Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
  • 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

Offer recieved, advice required


drufcdragonno12
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6036 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

Submitted my N1 with CCI at 34.9% and alternative of 8% on 19 Sep.

 

I have recieved an offer from CAP1 for charges + 8% + personnal admin costs + court fee. They say this is their final offer and cheque will be with me within 14 days. Letter says they dispute the 34.9% interest rate and will defend "on the basis that the correct amount has been paid"

 

It seems they are forcing me into the courtroom to fight for the difference in CCI. Has anyone got any previous knowledge of this situation?

 

Looks like I've won, but I was wanting to give them a good hard kick in the g**lies.

 

What are my options?

Dragon

 

:)

 

Abbey

S.A.R. - March 06

Settled in full £2300 - May 07

 

Abbey2

RFP - 13 June 07

N1 Filed- 20 July 07

Stayed - 07 Sep 07

 

Capital 1

S.A.R. - 25 June 07

Statements recieved - 29 June 07

RFP (with CCI) - 10 July 07

LBA (with CCI) - 30 July 07

N1 Filed (with CCI) - 19 Sep 07

Offer recieved (8% not CCI @ 34.9%) 28 Sep 07

Defence Filed (on basis that claim settled) 02 Oct 07

Cheque recieved and banked 16 Oct 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump

Dragon

 

:)

 

Abbey

S.A.R. - March 06

Settled in full £2300 - May 07

 

Abbey2

RFP - 13 June 07

N1 Filed- 20 July 07

Stayed - 07 Sep 07

 

Capital 1

S.A.R. - 25 June 07

Statements recieved - 29 June 07

RFP (with CCI) - 10 July 07

LBA (with CCI) - 30 July 07

N1 Filed (with CCI) - 19 Sep 07

Offer recieved (8% not CCI @ 34.9%) 28 Sep 07

Defence Filed (on basis that claim settled) 02 Oct 07

Cheque recieved and banked 16 Oct 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that you gave them 8% as an alternative to 34.9%. They've taken the alternative and are offering the 8%. I think you'd find it hard to go to court just on the basis of CCi alone, there's a thread on here somewhere, lynsey v cpaitla one, which might be worth reading.

 

I personally think it would be as well to take whats on the table, but obviously don't stop the court action till you get your cheque. I would send them a letter back accepting their offer but make it clear action wouldn't stope till cheque was cleared.

 

Just my personal opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your thoughts WendyB

 

I did propose to the Court on my N1 the 8% as an alternative to the 34.9% CCI, as is the norm. But what doesn't quite sit right with me is that on the Particulars of Claim we all clearly state that the rate of interest applicable is the decision of the Court and not Cap1. I just don't like the idea of them dictating to me.

 

However, I have got a positive result and will accept their offer once the cheque clears.

Dragon

 

:)

 

Abbey

S.A.R. - March 06

Settled in full £2300 - May 07

 

Abbey2

RFP - 13 June 07

N1 Filed- 20 July 07

Stayed - 07 Sep 07

 

Capital 1

S.A.R. - 25 June 07

Statements recieved - 29 June 07

RFP (with CCI) - 10 July 07

LBA (with CCI) - 30 July 07

N1 Filed (with CCI) - 19 Sep 07

Offer recieved (8% not CCI @ 34.9%) 28 Sep 07

Defence Filed (on basis that claim settled) 02 Oct 07

Cheque recieved and banked 16 Oct 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd push it to CI

 

If you had cash from them, thats what they charge you, so whats the difference - this is a legit argument and they damn well know it

 

 

I went for CI and won b4 court, but must add that I offered no 8% alternative - CI only!

 

All above IMHO

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your opinion ncf355.

 

The more I think about things the more I am inclined to ignore Cap1's offer and submit my AQ, continuing with 34.9% CCI. As I mentioned above, my Particulars of Claim clearly stated it is for the court to decide the level of interest. Cap1 are using my 8% option as their basis for settlement, and that really makes me itch.

I think the worst that can happen is that we go to court and the Judge decides to award what has already been offered by CAP1. But would they even let things get to court?? If they did, would they then have to disclose their true costs?? I don't think they would risk it.

