Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • IMG_2820-IMG_2820-merged.pdfmerged.pdf Case management was this morning. Here is the Sheriff’s order. Moved case forward to 24/05.   He said there was no signed agreement and after a bit of “erm, erm, yeah but, erm” when he asked them, he allowed time for sol to contact claimant.  what is the next step now? thank you UCM  
    • I've had a quick (well, quick for a thread of this length),  read of this thread and to be honest I'm struggling to make heads nor tails of the actual crux of the issue here. You seem awfully convinced that whatever is going on is worth the fight and the odds are in your favour but with how the thread has gone it seems that one trail goes cold so you simply move on to another in an attempt to delay the inevitable. All it does is end up digging holes and confusing others and yourself which means any advice given to you is completely pointless. I note that for the life of this thread there has not been any documentation or correspondence uploaded for people to have a look. Have you got any that you'd be willing to redact and upload for members to assist you? Right now, it seems people are shooting out advice while being in the dark because it's starting to become very difficult for people who weren't here at the start of this (including myself) to follow along. Right now, this whole thread is just hypothetical "He said, she said" and is going nowhere fast. Nothing more than basic advice can be given which, as you've sought out some legal advice, is likely not sufficient to actually come to any sort of conclusion. I, personally, am starting to agree with others that it may be best to consider bankruptcy and put the matter behind you.  
    • Thanks for coming back to us. There are no guarantees - but remember that so far MET have not had the guts to put even a single case before a judge.  Not once. Yours is one of seven court cases. Three ongoing like yours. In two MET bottled it as Witness Statement stage approached. In one the allocating judge decided their Particulars of Claim were rubbish and threw the case in the bin. Just the one victory by MET by default when the motorist stupidly didn't file a defence. So there is every chance that MET will throw in the towel in your case too if you stand firm. Please keep us informed of what is happening. Regarding being abroad, that is no reason for things going wrong, you can request an on-line hearing and we've had several cases where the PPC gave up when the motorist moved abroad. But please keep us in the loop.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

CCA request - is it 12 working days or 12 calendar days?


hackers0ns
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5585 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I have sent off a CCA request to the SLC - I thought I'd start counting days from 2 days after I posted in first class recorded delivery (which is today).

 

But what I need to know is... do I give them 12 working days or 12 calendar days to comply?

 

And if after the 12 days are up and they have not complied, or there's something wrong with the stuff they've sent - what do I do then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have sent off a CCA request to the SLC - I thought I'd start counting days from 2 days after I posted in first class recorded delivery (which is today).

 

But what I need to know is... do I give them 12 working days or 12 calendar days to comply?

 

And if after the 12 days are up and they have not complied, or there's something wrong with the stuff they've sent - what do I do then?

 

Hi the time scale for CCA is 12 + 2 working days if nothing received or they have sent something that does not comply they they are in default and cannot enforce the debt until they comply. After a further 30 days (calender month) they have then committed an offence. If they do send you an "agreement" then post it up on your thread and the experts will have a look at it.

 

all the best dpick:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I posted mine off 'Recorded' on the 3rd September and I'm still waiting, if they don't respond and they go over the Calender month what are the consequences?? Anybody know??

 

 

A level 2 fine which is £3K

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I've just checked on the post Office website and my request was signed for on 4th September. Maybe they can't find it. Recently they imposed a repayment plan on me warning me of the usual consequences if I didn't pay. However I did receive my deferment forms last friday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep here too. They had until Oct 4th, and surprise surprise, no CCA.

 

does this mean the debt is unenforcable? Can I claim back all the money i've paid them now?

 

I am a full time mum with no income of my own, and yet they're still taking payments out of my bank account!! They've deferred me on one loan, but not the other - they say i didn't send it, but they were in the same envelope, and it was sent recorded delivery!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you be claiming from SLC?

 

no CCA means the debt is unenforcable, it still exsists as a debt however the courts are precluded from issuing an enforcement order where no credit agreement can be produced.

 

i am not sure what grounds you would have to launch a claim,the only thing i can think of is for breaches of DPA 1998?

