Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • NewsBot
      Shein set to file for £50bn London listing - reports

      By NewsBot · Posted

      Shein has been linked to unethical business practices, including forced labour allegations.View the full article
    • stu007
      Are There Any Social Workers on CAG ?

      By stu007 · Posted

      Hi I have to agree with @unclebulgaria67 post#3 For the funding side of moving to a new area and it being private supported accommodation I would also suggest speaking to private supported accommodation provider about funding but also contact the Local Council for that area and have a chat with them about funding because if you are in receipt of Housing Benefit certain Supported Accommodation that meets a certain criteria is treated as ‘exempt accommodation’ for Housing Benefit purposes but you need to confirm this with that relevant Council in your new area especially since it is Private Supported Accommodation as each Council can have slightly different rules on this. If you have a certain medical condition look up the charities and also have a wee chat with them as they may be able to point you to different Grants to assist with moving costs and your question about funding for private supported accommodation as well.
    • stu007
      Advice needed regarding Eviction

      By stu007 · Posted

      Hi Just to be clear a Notice to Quit is only the very start of the Housing Association going down the Eviction route there is a long process to go. Also to be clear if you leave at the Notice to Quit date only and go to the Council claiming you are Homeless they will more than likely class you as Intentionally Homeless therefore you have no right to be given temporary housing by the Council. The only way that works is when the Court has Granted a Possession Order then you can approach the Council as Homeless with the Court Order. As for the Housing Association issuing the Notice to Quit because there investigation has proved it's not your main residence but you have witness statement to prove otherwise. From now on with the Housing Association you need to keep a very good paper trail and ensure to get free proof of posting from the post office with anything you send to them. You now need to make a Formal Complaint to the Housing Association and please amend the following to suit your needs:   Dear Sir/Madam FORMAL COMPLAINT Reference: Notice to Quit Letter Dated XX/XX/2024, Hand Delivered on XX/XX/2024 I note in your letter that you stated that the Housing Association has carried out an investigation into myself and came to the conclusion that I am not using this property as my main residence and have evidence of this and have therefore issued a 'Notice to Quit' by XX/XX/2024. I find the above actions absolutely disgraceful action by the Housing Association. 1. Why have I never been informed nor asked about this matter by my Housing Officer. 2. Why have I never been given the opportunity to defend myself before the Housing Association out of the blue Hand Delivered a Notice to Quit Letter. 3. I have evidence and witnesses/statements that prove this is my Main Residence and more than willing provide this to both the Housing Association and the Court. I now require the following: 1. Copy of your Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Copy of your Customer Care Charter (not the leaflet) 3. Copies of your Investigation into this not being my main residence.    As well as the above you need to send the Housing Association urgently a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that in whether it be letters, email, recorded calls etc. The Housing Association then has 30 calendar days to respond but that time limit only starts once they acknowledge your SAR Request. If they fail to respond within that time limit its then off with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).     
    • stu007
      Eviction Time Again - Twice In 7 Months

      By stu007 · Posted

      Hi Sorry for the delay in getting back to you The email excuse and I do say excuse to add to your account and if court decide LL can't recoup costs will be removed is a joke. So I would Ask them: Ask them to provide you with the exact terms within your Tenancy Agreement that allows them to add these Court Fees to your Account before it has been decided in Court by a Judge. Until the above is answered you require these Court Fees to be removed from your Account (Note: I will all be down to your Tenancy Agreement so have a good look through it to see what if any fees they can add to your account in these circumstances)
    • Debt_Collector
      Summons to court for a S87 (1) offence

      By Debt_Collector · Posted

      Thank you for your responses. As requested, some more detail. Please forgive, I'm writing this on my phone which always makes for less than perfect grammar. My Dad tries but English not his 1st language, i'm born and bred in England, a qualified accountant and i often help him with his admin. On this occasion I helped my dad put in his renewal driving licence application around 6 weeks before expiry and with it the disclosure of his sleep apnoea. Once the licence expired I told him to get in touch with his GP, because the DVLA were offering only radio silence at that time (excuses of backlogs When I called to chase up). The GP charged £30 for an opinion letter on his ability to drive based on his medical history- at the time I didn't take a copy of the letter, but I am hoping this will be key evidence that we can rely on as to why s88 applies because in the GP opinion they saw no reason he couldn't drive i need to see the letter again as im going only on memory- we forwarded the letter in a chase up / complaint to the DVLA.  In December, everything went quiet RE the sleep apnoea (i presume his GP had given assurance) but the DVLA noticed there had been a 2nd medical issue in the past, when my father suffered a one off mini stroke 3 years prior. That condition had long been resolved via an operation (on his brain of all places, it was a scary time, but he came through unscathed) and he's never had an issue since. We were able to respond to that query very promptly (within the 14 days) and the next communication was the licence being granted 2 months later. DVLA have been very slow in responding every step of the way.  I realise by not disclosing the mini stroke at the time, and again on renewal (had I known I'd have encouraged it) he was potentially committing an offence, however that is not relevant to the current charge being levied, which is that he was unable to rely on s88 because of a current medical issue (not one that had been resolved). I could be wrong, I'm not a legal expert! The letter is a summons I believe because its a speeding offence (59 in a temp roadworks 50 limit on the A1, ironically whist driving up to visit me). We pleaded guilty to the speeding but not guilty to the s87.  DVLA always confirmed to me on the phone that the licence had not been revoked and that he "May" be able to continue to drive. They also confirmed in writing, but the letter explains the DVLA offer no opinion on the matter and that its up to the driver to seek legal advice. I'll take the advice to contact DVLA medical group. I'm going to contact the GP to make sure they received the SAR request for data, and make it clear we need to see a copy of the opinion letter. In terms of whether to continue to fight this, or to continue with the defence, do we have any idea of the potential consequences of either option? Thanks all

