Jump to content


Help with Newmans please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4884 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

Newmans are certainly circumloquacious, if nothing else.

 

 

It would be interesting to hear their thoughts on s127(3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. They overlooked that, funnily enough.

 

 

I'd be even more interested in their thoughts about s.6 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008:

 

6.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading omission if, in its factual context, taking account of the matters in paragraph (2)—

(a) the commercial practice omits material information,

(b) the commercial practice hides material information,

© the commercial practice provides material information in a manner which is unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely, or

(d) the commercial practice fails to identify its commercial intent, unless this is already apparent from the context,

and as a result it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

 

It strikes me that Newmans email deliberately omits material information (i.e. that without an original document, a creditor cannot enforce in court) so as to be likely to cause the OP to take a transactional decision she would not have taken otherwise (in other words, to pay them).

 

Communicating in a deceitful or misleading manner is also a breach of the OFT Guidance, which in itself is contrary to s.5(3)b(i) of CPUTR

 

failure by a trader to comply with a commitment contained in a code of conduct which the trader has undertaken to comply with, if—

(i) the trader indicates in a commercial practice that he is bound by that code of conduct

 

Compliance with OFT Guidance is a condition of the consumer credit licence a DCA needs to trade.

 

I reckon their rather pompous, smartarse email is actually an own goal, as it provides documentary evidence to that could lead to prosecution by TS (note to self: don't hold breath).

 

Oh what a tangled web they weave...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I'd report them to TS for the email they sent you.

 

The only other thing I can add is that I didn't see Newmans for dust after I sent them a CCA letter.

 

Don't forget to wave goodbye to them ;)

The REAL Axis of evil: Banks, Credit Card Companies & Credit Reference Agencies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello SP!

 

I'd be even more interested in their thoughts about s.6 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

 

Very good point indeed, I had not thought of that. Well worth wishiwasrich following up on that.

 

I have a particularly snotty Letter from one American Card Company that is another fine example of "Communicating in a deceitful or misleading manner." I shall review that Letter again, and will report them.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received the email from them exactly as above by registered post yesterday morning.

 

The only difference was they put the amount outstanding at the top.

 

In January when they wanted the whole amount repaid it was £9k. Since then I have repaid £4.5k - so how is the balance still over £7k??? Surely that rate of interest is usury if not illegal? :mad::eek:

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

6.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading omission if, in its factual context, taking account of the matters in paragraph (2)—

(a) the commercial practice omits material information,

(b) the commercial practice hides material information,

© the commercial practice provides material information in a manner which is unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely, or

(d) the commercial practice fails to identify its commercial intent, unless this is already apparent from the context,

and as a result it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

 

Quite interesting that this section is very close to what the 2006 Fraud Act says on the subject.

 

Glad its in the new regs as the chances of the plod ever taking action for a few grand are pretty remote!

 

David

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so I wait for the reply to the CCA and SAR from Newmans before sending anything else then - given your subsequent replies (thank you) - I should quote various sections as above and report them to the OFT?

 

When do I get to challenge the amount owed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...