Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

Halifax credit card now 1st credit


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3882 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

Oi, stop stealing m y thunder (lol)

 

ok the dN does not give you sufficient time to remedy the defect- even i

 

14th December 2007 was a Friday so it would not have been served at the earliest until tuesday 18th december

 

14 calender days from 19th December gives you until january 1st t rectify

 

also the DN does not say if , possibly or maybe , it says we WILL terminate if you do not rectify the breach by 29th December

 

it does not matter if they waited to later to terminate (and the demand for the full amount coupled with the statement that they WILL do this) is sufficient for you to beleive that the account was terminated

 

terminated on the back of a defective DN = unlawful rescission of contract which in my understanding is a complete defence to any proceedings irrespective of whether the agreement itself was valid and entitled you to pay ONLY the amount of arrears at the time of termination LESS any counterclaim you may have for damages due to the unfair rescission!

 

hi tiddley I ti Pom Pom!

 

 

DD,

 

Would never want to steal your thunder.

 

I guess that the only time the faulty DN then termination becomes relevant, is at the court stage?

 

Vint

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 218
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

DD,

 

Would never want to steal your thunder.

 

I guess that the only time the faulty DN then termination becomes relevant, is at the court stage?

 

Vint

 

well only if they take you to court- personally and for the sake of other caggers i would just ignore them and i wouldn't alert them to the exact reasons why they had cocked up

 

if they threatened court action i might just point out to them that at they had unlawfully rescinded the contract i would be defending and counterclaiming any action and let them waste their time (but tthats just me- a a stroppy old sod!)

Link to post
Share on other sites
well only if they take you to court- personally and for the sake of other caggers i would just ignore them and i wouldn't alert them to the exact reasons why they had cocked up

 

if they threatened court action i might just point out to them that at they had unlawfully rescinded the contract i would be defending and counterclaiming any action and let them waste their time (but tthats just me- a a stroppy old sod!)

 

 

Quite agree, I don't see any milage in following up at this stage.

 

Softly Softly

 

Vint

 

Member of the Garden of England grumpy old sods club.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Got to feel sorry for 1st Credit, received a letter yesterday stating the following: ~

 

"WE ARE ABLE TO OFFER YOU A GENEROUS DISCOUNT IF YOU SETTLE YOUR ACCOUNT BY A MUTUALLY AGREED "FULL & FINAL SETTLEMENT PAYMENT"

BLAH BLAH BLAH CALL US IF YOU WISH TO CONSIDER THIS OFFER.

 

ONCE PAYMENT HAS BEEN PAID WE WILL ARRANGE FOR YOUR CREDIT FILE TO RECORD THE FULL DEBT AS SATISFIED.

 

They then enclose a remittance to complete stating : ~

 

1) Yes I am prepared to make a full and final settlement offer, my offer is £ signed...........

 

2) I am not prepared to make a full and funal offer, I am prepared to offer a monthly payment of £ signed...........

 

3) I am not prepared to make a full and final settlement or a monthly payment offer signed...........

 

My telephone number is ......................

 

Clutching at straws me thinks.

 

I will of course not be returning their form with my signature or telephone number, but am very tempted to offer F&F of 1p!!!!

 

Another email to OFT to add to the ever growing case!!!

 

S.B.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Got to feel sorry for 1st Credit, received a letter yesterday stating the following: ~

 

"WE ARE ABLE TO OFFER YOU A GENEROUS DISCOUNT IF YOU SETTLE YOUR ACCOUNT BY A MUTUALLY AGREED "FULL & FINAL SETTLEMENT PAYMENT"

BLAH BLAH BLAH CALL US IF YOU WISH TO CONSIDER THIS OFFER.

 

ONCE PAYMENT HAS BEEN PAID WE WILL ARRANGE FOR YOUR CREDIT FILE TO RECORD THE FULL DEBT AS SATISFIED.

 

They then enclose a remittance to complete stating : ~

 

1) Yes I am prepared to make a full and final settlement offer, my offer is £ signed...........

 

2) I am not prepared to make a full and funal offer, I am prepared to offer a monthly payment of £ signed...........

 

3) I am not prepared to make a full and final settlement or a monthly payment offer signed...........

