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

MC Vs HFC/Marbles Response to my CCA Attached


im4347
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5981 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

Hi

 

I sent my CCA request to HFC on 1st November and I received a letter in response today (see attached letter).

 

The statements they have sent are from only June 2007 (my last payment to them) to date, and my account has been with them since 2002!!! :rolleyes:

 

My credit limit was £6300 and I was under my limit in June and since then they have bought my balance up to almost £7000! :-o

 

Any comments would be great.

 

Thanks,

 

MC

CCA Response.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys,

 

My point exactly. No time frame or indication as to when they will (if any) send me the signed agreement.

 

Where do I go from here?

 

MC

 

I don't think there are any Marbles Agreements any more.... remember reading it somewhere. :D

 

HFC have recently defaulted in my CCA request, but did try to send an Appication Form along with a similar letter to yours, so I suggest you write back (rec. delivery) in order to stop them passing it across for legal action (although they shouldn't). You will probably then get a nice letter back informing you that they are investigating your "complaint". ;)

 

Dear xxxx

 

Your Ref : xxxx

 

Thank you for your letter of xx/xx/2007 in response to my legal request.

 

The request that you received on xx/xx/2007 however, was for a true copy of my Consumer Credit Agreement (Consumer Credit Act, 1974) and not a simple request for a Statement of Account on its own. In any case, the Statement of Account that you enclosed appears to be missing several pages of information.

 

Therefore, until such times as you are able to comply with my request, the above account remains in dispute.

 

Yours sincerely,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi IM,

 

i have to refer to mine and curlybens comments on post 2 & 3

 

this is not an enforceable agreement FULL STOP

 

as far as i can see there are no prescribed terms at all

 

regards

 

paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is EXACTLY the same as I received recently. :D

 

My (rec. delivery) letter in response is below :

 

Dear xxxx

 

Your Ref : xxxxxxxx

Marbles - xxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter of xx/xx/2007 in response to my legal request.

 

The document that you enclosed however, is a pre-contractual Application Form; complete with application number. It contains no prescribed terms, APR, credit limit and/or terms and conditions. Therefore, contrary to the comments in your letter, this document does not in fact comply with my legal request under The Consumer Credit Act, 1974 and neither does it represent a legally binding Agreement under the above Act.

 

Until such times as you are able to comply with this request, the account remains in dispute.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

;)

 

Edit to suit your own needs (if different) and send by rec. delivery. You will probably then receive a letter back informing you of your obligations, blah, blah. :rolleyes: In the meantime, do not have any dealings with them over the 'phone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

 

Thanks for the response.

 

I noticed the same, no T&Cs, APR etc.

 

I will definately send them the letter posted above by PriorityOne, thanks for that.

 

Let's see what happens from here...... :-)

 

Regards,

 

IM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

 

HFC received my response letter on the 6th Dec, and then they sent me a letter out the next day (7th Dec), which I received on th 8th Dec, serving me a Default Notice for the 10th December. I am fully aware that they have to give me 14 days notice of the Default. When I looked at the date of the letter it was dated for the 23rd November 2007!!!! Absolutely impossible as the envelope it arrived in has the stamp for the 7th December 2007!!!! :eek:

 

Can't believe it!!!

 

Regards,

 

IM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Do you think I shoulod send the following letter to HFC regarding my Default?

 

"In response to my CCA Request, you have failed to provide me with the original terms and conditions that the purported agreement makes reference to. As I'm sure you are aware the Act deems you must send this information as part of my request and until you furnish me with a copy you remain in default and cannot enforce the agreement.

 

With regard to your letter I received on 8th December 2007, a notice to serve me a default notice, I would remind you that in accordance with the OFT guidelines on debt collection and the Banking Code you are not permitted to take any action on the account whilst the dispute remains unresolved, should you fail to do so I will not hesitate to contact trading standards, the office of fair trading and the financial ombudsman service.

 

I would also draw your attention to the Distance Marketing Directives that came into effect in October 2004. This agreement comes under this criteria, as such I should have been sent cancellation rights in order for you to comply with s127(4) of the Act. I can confirm I have never received any, making this agreement irredeemably unenforceable.

 

I now require you to immediately discharge any outstanding balance to 0 and inform me of this in writing forthwith.

Any default notices or adverse comments your company has recorded on my credit reference file should be immediately removed.

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter"

 

Regards,

If so, would the paragraph regarding 'the Distance Marketing Directives that came into effect in October 2004', apply to me if my account was opened in 2002? :confused:

Regards,

IM

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...