Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No, reading the guidance online it says to wait for a letter from the court. Should I wait or submit the directions? BTW, I assume that the directions are a longer version of the particular of claim accompanied by evidence, correct?
    • Thanks for opening, it's been another rough year for my family and I've procastinated a little.. Due to the age of my defaults on this and other accounts (circa 2021), I really need to avoid a CCJ as that will be another 6 years of credit issues. Mediation failed as I played the 'not enough info to make a decision' however during the call for some reason they did offer settlement at 80%, I refused. this has been allocated to small claims track, court date is June 3 and I've received their WS. I'm starting on my WS. They do appear to have provided everything required of them (even if docs could be reconstructions). Not really sure what my argument is anymore but I do want to attend court and see this through. Should a judgement be made against me then I will clear the balance within 30 days and have the CCJ removed - this is still possible isn't it? I'm going to be reading up today and tomorrow and hope you can provide me some guidance in the meantime. Wonder what your advice would be given the documents they have provided? I am now in a position to clear the debt either by lump sum or a few large installments - Is this something i should look into at this late stage? Thanks as always in advance
    • I have now received my SAR. It includes a great deal of information! Is there a time limit on how long account information is kept and/or can be provided to debtors? I have received many account statements which were not previously sent to me. I remember that the creditor should provide explanations of any acronyms and abbreviations that maybe used in the documents. Is this still the case? Also what, if any, are the regulations in regard to adding fees to a debt? Can fees be added to a debt after the court has approved a charge on a property. Perhaps due to the numerous owners of the debt, many payments I made were not properly recorded on the account, some were entered over a year after the payment was made! Following the Legal Charge, I paid every month until my payments were refused. I am trying to compute the over payments, but the addition of fees etc. is confusing me. Any comments and/or help would be appreciated.
    • did you submit your directions
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Band of Scotland CCA - help please


Battle weary
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5992 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 CCA'd BoS on 01/10/07

I sent 12+2+30 day letter of default by Recorded Delivery 19 November.

 

Their reply is attached together with what is an application form sent a couple of days later - although an illegible copy.

 

Can they now pursue me for this money. I cannot read the form but blowing it up to A3 it definately says "application form" although later it does refer to the CCA 1974. I cannot read any of the rest of the content of the form.

 

Also are they correct in their letter that a credit card application contains a copy of the terms, conditions and rights, making the document a full credit agreement. I want to reply to their letter and would like a legible copy of the application form.

 

Can anyone give me some assistance please as I am a newcomer to all this.

 

Thank you very much in advance.

Bank of scotland.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

well if its as bad as what youve posted then its illegible and not compliant with the CCA 1974 and the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents)Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1557)

 

2 Legibility of notices and copy documents and wording of prescribed Forms

 

(1) The lettering in every notice in a Form prescribed by these Regulations and in every copy of an executed

agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety

under any provision of the Act shall, apart from any signature, be easily legible and of a colour which is readily

distinguishable from the .

(2) The wording of any Form prescribed by these Regulations shall be reproduced in copies of unexecuted or executed

agreements or in Notices of Cancellation Rights sent [by an appropriate method] under section 64(1)(b) or (2) of the Act

without any alteration or addition, except that--

(a) the creditor or owner may enter the name and address of the debtor or hirer in any Cancellation Form prescribed

by these Regulations; and

(b) every Form shall be completed in accordance with any footnote.

(3) Any such footnote shall not be treated as part of any Form prescribed by these Regulations and may be reproduced

in addition to any such Form.

(4) Where any such footnote requires any words to be omitted, those words shall be omitted or deleted.

 

this is not legible and therefore you can request they send a legible copy

 

regards

paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a wonderful scan they have sent.

Well as there are NO prescribed terms present and it is mostly illegible, this makes it unenforceable.

 

They are taking out of their collective bottoms on this one.

 

Now I'd wait for them to demand payment again then hit them with that fact.

No need to tell them now as the CCA clock is still ticking.

 

 

S61(1)(a) CCA provides that, for a regulated agreement to be properly executed, it must contain all the prescribed terms of the agreement and conform to regulations under s60(1) – see Q1.14.

 

Reg 6(1) provides that the terms specified in Sch 6 to the Agreements Regulations are ‘prescribed terms’ for the purposes of s61(1)(a) and s127(3) – see Q8.2.

 

8.2 What if prescribed terms are missing or incorrect?

 

s127(3) provides that the court may not make an enforcement order unless a document containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor – see Q1.21.

 

If therefore any of the prescribed terms is missing, or incorrect, the agreement is not enforceable against the debtor, and the court is precluded from making an enforcement order.

 

 

8.3 What are the prescribed terms?

 

The prescribed terms specified in Sch 6 are as follows:

 

* amount of credit – see Q8.

 

* credit limit – see Q8.5

* repayments – see Q8.9.

* rate of interest – see Q8.6

 

Sch 6 was not amended by the 2004 Regulations.

 

 

Also check out Peter Bard's excellent thread on the subject: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/103383-agreement-enforceability.html

Be VERY careful whose advice you listen too

Link to post
Share on other sites

well this ian application form and by virtue if the CCA 1974 it is unenforceable as it is not an agreement. even bank of scotland admit this is an apllication form/ send them a letter telling them to faf off as it is unenforceable as curlyben said it ther is no prescribed term.

 

when it is the last time you have acnowldeg the debt as it seems that this application form was signed on 09+ July 1997?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Phill123

 

Well the silly billies that we are we have been struggling to pay off with an arrangement for the last few years until we found this site!

 

Not anymore, so our clock only started ticking on 01 October 2007 with our request for the CCA.

 

Thanks for all the advice guys. xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Subscribing.

Before you criticise another man you should first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, when you criticise him, you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes on.

 

Don't get me confused with somebody knowledgeable by all those green blobs. I got most of them by making people laugh.

 

I am not European, I am English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello BW :)

 

This is fairly typical of the record keeping of a certain age at HBOS - I have one just like it! Utterly, irredeemably unenforceable. Hang in there. Their bark is much worse than their bite.

 

Have a look at: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/119530-what-would-you-do.html

 

Regards

 

Rosie

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...