Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Looking for a bit of advice on an possible malicious or fraudulent claim.   I received a letter today from my insurance company regarding an alleged incident three months ago and stating I had five days to respond or my no claims bonus could be affected if they settled the claim. It gave a date and postal code for the incident. I rung the insurance company and said I had not been involved in an incident on the day in question and was not even in the area. I am absolutely clear on this although the area is only about 15 miles from my home, it was Easter Monday and I know exactly where I was that day. I asked about the incident and was told that my vehicle had reversed into another car outside a shop. There are no shops in the area, it is purely rural farmland (so no CCTV obviously).   The insurance company said they would note my response and send to the claimants insurance company but would need to send an assessor out to take photos of my vehicle for any damage. My vehicle has no damage to the rear but does have a dent to the door from a collision with a deer that I have never done anything about.   My questions are ;   How did the claimant obtain my insurance details ? Does my insurer have to provide me with details of who the claimant is ? Could the dented door cause a problem because I didn't report it ? It is very obvious it is not damage from reversing into someone else. If I had been away on holiday and hadn't responded, would this claim just have been paid without me knowing about it resulting in loss of NCB ?  
    • It doesn’t say FINE anywhere on the documentation.    I don’t have the facility to scan the document, is there something in particular that you need to see? I can explain what is on there.    Thsnks 
    • CASE DISMISSED!!!   Thank you so much for all your help guys! Couldn't have done it without you!!! - donation on it's way (just waiting for some money to come in next week!)   That was pretty nerve wracking, I must say, but once I got into the flow of things, everything went well. Didn't help my nerves that the PRA rep was 30mins late!! Was hard to gauge the judge initially, but once I realised that she was well versed in the legislation and seemed to hold it in high esteem, I felt confident and the nerves dissipated a bit (lucked out there from what I hear from other horror stories!). She pretty much agreed with everything that I had said, and even highlighted things that I had thought about mentioning but didn't in the end, although she wasn't interested in my use of PRA v Mr Segal as it wasn't directly relevant; I knew this, but that wasn't why I was using it! I tried just once to explain my reasoning, but realised that the judge was ultimately for my case and so yielded quickly on that, rather than get her back up!   The best part was when the rep knew that case wasn't going his way, he then reverted to desperate tactics and referred to the fact that I was a day late sending the stuff to PRA and that I hadn't signed their copy; judge was not impressed with this argument at all, simply saying "Well the copy I have here was filed on time and signed". Not that that would have made a difference as by that point I had already explained my case, and she had agreed. She also had a go at them for trying to file the "response statement" without permission and disregarded it (as you thought Andy).   I felt sorry for the rep, decent bloke, very polite, asked if I had any questions for him afterwards, and kept highlighting the fact that he didn't work for PRA; think he knew it was a poor case and that he would have a hard job trying to fight it.   Something he said did concern me a lot though, and that was that he "couldn't guarantee that they wouldn't try again, either by appeal or by another claim".......not sure what this means and where it leaves me!! I questioned him about there being another claim as I don't feel that an appeal would be approved (although it could I guess!) and he seemed to think that they could come after me in a claim for arrears/interest? This threw me and ruined the feeling of joy that I momentarily had! I phoned National DebtLine to get some clarity on this and they seemed to think the same thing! Then I found this online:   "However, according to Late Payment Legislation law (see ext. link 10), a creditor is allowed to charge his debtor an interest fee, if the consumer has late payments and bad debts. I.e. a debt buyer can request an additional interest payment from his debtors as a creditor, and not as a DCA. The same late payment legislation allows such interest collection to begin after a 30-days default period." https://ecollect.co.uk/wiki/debt-collection-uk/   Found similar information on other sites and even on other threads on CAG. I know you said they couldn't add anything Andy, so now I'm confused.com!!! How can they claim for arrears or interest if the debt that said arrears/interest is based on is now deemed unenforceable by a court ruling???!!! That just seems ridiculous and means that this thing will never end!!!!!    
    • Thanks Honeybee   For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]   please answer the following questions.   1 Date of the infringement - 5/7/19   2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 11/7/19   3 Date received 16/7/19   4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Y   5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Y   6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] N Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up   7 Who is the parking company? Northern Parking Services   8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] 1 Kings Manor Newcastle NE1 2ST   For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. BPA   There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, please check HERE     I do not think there is ANPR at this location but there are photos of the vehicle in a parking space The PCN has a "vehicle observed from"  date..... and time......  "to date..... time.....  
    • Hi,sorry for delay in respnse, just started a new job.   LBA here   Sports Direct 1st June 2019   Dear Sir/Madam, On 26th January 2019 I bought a pair of Phantom VSN in size 11 from Sports Direct Chingford. Please see my details of purchase below. ..... screen grab from bank statement of card payment .... On the 27th June 2019 I was surprised to see that the sole of the right boot had torn open at one of the rear studs, making the boots unusable. Please see picture below. ..... picture of torn sole of boot .... The Consumer Rights Act makes it an implied term of the contract that goods be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality.  I do not feel that an £85 pair of boots should fail after five months of being used for nothing other than their intended purpose. As you are in breach of contract I am rejecting the boots and request that you refund the sum paid to you of approximately £85 which I trust you will be able confirm from your records. I have bought a replacement pair of the same boots from your website on the 28th June 2019 as my son needed boots almost immediately, for that reason please give me a full refund of the original purchase price. I am today returning the faulty boots along with this letter to the Chingford branch of your store. If I do not receive your satisfactory proposals for settlement of my claim within 7 days of the date of this letter, I intend to issue a claim against you in the county court without further reference to you. Yours faithfully,   They replied by email to say this ............. Thank you for send your football boots for a further inspection.   I would like to advise you that on inspection it is our belief that the issue is due to wear and tear and not an inherent manufacturing fault. I appears that the stud had been caught on something which has caused it to rip apart from the sole.   Sadly, I am afraid for this reason we are on this occasion unable to offer a replacement or refund for your boots.   I have now returned your boots to you.   Apologies for any disappointment caused. Kind regards, ................ The boots arrived back to me today   I assume I now make a small claims claim?   Thanks Micky  
  • Our picks