 

My telephone number is ......................

 

Clutching at straws me thinks.

 

I will of course not be returning their form with my signature or telephone number, but am very tempted to offer F&F of 1p!!!!

 

Another email to OFT to add to the ever growing case!!!

 

S.B.

 

WELL......... whilst is it just a con to get them to call you - why dont you make an offer that will finalise the matter! 5% of what is owed is about what they'd get if they sold it

Link to post
Share on other sites

DD

 

No problem, I was going to say I won't offer anything due to unenforceable CCA and defective DN;)

 

Thanks for looking I have so many threads it's understandable to get mixed up!!!

 

S.B.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi al

 

Well 1st Credit don't give up do they ?

 

 

Yesterday I received a letter from them stating that they are unaware of any reason for non payment of the debt or a reasonable offer being made by me.

 

They are therefore CONSIDERING whether they should issue a Statutory Demand under the Insolvency Act 1986 (Bankruptcy).

 

They go on to advise me of the legal implications of being bankrupt, and strongly recommend that I consult a Solicitor or suitable advice bureau as Bankruptcy has very serious implications.

 

Now I am going to update OFT again with this letter, and just wondered if I should write to 1st Credit, I don't want to tell them that their CCA and DN are defective....any ideas would be much appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

s.b.

Link to post
Share on other sites

then let them consider it as much as they like!!

 

my advice is not to respond

 

IF they issue a SD (and issue it correctly) then you will have time a plenty to do something about it

 

it is a disputed debt and they cannot issued a SD against a genuinely disputed debt

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi DD

 

 

My thoughts exactly just wanted some clarification.

 

Thanks a million once again.

 

S.B.

 

i take it that you have ample correspondence disputing the account (and proof of posting?

 

if so you COULD if you wanted write and say

 

thank you for your letter of XXXXX i would be grateful if you would provide me with the authority upon which you rely to issue a Statutory Demand in respect of a disputed Debt

 

 

Y F

Link to post
Share on other sites

DD

 

Oh yes, all correspondence neatly filed in date order, all recorded mail proof etc etc, so not a problem there.

Think I may drop a certain lady at 1st Credit an email (cos its free) stating something along those lines. I have copied her in on the emails I have been sending to OFT, and she asked me who the person was who I was sending the email to because she didn't recognise the name, although it clearly states OFT, she was either very sub intelligent or playing silly games, anyway I didn't respond to her, let her do the work!!!

 

Thanks so much, you are a star.

 

S.B.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Halifax letter attached to your post #103

 

Prior to that time the monthly rate of interest was 1. 7%.the Annual Percentaqe

Rate - APR was 22.5%

 

You requested the monthly and annual rates. They have given you the monthly and %APR. Ask them again for

 

a) the monthly rate they actually appled - the figure 1.7% is highly likely to be an approximation.

 

b) the annual rate that they used to obtain the monthhly rate. Point out that you are well aware of the difference between annual rate and %APR.

 

Look at these figuresl

 

1.7% monthly is 22.4197....% yearly. APR is 22.4%

 

22.5% yearly is 1.7055...% monthly

 

If they are playing the APR [problem] they will charge

 

1.7090% monthly an annual rate of 22.549999....% an APR of 22.5%

 

It is very likely that the lass who wrote the letter has no idea that the annual rate is not the %APR but she could be aware of a cover-up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi pelham, this is being very cheeky but if you have any spare time in the not too distant future would it be at all possible for you to look at my thread please? I've been trying to get some clarification on the apr/interest figures without success.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/204972-halifax-cca.html

 

Shelbelle, I am so sorry to intrude on your thread and wish you good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

for debate

 

[10. Agreements for--

(a) running-account credit; and

(b) fixed-sum credit falling within the exceptions in

paragraph 9(a) to ©.

(1) The total charge for credit with a list of its

constituent parts and in the case of running-ac-

count credit, the total charge for credit shall be

calculated on the same assumptions as are set out

in paragraph 1 of Schedule 7 for the purpose of

calculating the APR in place of the assumptions

in Part 4 of the Total Charge for Credit Regula-

tions that might otherwise apply.

(2) The rate of interest on the credit to be

provided under the agreement or, where more

than one such rate applies, all the rates in all

cases quoted on a per annum basis with details of

when each rate applies.