 

The boss is telling me to let it go and be happy with my lot, but..............

 

Any other thoughts kind people??

Dragon

 

:)

 

Abbey

S.A.R. - March 06

Settled in full £2300 - May 07

 

Abbey2

RFP - 13 June 07

N1 Filed- 20 July 07

Stayed - 07 Sep 07

 

Capital 1

S.A.R. - 25 June 07

Statements recieved - 29 June 07

RFP (with CCI) - 10 July 07

LBA (with CCI) - 30 July 07

N1 Filed (with CCI) - 19 Sep 07

Offer recieved (8% not CCI @ 34.9%) 28 Sep 07

Defence Filed (on basis that claim settled) 02 Oct 07

Cheque recieved and banked 16 Oct 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

 

It is difficult to go into court for CCI alone. They have very recently started paying out Purchase interest and 8% as well as all of the charges.

I would write back and say that you will accept the offer as a part settlement to your claim, and remind them that the claim has been filed for xxx.xx amount in your local court.

 

From what we have seen recently, they sometimes pay CCI on an open account, purchase interest has been paid on closed accounts. Remember this amount of interest is what they have charged you compounded. It's only fair that they should pay it back.

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick response uk.

 

Cap1 have filed a defence indicating the return of purchace interest (my account is closed) to the value of just a few pounds. But as you point out, the amount of interest claimed is what they charged me compounded to the date my claim was submitted.

I will have a think about things overnight and also wait to see if others concur with your advice to accept as part settlement. This way forward does seem to tick all the boxes as it were; I get paid out, but continue to be a pain in their bum - a pain they may decide to pay to get rid of.

Dragon

 

:)

 

Abbey

S.A.R. - March 06

Settled in full £2300 - May 07

 

Abbey2

RFP - 13 June 07

N1 Filed- 20 July 07

Stayed - 07 Sep 07

 

Capital 1

S.A.R. - 25 June 07

Statements recieved - 29 June 07

RFP (with CCI) - 10 July 07

LBA (with CCI) - 30 July 07

N1 Filed (with CCI) - 19 Sep 07

Offer recieved (8% not CCI @ 34.9%) 28 Sep 07

Defence Filed (on basis that claim settled) 02 Oct 07

Cheque recieved and banked 16 Oct 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheque arrived yesterday and banked today. Decided to accept as part settlement. Is anyone aware of a template letter to send Cap1 that fits my situation, or will I have to amend one from the library?

Dragon

 

:)

 

Abbey

S.A.R. - March 06

Settled in full £2300 - May 07

 

Abbey2

RFP - 13 June 07

N1 Filed- 20 July 07

Stayed - 07 Sep 07

 

Capital 1

S.A.R. - 25 June 07

Statements recieved - 29 June 07

RFP (with CCI) - 10 July 07

LBA (with CCI) - 30 July 07

N1 Filed (with CCI) - 19 Sep 07

Offer recieved (8% not CCI @ 34.9%) 28 Sep 07

Defence Filed (on basis that claim settled) 02 Oct 07

Cheque recieved and banked 16 Oct 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

might be a little too late now.....but have you checked if you have been defaulted on your credit file by cap one? its worth tying in default removal before coming to any settlement.

Co-Operative bank default removal - succesfull december 2007.

 

Capital One Bank default removal - succesfull february 2008.

 

Co-Operative bank Visa default removal- Claim filed March 2008

 

Smile default removal - ongoing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

No, I havn't been defaulted. The account was closed in 2003 with £0 dalance.

Dragon

 

:)

 

Abbey

S.A.R. - March 06

Settled in full £2300 - May 07

 

Abbey2

RFP - 13 June 07

N1 Filed- 20 July 07

Stayed - 07 Sep 07

 

Capital 1

S.A.R. - 25 June 07

Statements recieved - 29 June 07

RFP (with CCI) - 10 July 07

LBA (with CCI) - 30 July 07

N1 Filed (with CCI) - 19 Sep 07

Offer recieved (8% not CCI @ 34.9%) 28 Sep 07

Defence Filed (on basis that claim settled) 02 Oct 07

Cheque recieved and banked 16 Oct 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...