Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Recurring credit scoring


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5949 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

Due to my ongoing claim against Lloyds and their decision that as I am dispute on my current account, I must also be in dispute with my loan account, I have a lovely 6 months in arrears notice sitting on my credit file.

 

Recently this has hit back at me twice as two other creditors, First Direct and Next, have run the monthly credit scoring (which I apparently gave them permission to do when I opened my accounts), and decided I am a bad risk. First Direct have withheld my cheque facility and Next have dropped my credit level by £1000.

 

Has anybody had this experience before/ is there anyway I can revoke the permission I gave to run continual credit assessments??

 

:confused:

:p MY POSTS ARE MY OPINION ONLY...IF IN DOUBT TAKE PROPER ADVICE...I'M JUST CLAIMING TOO !

 

NatWest SETTLED IN FULL 25/08/06

Capital One settled in full 12/10/06

LTSB prelim letter sent 25/08/06

LTSB standard prelim response received 02/09/06

LBA sent 15/09/06

DONATE TO THIS SITE BY CLICKING THE LINK AT THE TOP OF THIS PAGE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody there??

:p MY POSTS ARE MY OPINION ONLY...IF IN DOUBT TAKE PROPER ADVICE...I'M JUST CLAIMING TOO !

 

NatWest SETTLED IN FULL 25/08/06

Capital One settled in full 12/10/06

LTSB prelim letter sent 25/08/06

LTSB standard prelim response received 02/09/06

LBA sent 15/09/06

DONATE TO THIS SITE BY CLICKING THE LINK AT THE TOP OF THIS PAGE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course you can revoke your permission to allow them to search your files willy-nilly, but they also have the right to withdraw your credit facilities and demand repayment by terminating your agreement with them - this is a bit tit-for-tat, if you ask me.

 

Rather than withdrawing your consent to search, it would be better to deal with the thing causing you the issue - the arrears recorded by Lloyds. Do you have a thread for this claim, so I can take a look?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what Experian have been touting lately - their 'Risk Factor Assessment' ie one late payment mark and your entire credit rating is shot to pieces - no excuses and no comeback.

 

I believe it should be made illegal as you do not want Experian giving everyone who looks at your account the knowledge that you have a late payment... my last late payment was because Virgin Media sent my bill to a DCA instead of my new address - their excuse was they didn't have my new address - which was bull.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Late payment markers are factual information - if they have their facts wrong, challenge them! If you did miss payments, they have a contractual right (your consent) to process those markers with the CRA's.

 

Incorrect factual information = incorrect payment markers = a Court claim for removal, in my eyes...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course you can revoke your permission to allow them to search your files willy-nilly, but they also have the right to withdraw your credit facilities and demand repayment by terminating your agreement with them - this is a bit tit-for-tat, if you ask me.

 

Rather than withdrawing your consent to search, it would be better to deal with the thing causing you the issue - the arrears recorded by Lloyds. Do you have a thread for this claim, so I can take a look?

 

Hi there

 

No I don't have a thread for the Lloyds loan problem. Briefly, I applied for a payment holiday in September last year and they refused as I am reclaiming charges on current account and they told me that as far as they are concerned if I'm in dispute with one account I'm in dispute with all. Hence I stopped making payments on the loan, sort of thinking it might push them into a settlement, but now they've recorded my account as in arrears.

:p MY POSTS ARE MY OPINION ONLY...IF IN DOUBT TAKE PROPER ADVICE...I'M JUST CLAIMING TOO !

 

NatWest SETTLED IN FULL 25/08/06

Capital One settled in full 12/10/06

LTSB prelim letter sent 25/08/06

LTSB standard prelim response received 02/09/06

LBA sent 15/09/06

DONATE TO THIS SITE BY CLICKING THE LINK AT THE TOP OF THIS PAGE

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what Experian have been touting lately - their 'Risk Factor Assessment' ie one late payment mark and your entire credit rating is shot to pieces - no excuses and no comeback.

 

I believe it should be made illegal as you do not want Experian giving everyone who looks at your account the knowledge that you have a late payment... my last late payment was because Virgin Media sent my bill to a DCA instead of my new address - their excuse was they didn't have my new address - which was bull.

 

Can you prove that they did have your new address? I've got a complaint with the Data Commissioner going on at the moment because of a 1 month in arrears marker by First Direct on my current account, full story here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/116160-unpaid-cheque-recorded-arrears.html

:p MY POSTS ARE MY OPINION ONLY...IF IN DOUBT TAKE PROPER ADVICE...I'M JUST CLAIMING TOO !

 

NatWest SETTLED IN FULL 25/08/06

Capital One settled in full 12/10/06

LTSB prelim letter sent 25/08/06

LTSB standard prelim response received 02/09/06

LBA sent 15/09/06

DONATE TO THIS SITE BY CLICKING THE LINK AT THE TOP OF THIS PAGE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there

 

No I don't have a thread for the Lloyds loan problem. Briefly, I applied for a payment holiday in September last year and they refused as I am reclaiming charges on current account and they told me that as far as they are concerned if I'm in dispute with one account I'm in dispute with all. Hence I stopped making payments on the loan, sort of thinking it might push them into a settlement, but now they've recorded my account as in arrears.

 

If the payment arrears are factually correct, you'll have a difficult - if not impossible - time getting them removed.

 

I'd be questioning their argument about all accounts being in dispute, as this clearly isn't the case! Your best attempt to get this corrected is to complain to the FOS, as they are clearly in breach of OFT Debt Collection Guidelines and the Banking Code by stating this and shouldn't be refusing payment holidays on the basis another account is in dispute, IMO.

 

Having said that, a payment holiday **probably** has to be agreed in advance. They didn't agree - you didn't pay under the terms of your contractual agreement.

 

I can't see how you can get the payment markers removed, as they are technically right. If you can query their decision surrounding refusal of giving a payment holiday, that will be the best approach in your case.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

as Lloyds have admitted themselves your loan acct is in dispute they cannot process info on it to CRA's

 

banking code as follows;

 

The current Banking Code (Section 13.6) states: We may give information to Credit Reference Agencies about the personal debts you owe us if:

  • You have fallen behind with your payments,
  • The amount owed is not in dispute; and
  • You have not made proposals we are satisfied with for repaying your debt, following our formal demand

send them the letter on this link. they will have to remove the info on your credit report.

 

Account in Dispute Letters - Consumer Wiki

 

hope this helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...