(3) A statement whether any interest rate to be

shown under (2) above is fixed or variable.

(4) A statement explaining how and when in-

 

terest charges are calcthe agreement.]

Page 17

 

THE AGREEDMENT MUST SHOW HOW THEY HAVE CAL THE APR OR A STATMENT FIXED OR VARIABLE

 

WILL BE INTERESTED IN COMMENTS

Id quot circumiret, circumveniat.

 

please do not take my word for anything please do your own research All that i make comments on are done in good faith and to the best of my knowledge

Link to post
Share on other sites

lilly white.

 

Do you believe that the APR is the rate of interest that will be applied to a loan or other account? If so read my further post!

 

There are a lot of requirements in Schedule 1 and Schedule 7 of the 1983 Rugualtions governing CCA 1974. Schedule 7 merely confirms the exact way that APR has to be calculated and is in addition to the previous APR regulations.

 

However do these schedules matter in practice - the banks routinely ignore them and do there own thing. This is because they can get away with it. Not giving the correct information (schedule1 & 7) in an agreement only makes the agreement unenforceable if a judge says it is. Judges seem ( and my only information comes from CAG only) to take the view that an agreement should not be declared unenforceable because of a 'technicality'. Basically the are on the side of the banks.

 

Schedule 6 -the prescribed terms schedule - is a differennt matter. This schedule makes it mandatory as a matter of statute law that judges do not enforce an agreement that does not show 'the rate of any interest that will be applied. This in NOT the APR. APR by definition is not 'the rate of any interest to be applied'

 

Misleading and incorrect APRs in an agreements causes CAGGERS great excitement but in practice there is nothing there for them. In most ordinary agreements the provisions of Schedule 7 means thatt the APR does not have to be shown at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

APR is not the annual 'rate of of any interest' to be applied'.

 

I would be willing to bet that

 

a)95% of Caggers

b)99% of judges

c) 100% of bank empoyees.

 

would disagree with that statemant but they would all be wrong.

 

The APR is defined in statute as the total cost of credit expressed in annual percentage terms to one decimal place. The total cost of credit is defined as interest charges plus other compulsory charges.

 

So if the annual rate of interest to be applied is 10% and there are annual charges which add another 1% then the APR will be 11%. An APR of 11% does not express the annual rate to be applied which is 10%.

 

If there are no charges because of the rounding an APR of 10% can mean an annual rate to be applied between 9.95% and 10.049999,..%- all numbers in this range can be rounded to 10%. Guess what the banls will charge for an APR of 10% - 10.04999..% or as near to that figure as is convenient. The annual rate of any interest to be applied is 10.049% and this matters.

 

APR is very useful for comparing loans - it was introduced so thar punters can do that - but for calculating interest it is useless.

Edited by pelham9
Digit left out 10.049999..% not 10.4999.%
Link to post
Share on other sites
I would be willing to bet that

 

a)95% of Caggers

b)99% of judges

c) 100% of bank empoyees.

 

would disagree with that statemant but they would all be wrong.

 

The APR is defined in statute as the total cost of credit expressed in annual percentage terms to one decimal place. The total cost of credit is defined as interest charges plus other compulsory charges.

 

So if the annual rate of interest to be applied is 10% and there are annual charges which add another 1% then the APR will be 11%. An APR of 11% does not express the annual rate to be applied which is 10%.

 

If there are no charges because of the rounding an APR of 10% can mean an annual rate to be applied between 9.95% and 10.049999,..%- all numbers in this range can be rounded to 10%. Guess what the banls will charge for an APR of 10% - 10.4999..% or as near to that figure as is convenient. The annual rate of any interest to be applied is 10.049% and this matters.

 

APR is very useful for comparing loans - it was introduced so thar punters can do that - but for calculating interest it is useless.

 

so in the prescribed terms which has to be shown one or both?

 

should the different rates for cash cheques purchases have to be shown or are they all lumped together

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is a para from a pt letter which i have stolen thanks Paul

 

These breachs are clearly prejudicial to me as on entering into the agreement i was not given the information that the Consumer Credit Act required to be made clear, i was not aware of the true cost of borrowing.