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Can anyone help - New to this site - SCOTLAND

wideload1888

By wideload1888
in Financial Legal Issues

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5480 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

wideload1888

wideload1888

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Bigmac versus / Godmother should I send a letter back to them asking for a copy of my credit agreement document as first requested ? Should I inform them that they have sent the wrong document ? It was pointed out to me on a previous comment that they should reply in 14 days is that still the case ? Bigmac versus mentions taking action "TS" what does this mean ? Sorry for so many questions

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

pt2537

pt2537

Posted
Posted
Bigmac versus / Godmother should I send a letter back to them asking for a copy of my credit agreement document as first requested ? Should I inform them that they have sent the wrong document ? It was pointed out to me on a previous comment that they should reply in 14 days is that still the case ? Bigmac versus mentions taking action "TS" what does this mean ? Sorry for so many questions

 

TS Bigmac is referring to is Trading Standards

 

you can find your local TS here Trading Standards Central - Trading Standards and Consumer Protection information for the UK

 

I think you need to simply tell them that what they have sent is not compliant with the law

 

im sure i have a letter on file somewhere, bear with me, and i will dig it out

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
pt2537

pt2537

Posted
Posted

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

DO NOT IGNORE THIS LETTER

XX/XX/2008

Dear Sirs,

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

This account is in Dispute .

 

On xx/xx/2008 I wrote to xxxxxxxxx requesting that xxxxxxx supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account.

In response to this request I was supplied a mere application form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain any of the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553

 

The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following--

1. Number of repayments;

2. Amount of repayments;

3. Frequency and timing of repayments;

4. Dates of repayments;

5. The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable

 

 

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974, which states

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

Further more, since the prescribed terms referred to above do not appear within the agreement your client has supplied, the agreement is rendered totally unenforceable, as the prescribed terms must be contained within the agreement and not a separate document, case law confirms this opinion

 

I refer you to the judgment of TUCKEY LJ in the case of Wilson and another v Hurstanger Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 299

 

”[11] Schedule 1 to the 1983 Regulations sets out the "information to be contained in documents embodying regulated

consumer credit agreements". Some of this information mirrors the terms prescribed by Sch 6, but some does not. Contrasting the provisions of the two schedules the Judge said:

 

 

"33 In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under s 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127(3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement. More detailed requirements, which

are designed to ensure that the debtor is made aware, so far as possible, of specified information (including information contained in the

minimum terms) are to be found in Schedule 1."

 

Therefore the prescribed terms cannot be contained within a separate document outside of the agreement

 

In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states

 

 

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

As it stands, the document supplied by your client is not a valid credit agreement nor is it enforceable by any court

 

What I Require

 

Firstly, I require all correspondence in writing from here on; any persistent attempts to contact me by phone will be reported to Trading Standards, the Financial ombudsman service and the Office of Fair Trading.

 

 

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that your clients do not hold a signed copy of a credit agreement containing the prescribed terms. Therefore the fact that they do not hold such document means that you cannot obtain an enforcement order in court. The case of Wilson-v-FCT sets this out as previously referred to above

 

However should you believe that you have grounds to enforce this agreement, please provide me with a signed copy of the credit agreement that you would consider relying upon? Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40

 

Since the agreement your clients have supplied as it stands is unenforceable, should you be unable to produce a compliant agreement it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for you to write the debt off. I suggest you give serious consideration to this as any attempt of litigation will be vigorously defended and I will counter claim for all quantifiable damages. I respectfully request a response to this letter in 14 days

 

I trust this out lines the situation

 

 

 

 

 

Amend to suit your situation

Link to post
Share on other sites
vselym

vselym

Posted
Posted

pt2537

 

nice letter, is there any validity though in including an element of "write the debt off AND REMOVE ANY DEFAULT MARKERS" ?

 

many people on here seem to think of it after the event, and we all know just how difficult the cra's make it to remove such markers

Regards

 

vselym

 

"Every day, and in every way, i'm getting better and better" - Chief Inspector Dreyfus

Link to post
Share on other sites
wideload1888

wideload1888

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Pete thanks for the letter - I will ammend accordingly & forward to HFO. I see from vselym that he thinks it may be a bit OTT or am I reading it wrong ? Should I remove the txt with regards to writing off the debt or do you think I have a chance ?

