Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Unpaid wages should be pretty straightforward if you did the work. Don't be intimidated. You need only show you were due money, and did not get money.   The risk is that they have no money to pay you (and legal fees) - frankly a solicitor maybe be costing them more than your claim is for and I might have expected them to make a commercial decision to settle before this point regardless of the merits of the case.
    • Thanks so much FTMDave.  This is so much better   I'm still tempted to leave the blue section in is as if I lose it will at least save me a little bit of money.  But I get your point that it's pretty superfluous.   Thinking I'll get this in the post on Monday unless you think it's worth delaying?   
    • Hi All I have now received a Final Reminder, which I have attached. Can you confirm that I should still ignore this letter and take no further action. It does not appear to say "Letter of Claim" anywhere on the document but I just wanted to check with you all. Many thanks FightUnfairParkingTickets Parking Charge Final Reminder issued 29th May 2024.pdf
    • Hello I am a resident of a communal block of flats owned by a Housing Association and since Tuesday 14th May 2024 Matthews and Tannert had put up scaffolding for a job on the roof last week, which was up for the best part of nine days. They had removed the scaffolding on Thursday 23rd May 2024 but my Sky box is still not working because of the satellite dish outside, and I was wondering whether the scaffolders had touched the dish while it was there and as a result had probably knocked the dish and probably made the dish go out of signal or whatever. I needed someone to check this out as well as to see my Sky box to see what could be the problem, and hopefully sort this out. I have had my Sky Digibox for many years and I have got recordings saved on them that I have had a long time - it would break my heart if I had lost them forever.       I contacted Sky but I almost made the mistake of accepting an offer where I would have to pay £31.50 and wait a whole month without television in my front room for it. I am in debt at the moment and I don't want all this on top of everything else - thankfully I have since cancelled it two weeks later when I told the person on the phone that it is the dish which is at fault as well as the fact that I live in a communal Housing Association property, and so that is one of very few weights off my mind. I emailed the Housing Association's Repairs department and they said that they will contact an electrical company to come out and see to the dish outside. I received a telephone call on Friday 24th May from the man to say that he will arrive on Wednesday 29th May 2024 to do the job. He arrived at around 9.40 am on Wednesday as promised; he went into my flat and had a look at the Sky box and saw the blue screen on my front room TV set, indicating no signal. He also looked outside as to where the dish was.  The main problem was that the ladders that he had with him were not enough to reach the dish outside as the dish was towards the top of the building - obviously the Health and Safety aspect of the job didn't allow him to do this. He then mentioned that whether he could do the job as a result of getting onto the roof and doing it like that as the dish is closer to the top. He said that he needed the key to enter the loft part of the building in order to reach this, and he needed to contact the Housing Officer at the Housing Association who had key to this, but lo and behold, he came on the Wednesday to do the job, and guess what? Wednesday was the Housing Officer's day off and so therefore he was unable to contact him for the key so that he could do the job! I just couldn't believe it myself. I am personally annoyed because this has not been sorted, and the man who came to do this is also annoyed because he came all the way to Nottingham from Peterborough, and he said to me that he won't get paid if he cannot do the job, so you see, we are both angry about this for different reasons. We are both in the same boat with regards to frustration, and we both want to see a conclusion to this, once and for all. Sometimes I wish that I didn't live in a flat which is in a communal building and I am thinking of getting a transfer to a one bedroom flat that isn't in that sort of place. I pay around £85 a month in a Direct Debit to Sky to receive their TV services which I cannot use at the moment, and I don't have much money in my bank account as it is due to one thing and another. I also pay nearly £14 a month to TV Licensing so that I can legally watch TV in my front room. I pay for Sky hence the fact that I want the Sky service in my front room and not Freeview. Also, as the General Election is coming up in five weeks' time, I want the satellite TV to be working properly so that I can catch up with what is on the news channels, and I feel rather "cut off" from that at the moment, and I want it working in time for Thursday 4th July 2024 for ovbious reasons . I have Freeview in my bedroom, but that is not the point  - I don't want to be limited to my bedroom every time I want to watch TV. I have tried putting the Freeview in te front room but it doesn't seem compatable for the same uses that I usually have Sky for.  Sunday 9th June 2024 is Day 27 of the satellite TV not working in my flat, and I feel that something needs to be done about this. You can take this message as a complaint if you like, but nevertheless, I want this message to be acknowledged and also something to be done about what has happened. I have enough on my plate with regards to health problems and depression without things like this making things worse. I would appreciate it if something was done.  I don't like naming and shaming but it is Matthews and Tannert's fault that I am in this situation in the first place, and sometimes I wish that I could sue them. In a nutshell, I have had more than enough after being without TV in the my front room for nearly four weeks. Also, at a time like this, I am missing so much of interest on TV what with the General Election comning up in just a few weeks.
    • There's no facility for a settlement "out of court" as such. But matters that are started under the "Single Justice" (SJ) Procedure can often be concluded without the defendant appearing. The SJ procedure, as the name suggests, involves a single magistrate, sitting in an office with a legal advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The SJ deals with straightforward guilty pleas. Anything where the SJ believes the defendant should appear, or which should be dealt with by the "ordinary" court are adjourned o a hearing in the normal magistrates'  court .As well as this, all defendants have the right to a hearing in the normal court if they wish. Nobody is forced to have their case heard under he SJP.  In particular, as far as traffic matters go, a SJ will not disqualify a driver and if a ban is to be considered, the case will be passed over to the normal court. Because, following your SD, you will be pleading Not Guilty (and offering the "deal"), your case would usually be heard in the normal court, meaning a personal appearance. To be honest, performing your SD at the court is a more straightforward way of doing things. It avoids any possible hitches involved in serving he SD on the court. But of course, as I said, most courts have backlogs which mean an SD may not be quickly accommodated. If you do end up doing your SD before a solicitor, check with them the protocol for serving it on the court. Do let us know what the solicitor says about Wednesday.    
  • 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

Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4953 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 agree sparkie,

 

but the problem is, where can I get one?

 

most are rubbish

 

regards

 

 

That IS the problem ...it even goes further than that ...because consumer law and regulations are still so very complex even a lot of Barristers fall short on the undestanding of it .....even the law lords get lost.....and interpret it wrong .....when the facts of the matter are ..........when it has to come down to interpretation they forget that its the interpretation that favours the consumer that must prevail............ even they take no notice of that.

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Sparki were you refering to my post

 

In my opinion this agreement is unenforceable, for so many reasons I cant count,

 

It is impossible to understant the manner in which payments have been calculated.....it is without doubt a multiple agreement partly regulated by the CCA 1974...therefore the interest rate on the PPI should be shown an an APR in any event and it is not.......if the PPI is taken out of the amount of credit by the misselling it would affect the whole agreement and would in my view be declared void.

My Advice

Get genuine good legal advice off a good consumer law lawyer

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sparki were you refering to my post

 

In my opinion this agreement is unenforceable, for so many reasons I cant count,

 

It is impossible to understant the manner in which payments have been calculated.....it is without doubt a multiple agreement partly regulated by the CCA 1974...therefore the interest rate on the PPI should be shown an an APR in any event and it is not.......if the PPI is taken out of the amount of credit by the misselling it would affect the whole agreement and would in my view be declared void.

My Advice

Get genuine good legal advice off a good consumer law lawyer

sparkie

 

 

Yes I was Friend

 

Sorry forgot to address it for you.

 

apologies sparkie

 

By including the PPI in the total loan and due to the fact it is stated to be a non cancellable agreement.....it meant your parents were/are tied to another agreement that was a cancellable one,....... that aslo falls under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Credit Contracts and Unfair Relationship ........a good Barrister would get ALL your money back under this one I believe....worth looking into ..Swifts agreements can be broken.

 

sparkie

Edited by Sparkie1723
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks sparkie

 

can you or anyone else recomend a good barrister that i can contact to look into this case.

 

First I would try and locate a public access Barrister, one who takes cases on without going through a solicitor.there are quite a few.

 

 

What area do you live in?