 

i believe that this statement should be how we approach our own situation

 

So what in the agreement can you nail.

 

Well if they have not given what the act requires we can start there.

 

So if you are not told what the APR is fix or variable what is the point.

 

HOWEVER I AGREE THAT JUDGES DO VARIED HOWEVER WE MUST PUT DOUBT IN THEIR MIND.

 

HOPE THIS HELPS IN THIS DEBATE.

Id quot circumiret, circumveniat.

 

please do not take my word for anything please do your own research All that i make comments on are done in good faith and to the best of my knowledge

Link to post
Share on other sites

so in the prescribed terms which has to be shown one or both?

 

.

 

The APR is not a prescribed term

 

As I understand both the monthly rate and the annual rate can satisfy the prescribed term for interest. If this is tthe case either can be used alone. Nothing to stop both being quoted but the banks might just run into trouble that way.

 

So as a prescribed term

 

15.9% APR alone is not acceptable

 

I5.938% alone is acceptable provided they charge 1.24% monthly

 

1.24% monthly is acceptable.

 

15.9% yearly is acceptable provided they charge. 1.237% monthly

 

But what about 15.9% yearly and 1.24% monthly?

 

In my book these two rates are inconsistent so nobody knows what the prescribed term is meant to be and these two together i think do not satisfy the requirement of the interest rate prescibed term. But what would a busy judge say? He has probably never considered the matter and his maths is very rusty. We are saying that a discrepency of .003% is sufficient to make a an agreenent unenforceable absolutely. Somehow I do not think we would win,

Link to post
Share on other sites
.

 

The APR is not a prescribed term

 

As I understand both the monthly rate and the annual rate can satisfy the prescribed term for interest. If this is tthe case either can be used alone. Nothing to stop both being quoted but the banks might just run into trouble that way.

 

So as a prescribed term

 

15.9% APR alone is not acceptable

 

I5.938% alone is acceptable provided they charge 1.24% monthly

 

1.24% monthly is acceptable.

 

15.9% yearly is acceptable provided they charge. 1.237% monthly

 

But what about 15.9% yearly and 1.24% monthly?

 

In my book these two rates are inconsistent so nobody knows what the prescribed term is meant to be and these two together i think do not satisfy the requirement of the interest rate prescibed term. But what would a busy judge say? He has probably never considered the matter and his maths is very rusty. We are saying that a discrepency of .003% is sufficient to make a an agreenent unenforceable absolutely. Somehow I do not think we would win,

 

understood so realistically what we are looking for is that they are not there in any form within the four corners rather than hair splitting over a few less than percentage points!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are right when it comes to court action simply because of the attitude of judges in the lower courts. If I were a judge I would make even small deviations from the CCA particularly if they involve dishonesty a reason not to enforce an agreement. Hopefully CAG will change this and they have made an excellent start. In the example I laid out the difference was only .003% but it is more usually .0499%

 

The CCA (1974) laid down a framework which protected the customer and insisted that all interest rates were set down fairly and clearly. If the CCA was upheld by judges in our courts the banks would either make less money or charge slighly higher interest rates But there would be no arguments.

 

The banks did not like the CCA because it took away opportunities to cheat unsuspecting customers. It also meant that they had to be more careful with their agreements. They therefore largely ignored whole chunks of the CCA. We have no effective regulation and the law seems to have dismissed the legislation for over 30 years and it has taken organisations like CAG to start the process of making the banks toe the line. I am hopeful that CAG by constantly supporting the bank's aggrieved customers will eventually force(by costing them money) the banks to be honest - even now you can see the effect in better agreements.

 

The CCA and the APR did however immediatly make two scams obvious and made comparison of loans on offer much simpler for customers.

 

The Flat Rate [problem]. Quoted rate 20%. Loan £1000 for 1 year payable by equal monthly instalments. 'Obviously ' on £1000 the interest would be £200 making £1200 to be paid at £100 per month. This an actual annual rate of not far from 40%. I have not seen this [problem] for mamy years now.