freakyleaky

H.O.L Test case appeal. Judgement Declared. ***See Announcements***

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3279 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

There is a precedent in that the McLibel 2 even though they lost against McDonalds they won damages against the UK & one of the main concerns of the EU court was that legal aid was not available to them. Therefore the trail was not fair & a clear breach of Article 6

 

They also criticised the law in that there was little protection for those who spoke out against corporations which affected the everyday lives of citizens & the environment. They thought our libel laws too erroneous. Of course in this regard they are wrong its the Judgments that have been too erroneous

 

As the Banks have said it is in the interest to take it higher and back then Mclibel2 ATE's were not so popular...can't ATE be used by Walls

 

m2ae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
300 caggers 2000 visitors says it all.... this site is losing its power!!!

 

what do we do????

Actually, that's pretty average for this time of the year, the numbers always drop a fair bit in summer. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey well im just sitting here doing nuthin important and watchin nurses.

 

hope all is aok in the land of the living.

 

Word as it mateys that the milk suply is being restricted in some areas due to a stopage in delivery of some kind.

 

Heyn ut you know this link shud keep the mind focused and distracted for a while you think?


Any typos spelling mistakes are due to leprechauns in my keyboard they move the letters around sometimes (edited for bookworm god bless her sole) Deep Peace be with you.

 

“I would say to the House as I said to those who have joined this government: I have

nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the

most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of

suffering.

 

You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory. Victory at all costs —

Victory in spite of all terror — Victory, however long and hard the road may be, for

without victory there is no survival.”

 

(Winston Churchill Addressing the House of commons.)

 

All complaints go to the lootube. All conversations go in the white box then you click submit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK whuts mae2 confused about were all here to help?


Any typos spelling mistakes are due to leprechauns in my keyboard they move the letters around sometimes (edited for bookworm god bless her sole) Deep Peace be with you.

 

“I would say to the House as I said to those who have joined this government: I have

nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the

most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of

suffering.

 

You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory. Victory at all costs —

Victory in spite of all terror — Victory, however long and hard the road may be, for

without victory there is no survival.”

 

(Winston Churchill Addressing the House of commons.)

