independent debt advice and relevant helplines; · sit along with each trade association’s individual Codes and be easily accessible via lenders’ websites or at business premises. 2. Increased transparency about loan repayments to help consumers make better informed decisions and making sure that continuous payment authority is not used inappropriately for those in financial difficulty. Lenders have committed to: · only extend (‘rollover’) the term of their loan at the specific request of the customer and after reminding the customer of the risks of extending a short term loan; · provide consumers with a clear explanation of how continuous payment authority works and how payments will be deducted from their bank accounts. This will help consumers decide whether this type of repayment is acceptable to them before they take out the loan; · set out consumers’ rights to cancel a continuous payment authority before they take out a loan, reminding them that if they cancel they will still owe any outstanding debt and the need to provide an alternative method of payment on the due date to avoid going into default; · always pre-notify consumers by email, text, letter or phone at least three days[1] in advance before attempting to recover repayment using continuous payment authority on the due date. This notice will encourage customers to contact the lender if they are in financial difficulties and cannot repay; · Where customers have failed to make repayment on the due date, send further regular reminders to customers when a continuous payment authority is being used, providing a contact point for the customer if they are experiencing repayment problems; · Repay any amounts recovered by the continuous payment authority if the customer is in financial difficulty. 3. More help for customers in financial difficulty: Lenders have committed to: · freeze charges and interest if a reasonable repayment plan can be agreed, or after a maximum of 60 days of non-payment; · engage sympathetically and positively with the customer and split the loan into realistic repayments to be repaid over a longer period, where appropriate; · provide customers with a ‘breathing space’ of 30 to 60 days where they are making a genuine effort to agree a repayment plan. 4. Robust credit assessments: Lenders have committed to: · undertake sound, proper and appropriate affordability assessments and credit vetting as part of each loan application and before the term of a loan is extended (‘rollover’); · check the suitability of the loan given the customer’s situation · remind the customer that the loan is only suitable for borrowing over a short-term and not over a longer-term. 5. Effective compliance monitoring of members by their trade associations to ensure improved self-regulation and root out poor practice in the payday and short-term markets. The trade associations have committed to: · meaningful and enforceable sanctions in their Codes (up to and including expulsion from membership for serious non-compliance) · delivering rigorous internal complaints procedures; · taking a proactive approach to monitoring compliance with their codes and regular meetings with the OFT to discuss areas of concern in the market. · undertake a review of the effectiveness of these changes to the Codes 12 months after they come into effect and in light of the OFT’s current study of the market and publish the findings. Definition: Payday and other short-term loans include an agreement where you can borrow a small amount of money (usually between £50 and £800) and repay the loan over a short period (typically one or two months). [1] Where contact is being made by telephone, this timeframe will be influenced by the customer actually receiving the call. Full details;http://news.bis.gov.uk/Press-Releases/Better-help-for-consumers-in-financial-difficulty-from-payday-loans-67a77.aspx
×
×
  • Create New...