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go to here..............There is also what is called pro bono Barristers ..ones that offer their services for free......in any event your parents could be eligble for legal aid assistance, because of their age

sparkie

 

Find A Barrister - Search - Barristers offering legal advice and services, find lawyers, public direct access barrister, law, law firm, compensation, solicitor, legal claim, litigation barrister.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can everyone find their Broker they signed up with? most likely not, what happens they can simply change their trading name, I know of one company who did so in order to get out of the PPI problem,

more about this lot later they are even worse off then Swifties, god pity them when the lads start into them, :mad:

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about Barristers matie

I heard a rummor today of one who was Working and on his way home he took a tantram or tandam or whatever you call that thing, anyhow talk about the Wheels falling off your wagan lol:D

Edited by pkelly

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about Barristers matie

I heard a rummer today of one who was Working and on his way home he took a tantram or tandam or whatever you call that thing, anyhow talk about the Wheels falling off your wagan lol:D

 

 

Yep pkelly...... thats the one that amended a Swift witness statement..

This is what amend means

 

1.to alter, modify, rephrase, or add to or subtract from (a motion, bill, constitution, etc.) by formal procedure: 2.to change for the better; improve: to amend one's ways. 3.to remove or correct faults in; rectify.

 

BY amending that statement he bcame a joint witness in my view, Barrister or not....he altered it.

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re Swift Advances v Ourselves

 

To

A copuple of further questions for Mr Mathew..........already sent ...but sparkle can copy it in the morning just in case

 

sparkie

 

 

Mr Mathew Payne

Swift Legal Services

 

Dear Mr Payne,

 

As you are aware Swift Advances Plc have re instated the possession proceedings against us, as both of us are aware that our account was transferred to Kestrel Loans No 1 Ltd, can you confirm before Wednesday close of business, that Swift Legal Services are also the appointed legal representatives of Kestrel Loans No 1 Ltd.

 

I will be asking this question in Court, it would be simpler and would save time if you could answer before hand, as am sure you will have deuced I do have a great many of such similar ones to ask, some that have not been mentioned as of yet.

 

Also could you supply me with the name of a senior representative of Kestrel Loans No 1 Ltd who can explain to the Court, all the relevant details of the transfer/sale of our loan to the Kestrel company involved, and from the point of view of that company.

 

I trust you will reply by return

 

Your sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah well must go auld matie looking forward to monday morning lol not like a lot of people cant wait to see how this all is goes down in headoffice

and so its good night from me

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest blackie

Good morning Swifties, just had notification from the company that is monitoring Swift for me, that on the 30th October there was a change id Director / Secretary. Interesting........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning Swifties, just had notification from the company that is monitoring Swift for me, that on the 30th October there was a change id Director / Secretary. Interesting........

 

 

My little inside mole tells me Mr Rosenberg the Company Secretary has gone ;)

Getting far too hot in the kitchen...

 

Just had another phone call - Barwick has taken over as Co.Sec..

Edited by Smarterchick
Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a message for all of you to Desist from putting up any more posts until the staff and illegal teens have caught up with the last lot,

They are under pressure, I just heard another one has applied for a new job, lol

:(:mad:

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

only joking folks I know its not like me :) but have any of you tried to contact any Kestrel workers would be nice if you were to phone in and have a chat with them, make them feel WANTED

WHY NOT DO IT NOW :?:

OOPS ``rabbits out again now``

pick up a penquin two systems for the price of one:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to copy a post by another Cagger (In Blue) who I am sure will not mind my copying it anonymously given the trolls on here...but it might throw some light on certain 'transactions' going on within another company we know...

 

"In UK practice, however, stamp duty is not paid, as most securitization transactions are structured as equitable assignments and not perfected legal transferes. Nevertheless, if and when the transaction were to be perfected into a full fledged sale of receivables, the document will attract stamp duty: therefore, the originator is required to provide for full payment of duty. But this is usually regarded as a theoretical tax - very rarely have circumstances arisen where the duty has actually become payable."

 

Mr Webster (Swifts Director and Ch.Exec for those who didn't know) insists and has confirmed in writing that Swift do not securitise, very nice of him to be so honest about it, but their accounts say they 'sold' the loans so if that's the case then other things might kick in: -

 

continued:

"This was posted sometime back.What I am trying to say is that if the company etc have sold the legal title as many assert but have not disclosed this fact they are liable for a whopping great stamp duty bill to the revenue and have been for several years and also guilty of tax evasion and fraud and should be investigated by the revenue who will undoubtedly bankrupt them if this is the case.The one big reason to retain or pretend to retain the legal title which they are continuing to do as theyre still carrying out all the repos, is to avoid the duty and land registry charges.They should be investigated by HMRC who would get to the bottom of this once and for all."

 

Interesting? :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4953 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...