 

The Simple Interest [problem]. We will charge an annual rate of 12% which is 'obviously' 1% per month. This is an actual yearly rate of around 12.45%. Not all that large a [problem] and it is still around to some extent. Indeed the the wrong formula used in one of the calculators I discussed in a previous post used the /12 formula startimg with the APR to do calculations - total ignorance you might think but I wonder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks pelham 9

 

I CAN SEE THAT YOU ARE A HEAD OF ME IN THIS IT IS SOMETHING I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON .

 

I AM AWARE THAT THE APR IS NOT A PRESCRIBED TERM.

 

I HAVE STOLEN A FULL COPY OF THE CCA 1983 WELL NOT STOLEN BUT GOT MY STICKY HANDS ON.

 

HOWEVER IT IS CLEAR THAT THE APR IS NOT A KILLER ARGUMENT HOWEVER I WAS NOT AWARE HOW THEY WORKED THE CAL. BEFORE I BELIEVED IT WAS TO THE POWER OF 100 I HAVE TRY TO WORK OUT THE FORMULA IT DID NOT ADD UP YOU WOULD NEED A DRGEE IN MATHS TO DO IT.

 

ALSO I AM SURE YOU AWARE IF ADD COMPOUND INTEREST IT IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT.

 

AGAIN I BELIVE IT CAN BE USED IN THE DEBATE THE AGREEDMENT WAS NOT CLEAR TO ME AS A LAY PERON WHAT THE HELL I WAS DOING.

 

JUST MY VEIWS

 

REGARDS TO YOU ALL

 

LILLY

Id quot circumiret, circumveniat.

 

please do not take my word for anything please do your own research All that i make comments on are done in good faith and to the best of my knowledge

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that equation is horrific and I think lawyers have been put off interest matters simply because they feel they need to employ professional mathematicians even to understand it. Certainly judges take one look at and give up in despair.

 

The banks are in the same position and this has forced them into abandoning complicated payment schedules, tiered rates and all the other favourite ways to bamboozle borrowers. One of the reasons that credit cards are wary of annual fees is that they complicate the APR calculation. and make the APR higher than for their competitors who do not use fees. This has meant that the complicated formula can be reduced to something much more simple in practice. I read an APR booklet some years ago (supplied by Trading Stanadards and published by OFT) where the complicated fornula is reduced to a number of O level maths fornulas . NB the APR calculation is based on compound interest methods so nobody shoud ever consider using simple interst ever - it is just not a fair way to do it.

 

For instance with a straightforward monthly interest compounded monthly you calculate the APR using the formula.

 

Annual rate = ((1+monthly rate/100)^12)-1)*100 and then rounding the answer to one decimal place to get the APR.

 

You need a scientific calculator with an X^Y function and I use the one supplied with Windows. Once you get practiced it can be done in about 10 seconds and it is much faster and more reliable than website calculators. Get a few monthly rates from this website and you will soon detect the APR [problem] -the practice of arranging monthly rates to give an actual annual rate that is as high as possible but can still be rounded down to APR quoted.

 

If you have the actual annual rate (not the APR) you can calculate the true monthly interest rate using the reverse equation.

 

monthly rate = ((1+AAR/100)^(1/12) -1)*100. (1/12) is the 12th root and if you use a caculator you will need to put 1/12 into the memory before you start.

 

If you ever thought that the APR was ever the interest to be applied using this formula on the figure of the APR and comparing it with the monhly rate which will definitely be applied will disabuse you. Website calculators that use the APR are bound to be inaccurate.

 

When it comes to checking the APR for repayment loans things are a bit more difficult because you have the loan amount and the monthly payment only. You have to start by guessing the monthly rate doing the sums and modifying the monthly rate until you get the correct answer. The monthlly rate is then used to calculate the correct AAR and APR The process can take a long time by hand but in these days of fast computers it can be done in seconds using a simple 10 line progam. However the website calculators cannot go wrong because the start figures are not approximate. They all however only give the APR as an answer never the internediate AAR - I wonder about this too.

 

Have you ever wondered why annual rates when given are to one decinal place (like the APR) but that these days monthly rates are often given toi 4 decimal places. It is because the APR scan is being used. Interested?

 

At the moment calculating the APR is fun but is a pretty useless exercise for Caggers. If we could get judges to realise that the maths is quite easy and that there is dishonesty involved they might start taking Schedule 1 seriously.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...