Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello I hope someone can give me some advice here, as I am at a bit of a loss on how to proceed. This relates to alleged offences under the RTA. Yesterday I received a notification from the local police of intention to prosecute for the following offences: 1 driving without due care and attention 2 failing to stop at a road traffic accident 3 failing to report a road traffic accident At this stage they have only asked me to say whether I was the driver at the time or not and provided a blank sheet of paper to give information about the incident. Going by the location (just round the corner from where I live) I can only imagine this relating to one recent incident, which wasn't actually an accident but more of a road rage event. I was driving past someone unloading or working next to his lorry which had stopped in the road. I wasn't going fast or anything, while I went by lorry man turned around and punched and kicked my car whilst going past him. I stopped and got out and wanted to know what he thought he was doing punching and kicking my car. He then hurled some verbal abuse at me, swearing and he was quite aggressive. I still didn't know what his problem was and said I would report him to his company for threatening behaviour and vandalism for punching my car. I got my phone and tried to take a photo of his lorry and number plate but at that moment he came right at me, still shouting and swearing, so I was worried he may hit me next, as he already punched my car. I thought if the guy hits me I will come off second best, so I decided to retreat. I quickly got back into my car and left. When I checked my phone later the photo I tried to take was blurred and useless, so I thought it was pointless to report the incident to the police, as the guy would not be traceable. Over that I forgot about it until I got the letter yesterday in the post. This is the only thing I believe this can relate to, but I have no idea based on what the three above allegations come from There was no road traffic accident, more of a road rage incident. So I am at a loss what to do. I have 28 days to respond. Should I just say yes I was the driver and was there and see what happens next, or should I already make a written statement on the attached piece of paper they sent me and send that with it ? Is there anyone here who would have a rough idea what to do next ? I tried my legal advice line through my Union, but they have sent me from pillar to post, now say it needs to go to a different department again and that would be chargeable as the RTA comes under Criminal Law. So any advice would be appreciated Many Thanks
    • So a quick update got bounced around two different departments and managed to speak to a DVLA bod , explained the situation and they could see the overlap and that DD payments had been made from Feb , also no formal remiders prior , they gave me a number for the legal dept who I am calling this morning to see what they can do in terms of the SJP notice , still have time to submit this online.  Will update after my chat this morning 
    • filed the defence at same time as suggested @dx100uk
    • Also, I am trying to understand how invoicing a large sum in a 6m period becomes tax fraud?   Is it because if he had invoiced over the £85k threshold he should have been obligated to charge vat?  Which would have meant hmrc would have benefited from the vat amount? So by not charging it Hmrc have lost out on £s revenue?  Is that what makes it tax fraud? So as a self-employed contractor, let's say he invoiced one Co for 200k.  Should he have charged vat on the full 200k (£40k)? Or just on the sum above the threshold (£23k)?  And that by not charging vat, he has knowingly withheld tax £s from Hmrc? And is the payer complicit ?
  • 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 
        • 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

RBS CCA request refused due to CCJ


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4667 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

Why is it on these letters that we are sent, they refer to 'these charges have been processed in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of our agreement with you, in the event that YOU breach the Terms and Conditions we will take the appropriate action'?

 

But WHERE ARE THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS?

 

We didn't even know these accounts existed!!!

 

So what about this response....

 

 

Dear Banky People

 

Without the original contract for any of our accounts and relevent paperwork from Retail Credit Services, Drummond House. Please explain how you know that these accounts were being administered in accordance with the banks T&C's?

 

Also, please provide us with a copy of the Banks T&C's which states that you can do the following:

 

1. The Bank can close a Current Account without the customers prior knowledge or consent.

 

2. The Bank can create NEW 'Capital and Interest Loan Accounts' without a customers knowledge or consent.With a made up overdraft. (just press the £ sign and enter random numbers).

 

3.The Bank can provide to it's Solicitor a document which implies that the NEW Loan Accounts are subject to guarantee that was discharged 2 years previously.

 

4. The Bank can provide to it's Solicitor data in connection to an AOE that is totally incorrect and then LIE about it when confronted.

 

5. The Bank, when applying for a CCJ does not have to provide either to the Courts or the Defendent accurate information.

 

6. The Bank does not have to comply with the Insolvency Act 1986. It can add Charges and Interest during the IVA regardless of the LAW.

 

7. The Bank can withdraw money from a customers account that is in credit without their knowledge or consent.

 

8. The Bank can apply 80% interest instead of 8%, call this an error if found out, and refuse to explain why.

 

9. A 'Debt at Transfer' does not have to be correct. It is acceptable to take 'data from an incorrect screen'.

 

10. The Bank can take legal action against the Customer and then deny having any documents about it.

 

11. The Bank can withhold Statements from a customer. Denying them knowledge of the way we are messing with their accounts. We can have their statements sent directly to Head Office in Scotland or we could ask 'Sarah to hold on file'

 

 

What do you think?

 

D & D

 

:cool: & :p

Edited by DandD
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 305
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I would ask them to provide you with their relevant terms and conditions that relate to your account/accounts.

 

I quote my MP in a letter to Sir Tom - RBSs Chairman.

 

"Is it RBSs normal business practice to create and change accounts, including significantly the terms that attach to them, without informing a customer or seeking their agreement"

  • Haha 1

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would ask them to provide you with their relevant terms and conditions that relate to your account/accounts.

 

I quote my MP in a letter to Sir Tom - RBSs Chairman.

 

"Is it RBSs normal business practice to create and change accounts, including significantly the terms that attach to them, without informing a customer or seeking their agreement"

 

 

Paul

 

This is very interesting as we didn't even know these new accounts existed. Did your MP get a response?

