Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Prices had already risen in expectation of action, with Brent crude near a six-month high last week.View the full article
    • Thanks everyone. Will speak with the manager first chance I get later today and let you know.
    • own topic created  tnx the info. dx  
    • this debt: MBNA Bank of Scotland Card debt- LInk got a CCJ - now want payment review - MBNA - Consumer Action Group and a barclaycard loan - did you ever send the a CCA in all these years.....when was it taken out?    
    • Welcome to the Forum. The PCN must be subject to Bye laws as the warning near the bottom of the PCN does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Under Section 9 [2][f[] of the Act it should say: (f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver ,the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Their version states they are pursuing you as the driver [because of the Bye laws they cannot transfer the liability from the driver to the keeper] even though you are the keeper. Should it go to Court Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. Obviously on many occasions another member of the family may be driving instead of the keeper. Indeed anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your car. if any of the three cars were not driven by the keeper they are not liable to pay the PCN only the driver is.  as long as they do not divulge who was driving those lovely people at Alliance haven't a hope of winning against them in Court. What a shame. However while those keepers who were not driving are in the clear all is not lost for the other keeper drivers. Alliance still have to prove who was driving which is difficult providing those keepers do not appeal.  It is quite often that on appeal the keeper may say "I entered the car park at....."  immediately giving away that they were the driver. Plus even if you appeal it won't be accepted as a] they lose £100 straight away and b] mostly all the major car parking companies are dishonest scrotes. In the meantime you will be on the receiving end of threatening letters from Alliance, unregulated debt collectors and fifth, sixth or even lower rated solicitors all trying to frighten the life out of you to cough up. They can all be safely ignored since if you don't contact any of them they don't know who was driving so have no information that the can use in Court to identify the driver. Some time in the future they may send you a Letter of Claim which must not be ignored. Just let us know and we will advise a suitable snotty letter to send them which will show that you are not afraid of them and are happy to turn up in court knowing that you will win. Sorry it was a bit long winded.  
  • 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

Nationwide's 'agreed' overdraft.


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5922 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've just noticed that Nationwide still has the same info in its overdraft litereature. They are not even trying to hide the nature of the charges like some banks.

 

I wonder what implications this will have for thier part in the test case since my understadning was that, generally, places were running with the service charges argument?

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nationwide aren't involved in the test case, maybe they are waiting to see how it goes before reviewing their literature.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nationwide aren't involved in the test case, maybe they are waiting to see how it goes before reviewing their literature.

 

Are you sure? I thought they were?

 

Taken from an internet site.....

 

 

The Financial Services Authority has granted waiver to the banks, so that they are no longer obliged to handle complaints about unlawful bank charges.

No, this is not because it's ruled that charges are lawful. In fact, it's because the Office of Fair Trading thinks they aren't lawful, and is taking a super-claim to court to get the matter settled once and for all.

The banks being taken to court are: Abbey National, Barclays, Clydesdale, Halifax, Bank of Scotland, HSBC, Lloyds, Nationwide, NatWest and Royal Bank of Scotland.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They definately are, we got a briefing on it. It was woefully inadequate and I still encounter colleagues who say the customer has done something wrong by going over thier limit. Geez give me a break... lol

 

I find it very puzzling, I only noticed on increasing my limit.

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the whole Nationwide does some very good things, like campaigning against fee charging ATM's and negative allocation on payments on credit cards; which is why it is such a shame that they are so wrong on this.

 

I guess being smaller than the banks they couldn't afford to lose the revenue until there was a level playing field. I'd love to roast the CEO about this though...

 

I wonder if the comment above and the number of cigaretts bought abroad by people from Scotland is a co-incidence :p

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...they couldn't afford to lose the revenue until there was a level playing field.
If they STOPPED acting like the Banks with Shareholders...+ STARTED acting like a Building Society for the benefit of its Members, then it would gain revenue!

 

There is NO reason why it shouldn't be the market leader with the lowest %APR for Personal Loans, O/D's etc + the higest %APR for Deposit Accounts, ISA's etc.

 

Makes U wonder why it's NOT, when there's NO money siphoned off by Shareholders, doesn't it??

 

 

 

 

I'd love to roast the CEO about this though...
U can...the next time that there is a vote for Members of the Board.

Just un-elect him + replace him with someone who cares for what a Building Society should be all about...It's Members!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Just un-elect him + replace him with someone who cares for what a Building Society should be all about...It's Members!!!"

 

I believe over a million voted and off the top of my head approx 45,000 voted against re-election.