 

regards

paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

So are you saying that if they don't have the documents they cannot ask for the money back and that I have no need to try and reclaim any charges they have put on my loan? Sorry if thats an obvious question but I just need to be clear with what I'm doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,the general rule is that NO CCA = NO PAY,

 

Now if there are penalty charges, they are a different issue. Penalty charges for breach of contract are unlawful and have been for over 100 years. this would be best dealt with by a SAR , once you have full details of the charges then you could conciveably reclaim them, but you would need to follow proceedure and ask for hte charges back firstly from SLC

 

If you have cca'd the SLC and they have failed to comply then they are in default and in normal circumstances a creditor in default of a CCA request is not entitled to enforce the debt while the default exsists which would mean that you dont pay them.

 

however i need to check that SLC are covered by the CCA 1974 just to make sure that what i am telling you is correct

 

bear with me and i will get back to you

 

Regards

paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, ive been told the Old-style student loans pre sept '98 were regulated by the CCA. These were the ones you had to defer if you were not earning enough.

 

was your loan a pre 98 one or is it post 98?

Link to post
Share on other sites

then from what i,m told, they are regulated by the CCA 74 and they have the 12 working days to comply, failure to comply means they enter a default situation where the debt is unenforcable until they comply with the CCA request and produce a validly executed agreement

 

after 12 WDs + 30 calender days pass they commit a criminal offence

Link to post
Share on other sites

on the offence side of things, they commit an offence if 12 working days plus 30 calendar days pass and they have not complied with a CCA request.

 

 

i have asked someone with a little more knowledge in SLC to look in on the thread as i must admit its not my specialist area

 

regards

paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well on that basis an offence has been commited. The thing is I'm about to send my deferment forms off, should I be doing this??

 

That is up to you and what you are hoping the achieve with the CCA request. Legally, with no CCA you would be able to defend any action brought against you in respect of the money owing.

 

Is the money an amount you know you owe or is there a dispute in place?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there's about £300 they are trying to get from me in charges, all the usual threats and letters from fake debt collection companies. So yeah, its the £300 I was going to the small claims court over. That said, if its unenforcable then thats another matter.

 

Since I started sending them letters about actions I may take they've stopped phoning me and sending me threatening letters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I just got another threatening letter from the SLC about charges on my account - even though they accepted my dferrment two months ago!

 

The date on the letter was the same date as the deadline for the CCA request, which they havew failed to comply with! So they manage to send a threat but can't come up with the CCA.

 

Still no SAR info either, but they've got until the 28th to produce that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I eventually got a reply from SLC, unfortunately they've only sent my CCA document for my loan in 95 and not the ones from 93 & 94. Hmm, wonder if they lost them and are hoping to fob me off with just the one. Also received the standard threatening letter from them the same day.

 

Is it worth reporting them to Trading standards or the OFT, at the end of the day they didn't send the CCA within the legally required time and what they did send is incomplete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well I've written to them again stating that they have only sent me the CCA for one of the three agreements and telling them I will only deal with them by letter. The result of this is I am getting phone every day, how do I get them to stop this. I just can't beleive they can get away with this, its harrassment surely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

send them the standard Harresment letter:

 

Dear Sirs

 

 

 

Telephone harassment

 

I am writing in relation to the quantity and frequency of telephone calls that I have received from your company, which I deem to be personally harassing.

 

I have verbally requested that these stop, but I am still receiving calls.

 

I now require all further correspondence from your company to be made in writing only.

 

I am of the view that your continued harassment of me by telephone puts you in breach of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

 

If you continue to harass me by telephone, you will also be in breach of the Communications Act (2003) s.127 and I will report you to OFCOM, Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading, meaning that you will be liable to a substantial fine.

 

Be advised that any further telephone calls from your company will be recorded, time and date logged.

 

Failure to comply with my request will also result in a formal complaint to the OFT for unfair collection practices

 

Collection while the alleged debt in dispute

 

On the XXXXXXXXX I made a formal request for a copy of the signed, executed credit agreement(s) for the above account(s) under section 77(1) and section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act. In addition, a statement of my account should have been sent along with any other document mentioned in the credit agreement.

 

The Consumer Credit Act allows 12 working days for this request to be carried out before your company enter into a default situation. If the request is not satisfied after a further 30 calendar days, your company commit an offence. These time have expired.

 

As you are no doubt aware subsection (6) states:

 

“If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

 

(a) He is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement; and

(b) If the default continues for one month he commits an offence. “

 

Despite the account being in disputed you continue call me from you collections department , if the continues this will result in a further complaint to the OFT.

 

 

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

:D :D :D :D :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...