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul

 

This is very interesting as we didn't even know these new accounts existed. Did your MP get a response?

 

D

 

Yes the RBS aren't bothered who they mislead.

 

My MP forwarded the bank's latest response last month in which it is admitted that my accounts were set up incorrectly as a "different type of recovery account"

Edited by paulwlton

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this make sense.

 

 

 

 

 

Thinking back to when I worked in the banks as a Financial Adviser in the early 90's, this 'moving' of debt accounts went on all the time. Although I wasn't involved in day to day banking, I did keep my ear to the ground as to what things went on.

 

I clearly remember a case of a high overdraft on one account, where the account holder was not repaying anything or was not in a position to repay it.

 

The branches were put under pressure to keep dormant overdrafts to a minimum. Branch managers were targetted on their 'net balances' of the branch . A large dormant overdraft would have an effect on the net balance of the branch and would leave the manager open to some awkwad questioning from head office.

 

At the same time, they were targetted on sales of personal loans.

 

So what do you think happened to large dormant overdrafts???

 

It was a case of branch managers killing two birds with the one stone. Net balances increased due to the 'removal' of the overdraft and the lending book increased towards their sales target.

 

All this was done as a 'paper exercise' without the knowledge of the debtor, and no consideration given to the CCA or any repercussions. If the fantasy loan wasn't repaid, then the banks went for judgement, and the poor debtor in those days who didn't know their rights were screwed.

 

The reverse also happened, there were instances where current accounts were opened and put into overdraft, and unauthorised overdrafts were increased if the branch had a good net balance figure - to cover the fact that a loan granted had not been repaid, as the manager would also be questioned about loans with 2 or more consecutive missed repayments. This would make it look like a PL granted by the manager, was continuing to be repaid every month and would not show up on any reports. The overdraft would not be questioned for some time if the branch had a good net balance figure. Again these new accounts were set up without the knowledge of the debtor. I suppose money laundering regulations have made this more difficult now? Or maybe not?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

my oh my.. I have an account with Halifax which I will now be closing.

 

Subbing with great interest.. Hope you win D&D, I am pursuing them for their utter inability to do ANYTHING correctly.

 

Gives me renewed perseverance to prove what utter lobotomised gibbons they are!

Edited by adzya

adzya Versus:

 

Nationwide Bank Charges & Loan PPI

Amazon.co.uk/Halifax Charges

Cr@pitall One Charges and PPI

First Direct Bank Charges

Vanquis Visa Charges

GMAC Default notice & PPI

Halifax Bank Charges - S.A.R Request To Be Sent.. Switching Accounts First! ;)

 

Hope I provide useful info and help, if I do please feel free to tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any more progress to report DandD? Am rooting for you! :)

adzya Versus:

 

Nationwide Bank Charges & Loan PPI

Amazon.co.uk/Halifax Charges

Cr@pitall One Charges and PPI

First Direct Bank Charges

Vanquis Visa Charges

GMAC Default notice & PPI

Halifax Bank Charges - S.A.R Request To Be Sent.. Switching Accounts First! ;)

 

Hope I provide useful info and help, if I do please feel free to tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a letter from the bank this morning.

 

Apparently, all departments will not be getting back to us directly as they have been told to brief Sir Freds office who are doing an investigation themselves!!

 

Let's wait and see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wish you all the luck you deserve guys.. hope it all gets resolved before long.

adzya Versus:

 

Nationwide Bank Charges & Loan PPI

Amazon.co.uk/Halifax Charges

Cr@pitall One Charges and PPI

First Direct Bank Charges

Vanquis Visa Charges

GMAC Default notice & PPI

Halifax Bank Charges - S.A.R Request To Be Sent.. Switching Accounts First! ;)

 

Hope I provide useful info and help, if I do please feel free to tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi D & D,

 

Gosh - what an awful mess - as if you didn't have enough on your plate when things went t*ts up with the business....

 

Something struck me as odd when I read posts in page 1 and page 3, I have repeated them out of sequence here to see whether anyone else spots a connection or whether I am just being paranoid!!!!....

 

Post 45 - Unexplainable (by the banks) comment on "Diary Event History Log"is the first date, Post 20: Interest of 80% charged throughout 2000 and not spotted until 2001 is the second date....

 

26/01/00: "Validation agreed - WR part funded 57.26%"

06/03/01: "...branch have incorrectly keyed 80% as opposed to 8% when carrying out validation"

 

Sorry guys I do not believe in coincidences, I find it odd that they note in 2000 that validation is agreed and that the "WR" is part funded 57.26%, then throughout 2000 80% interest is charged....come on....they are trying to pull the wool over someone's eyes here..... I would be asking to see the auditors accounts particularly as 57.26% could not be explained away as a simple keying error...and I would be asking, and wracking my brains, as to what a WR could refer to....

 

Jody

  • Haha 1

Jody123

Please note I have no legal training - the information I have has been gleaned from too many hours on this site! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe its World Record for highest interest Rate. Seriously though I find these two entries very very disturbing...Whole R**** - Whole Rate, Whole Record maybe Are there no former employees, or indeed current ones, that could explain what a WR is?

Jody123

Please note I have no legal training - the information I have has been gleaned from too many hours on this site! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanton Recklessness? :D

adzya Versus:

 

Nationwide Bank Charges & Loan PPI

Amazon.co.uk/Halifax Charges

Cr@pitall One Charges and PPI

First Direct Bank Charges

Vanquis Visa Charges

GMAC Default notice & PPI

Halifax Bank Charges - S.A.R Request To Be Sent.. Switching Accounts First! ;)

 

Hope I provide useful info and help, if I do please feel free to tip my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...