 

In Nationwide's defence until recently the overdraft was just 7.75%, it only went up recently and now its 9.9%. HSBC charge 18.8%, there was one stage when the loan rate was about the same as the OD rate.

 

I agree that in some ways Nationwide acts like a bank but I do feel they have to be careful with what they offer in that they want to attract members that contribute and thus everyone is better off. If we offered say a REALLY cheap mortgage we'd get loads of new customer from brokers who would just move the second there was a cheaper deal.

 

Nationwide's FlexAccount runs at a loss, I believe every new Flex opened costs £40 and that was BEFORE allt his charges stuff.

 

That said I feel the policy on charges is wrong headed. I mean if they had put thier charges down to say £10 alright they would still be getting sued BUT there would be clear water between Nationwide and the banks, and some admission of having made an error.

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...I agree that in some ways Nationwide acts like a bank but I do feel they have to be careful with what they offer in that they want to attract members that contribute and thus everyone is better off.
So what U are advocating is, that if a potential Member (...+ I stress the word Member, as opposed to Customer!) isn't going to contribute to further profits i.e....ISA's, Mortgages etc etc, then that potential Member is NOT worthy of even a basic Flexaccount with Nationwide??

 

 

 

 

...Nationwide's FlexAccount runs at a loss, I believe every new Flex opened costa £40 and that was BEFORE allt his charges stuff...if they had put thier charges down to say £10...
U know as well as I do that £10 is NOT a reflection of TRUE costs + is therefore unlawful.

 

This extremely crass statement of yours is ever so reminicient of Credit Card firms who STILL try to justify their NEW £12 unlawful Fee.

Perhaps the £40 cost of the Flexaccount is just made up of exhorbitant Staff costs + inefficient manual administration??

 

Mmmm...Methinks Don't bite the hand that feeds U eh IDS??...;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

"Perhaps the £40 cost of the Flexaccount is just made up of exhorbitant Staff costs + inefficient manual administration??"

 

This is not true, I've worked in several branches and there are simply not enough staff!

 

I do not KNOW that £10 is not the true cost, I don't have access to that data. I do remember seeing a comment on here that one bank manager was overjoyed when Nwide started offering current accounts because they took a lot of thier unprofitable customers.

 

In all honesty I think the banks wanted to introduce monthly fees anyway, (look at HSBC's increaing promotion of premium products) and it is unfortunate indeed that they are trying to use thier own unlawful behvaiour as an excuse to justify introducing fees.

 

I do think it will be interesting if all banks and Building Societies try to impose these charges since people already feel, in general, that branches are inadequate.

 

I admit that here I am exploring arguments advanced by colleagues, most of what they say is rubbish, but I find with most things the answer is a little from column a and a little from column b.

 

 

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and that's £40 per year, not £40 as a one off. I don't have a source but it did come from a manger.

 

My mistake I should've been cleared about that.

 

Also Nationwide has a much higher than average % of dormant accounts, so many in fact that they have changed the criteria for opening a FlexAccount. I'm not saying whether this is right or wrong merely adding a fact.

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pssst...indebtstudent...

 

Keep changing font throughout a Thread, can make the Thread difficult to follow for others + make them less likely to contribute to any argument/debate/discussion that is taking place...;)

 

 

P.S....Nice Post Count No. (666) btw...lol...:D

 

 

...:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It costs them to open a Flexaccount? They still find money to spend on TV advertising, newspaper advertising etc.And they were quick to give £50000 to farepak victims but won't give me my £1200 charges refund.

A+L S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 28th July. Statements rec'd 01 Sept. Letter requesting repayment of £4,979 sent 18/09 MCOL sent 15th Nov £6389.57. Cheque received £6425.54 4th Dec.:D

MBNA S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 28th July, promised reply by 28th August. Cheque rec'd £250 31 Aug.:confused: . 2nd letter sent 7 sept for rest of charges to be returned. £243 rec'd 28th Oct:D

CCA sent 1st Credit 11th August, reply 15th Aug

Request for repayment Rooftop Mortgages for £1095, reply saying no on 17th Aug.

Still to come: Cap. One, Time retail, HFC Bank.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

It costs money to run a FlexAccount. Nationwide will make a loss on the 'free' cash withdrawals abroad which other providers charge for.

 

I think Nationwide is dead wrong on this issue and does not appear proud to be different here, or indeed the consumer champion they claim to be.

 

I can see why people are angry, hell my contract of employment says, essentially I MUST run my flexaccount in accordance with the T & C's (which themselves are of dubious leglaity!), but all I'm saying is I would guess the approach to charges was based on economics.

 

Oh and sorry for changing fonts, I believe when I copied something it changed the font or something.

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...