Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Documents arrived today dated 27th March.  This is a cc taken out a long time ago (2008) and they don't seem to have been able to provide a copy of a CCA agreement, just reams of print outs of lines of texts from old bank statements, default notices etc.   
    • Documents finally arrived today from PRA group.  New day have sent me lots of paperwork, copies of default letters and statements, print out of what looks like a CCA that would have been completed on online, IP address as signature.  This debt is not too old, so possible this is the true copy of agreement ?  Not sure what my defence would be beyond irresponsible lending. 
    • pers i wouldn't.. all you need to know is in the posts of that thread....that being section 127(3) of the CCA refers. if under a CCA return, the 'creditor' claims its a recon, it must not contain any details like a sig, tickbox, or typed name (whether you signed physically or by online tickbox) 1. those are not necessary in a recon, so why inc them? (faked??) 2, it cant thus be a recon!!, it must be a copy of the 'original' from the original creditor, not from a debt buyers filing cabinet. they shouldn't not be 'mixing' some original docs from the OC with crap from their filing cabinet, claiming its ALL a recon! because some of it is faked. just remember there are far more docs like NOA and a DN that are as equally important to a court claim of 'this debt is enforceable'. never rely solely upon the dodgy agreement argument.
    • India has thousands of small gold refineries which are facing more competition from big players.View the full article
  • 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
      • 160 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

DAILY MAIL ARTICLE Today 12th July


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6469 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

HAs anyone seen the daily Mail article today stating that several courts have frozen a large number of claims agains the banks as a case is going to court and the ruling of the case would take precendence over all claims made against banks????? i've paid my £120 to issue a court order against LTSB and am worried this means I will loose my case and money

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a very large thread about this here. No-one really knows what is happening at the moment but if you have a read around the Lloyds TSB section, someone whose case was put on hold pending this test case has been paid out today (I think).

Please note that I am not a legal expert and all advice given is without prejudice and is purely my opinion only.

 

** Nationwide - £1821.15-PAID IN FULL - Aug 06 **

** Halifax Mortgage -£390 - PAID IN FULL - Nov 06 **

Lloyds TSB - MCOL issued 09/03/07 - £2953 + costs - ON HOLD....

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I haven't seen the article. I have just registered with the CAG today to start my claim against LTSB too. I have an account for which I pay £10 pcm and unauthorised overdrafts are charged at £60 + interest. I am looking to ind others who wish to proceed against LTSB for these excesses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

gilleece - don't panic, hold your nerve, it's business as usual till we hear anything specific to the contrary.

 

aligater - If you have not found them yet, you will find several hundred here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/ . Read the FAQ's, particularly the step-by-step instructions, the Bank Template Letters, and as many threads as you can, to get familiar with this. Best if you start your own thread so you (and we) can keep track/help as required.

Regards,

Bean

Lloyds TSB - 27/11/06 - £6377 paidrest with FOS

 

SETTLED

Cap One - 6/10/06 - £875

Lloyds TSB (MC) - 20/10/06 (BY DEF) £372

Hitachi Cap - Nov. 06 - £207

Citi Cards - 28/12//06 - £220

Monument - 23/1/07 - £889

Barclaycard (Mrs. Bean) - 19/2/07 £376

Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bank refunds put on ice by court | This is Money

 

Financial News, City News, Mortgages, Loans, Savings, Pensions, Market Reports | This is Money is the sister website of Money Mail, aka the Daily Mail's Money section.

 

What the article fails to mention is that Gloucestershire CC is most definately not "Kicking claims out of the county court". I hate the Daily Mail, with a passion.

 

What is actually happening is the Judge is recommending a "Stay" be put on the cases as another claim will be presented through a higher court, etc. It is perfectly within reason and justifiable to lodge a request the stay be removed from the case, as I believe someone from the main thread about this situation on this forum is doing (with the assistance of the Mods).

 

Currently, it is only one judge from Gloucestershire County Court filing these stays, that we are aware of.

 

In other words, business as usual.

reload vs Lloyds - £2703.11 Settlement Reached 14/07/06.

reload vs Lloyds Round 2 - Prelim sent 27/03/07. £435 owed.

reload vs Capital One - £456.57 Settlement Reached 14/07/06.

reload's mum vs Barclays - £745 owed. £375 partial settlement reached 17/10/06.

Lloyds Bank - The Template Response Letters!

 

Advice & opinions of reload are offered informally, without prejudice and without liability. Please use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...