 

All complaints go to the lootube. All conversations go in the white box then you click submit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:confused:

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FSA has backed earlier guidance issued by the OFT and confirmed that, in its view, ‘read and understood’ terms in consumer contracts are unfair. The FSA said that including a contractual term or a tick box on a website asking a consumer to confirm that they had read and understood the contract would be unfair and in breach of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. Companies should not reject customer complaints because they had ticked a box saying that they had read and understood the contract. The FSA said:

“A declaration requiring consumers to agree that they have read and understood a contract is, in our view, unfair. This is because the statement may not be true and may not reflect what has actually happened. Consumers may not have either read or understood the contract and so are not in a position to declare that they have in fact done so. In this instance, the declaration is effectively meaningless and does not reflect the circumstances in which the particular consumer signs their contract.

The law requires consumers to be given an opportunity to examine all the terms in a contract.

A declaration of this nature could be used by a firm to claim that it gave customers an opportunity to read a contract when it did not actually do so. The firm could argue that because a consumer has signed to say that they have read and understood a contract, this means the firm has fulfilled its obligation to allow the consumer to examine all the terms. This may not in fact be true. Therefore the use of a declaration in this way is unfair.

It is preferable for ‘have read and understood declarations’ instead to give a clear warning to consumers that they should read and understand terms before signing them and that consumers should ask questions if they do not understand any terms”

The FSA thought that it was fair to ask consumers to make declarations relating to matters which were within their own knowledge, such as personal information including age, gender and address.

The OFT has already issued guidance which makes it clear that asking consumers to declare that they have read and understood an agreement is unfair.

“Declarations that the consumer has read and/or understood the agreement give rise to special concerns. The Regulations implement an EU Directive saying that terms must be clear and intelligible and that consumers must have a proper opportunity to read all of them (see Part IV). Including a declaration of this kind effectively requires consumers to say these conditions have been met, whether they have or not. This tends to defeat the purpose of the Directive, and as such is open to serious objection.

In practice consumers often do not read, and rarely understand fully, any but the shortest and simplest contracts. It might be better if they tried to do so, but that does not justify requiring them to say they have done so whether they have or not. The purpose of declarations of this kind is clearly to bind consumers to wording regardless of whether they have any real awareness of it. Such statements are thus open to the same objections as provisions binding consumers to terms they have not seen at all.

Much more likely to be acceptable is a clear and prominent warning that the consumer should read and understand the terms before signing them.”

Click here to read the FSA’s statement

Click here to read the OFT’s guidance

  • Haha 1

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Patrickq1,

 

Very good can you put the above in the PPI forum too as I believe it also applies there also.

 

PF


If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well how long has this been going on for then and cannot this be applied to Consumer contracts???....especially when contracts are NOT cancellable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes It Will Be Applied To Consumer Contracts ,if You Read The Full Eu Data Protection Act Its In Their,you Can Use This Eu At The Moment But It Means The Supreme Court Throwing It Out First And I Do Not Think They Would Dare ?

Patrickq1


http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see scenarios where consumer credit agreements or other complicated commercial agreements are executed on lenders premises in front of an ''impatient'' representative and how this would apply...but not so much for s62's where cooling off periods are allowed or other contracts where ''sufficient time is allowed for reading and understanding the t&c's..but even so there are many cancellable contracts that have been signed within the cooling off periods that really needed expert advice before execution...

 

I gonna copy and paste that extract Patrick onto my word document very good of you thanks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consumer Credit Agreements usually state...''sign this only if you wish to be legally bound'' surely any signing after seeing that must indicate the customers intention still to be bound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Full Eu Data Protection Act

Purely for the record; and not to be digested at this time of night, where might I find this exceedingly useful document and is it in English? - don't fancy trying Flemish at ANY time of day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something here? Either a term is fair or unfair. What bearing can it have on the question if you said you understood the term?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Am I missing something here? Either a term is fair or unfair. What bearing can it have on the question if you said you understood the term?

 

Is the question not 'is the term fair or not?' and 'is the term fair or not under the regulations?', though?

  • Haha 1

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read/understood declarations confer no benefit on the supplier and are therefore pointless. Since they serve no purpose it is equally pointless to object to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...