Can you also advise how I can locate this thread quickly ? Do I save it anywhere ? I just keep trawling throgh the section till I find it - Sorry its all still quite new to me. Thanks again for your assistance

Link to post
Share on other sites
vselym

vselym

Posted
Posted (edited)

WL1888

 

PT2537 OTT ????!!!!!!?????!?!!?!?!??!?!? Never, just concise and to the point, i totally agree with what he says !

 

In terms of "finding yourself", towards the top of each page you should see the following

 

User CP FAQ Calendar New Posts Search menu_open.gifQuick Links menu_open.gifReviews Log Out

 

just click on User CP and scroll down, any thread you have posted on will appear

Edited by vselym
spacing

Regards

 

vselym

 

"Every day, and in every way, i'm getting better and better" - Chief Inspector Dreyfus

Link to post
Share on other sites
wideload1888

wideload1888

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Pete - Recieved a letter from "Barclaycard" last night claiming to have assigned my account to HFO as of 13 May 2008. Letter has Barclaycard header & footer on it but was sent from West Byfleet - Home of HFO ?

Letter states I now owe HFO £2162.53

 

As you will see from this early thread it started off as -

 

Owed £1829.84 to Moorcroft agreed payment plan of £50 pm starting Aug 07 & paid £200 in total

After 1 payment Moorcroft passed this back to Barclaycard on 21 Sep 07 as £1729.84 but we kept paying bank standing order

(Still fighting Moorcroft for missing £100 as they have "found" 2 pyments which they say they have passed to Barclaycard ?)

HFO start sending so called package awaiting collection letters in Nov ?

Sent request for the credit agreement in January 08.

Recieved copy of application in April 08.

 

Can these DCAs keep collecting some of the cash, send back to original credit supplier & they then pass it on to the next DCA who adds some cash to it & so on & so on

Sorry to go on a bit but its getting me down a bit to say the least. I will scan the letter later & post for you to see.

Can you advise what to do next - I was going to send the letter as advised so is still the correct thing to do ?

Thanks Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites
wideload1888

wideload1888

Posted
  • Author
Posted

First Letter recieved from HFO In November 2007http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk269/wideload1888/HFOLetterNov2007blanked.jpgLetter recieved 16 May 2008http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk269/wideload1888/HFOLetterMay2008blanked.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
The GodMother

The GodMother

Posted
Posted

ok so what date did HFO get the account as it seems to be conflicting info.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
wideload1888

wideload1888

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Godmother - HFO sent me the first letter in November 2007 saying they had taken the debt from Barclaycard. I sent letter N to them in January 08 & they sent my application form as above. I then got another letter as above on Friday saying they had just taken over the debt from Barclaycard again ? and increased the amount owed !!

Link to post
Share on other sites
wideload1888

wideload1888

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yes - ammended letter sent as advised by recorded delivery - Post Office track & trace say its been delivered but they cannot provide an electronic POD for some reason ? No reply back as of yet BUT I am little concerned with regrads to the 2 letters recieved from HFO as per posts 36,37,38,39 & 40 !! Can you advise any further on these ? Realy appreciate your time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
pt2537

pt2537

Posted
Posted

HI Wideload1888

 

hmm, tis rather confusing, the notice of assignment seems to vary between organisations doesnt it

 

i will need to go and look at some case law just to check something out, i wont be able to get back to you tonight but i would not panic and see what they have to say to that letter

Link to post
Share on other sites
wideload1888

wideload1888

Posted
  • Author
Posted

pt2537 - Thanks for your help its appreciated - Just cant seem to get my head around it all - Seems to me that HFO have sent me the wrong documents as requested & because I have riled them they have sent me what looks like a letter from Barclaycard assigning them the debt that they have already had assigned in November on alleged b/card paper sent from the HFO office in west byfleet (postmarked) and increased the alleged debt in the meantime !! that cant be right surely !

Link to post
Share on other sites
pt2537

pt2537

Posted
Posted

Basically as i understand it, the assignment letter from HFO is ineffective as it should have come from Barclaycard

 

so the correct assignment if you like is barclays one.

 

however the amount owed must be correct AFAIK

 

can you confirm if the amount stated is correct or not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
wideload1888

wideload1888

Posted
  • Author
Posted

pt2537 - really confused now - Debt as described in early thread 1 was with Moorcroft in August 2007 - We agreed payment plan of £50 p/m and paid £200 to them. In the meantime Moorcroft passed the debt back to B/Card but we didnt know until we recieved letter from HFO saying we owed them £1700ish in December. Sent the template letter N requesting credit agreement in January & recieved copy of application form in April as stated in earlier posts of this thread. Recieved letter from HFO as per attached which they say is from B/Card saying they have been assigned the debt which has now risen as stated BUT the letter was posted from HFO office in West Byfleet NOT from Barclaycard offices. You can see from the letters attached in early posts that this doesnt seem right !! Getting worried now

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...