Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • 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

AA99 v Capital One


AA99
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5203 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

  • Replies 333
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I think you are getting confused here... 31.14 is for requesting copies of documents mentioned in POC (if you want to check go here to the CPR rules website)

 

What I think youre confusing it with is querying any document produced under the CPR 33.2 Notice of relying on Hearsay evidence, of which microfiched documents would be one example and the ability to question a witness against that evidence via CPR 33.4.

 

I really must spend some time getting up to speed on CPR.

 

How the hell are you supposed to remember all the legislation and the reg and the rules. (pause to allow head to explode):confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

you mean brandy, surely:D

 

It does concern me a bit that we (I'm as guilty as anyone) tell all to DIY this process. Initially, the copy paste of letters etc is simple enough but as this process advances the required knowledge increases as does the necessity to be able to process the information.

 

In court, where this looks likely, in most cases to end, the ability to recall relevant statute, think laterally and in real time, and maintain composure will become a task beyond for all but the most committed.

 

Are we driving lambs to the slaughter?

 

I wonder?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya aa,

 

Said on your other thread that I was behind you regarding capquest, sure enough letter arrived this morning.

 

They have had a response from c1 following my query (? Mine wasnt a query it was a complaint) they have respond with any dispute has been resolved & payment now due in full.

 

How can my dispute by resolved when they refuse to respond to any letters that I send.

 

The cca is unenforceable (like all are)

 

Debitas threaten legal action, so I exercised MY rights and sent a CPR 31.16 as THEY said they were taking court action - that requedt was ignored without any form of acknowledgement apart from them returning the account to C1.

 

So how can C1 say any dispute has been resolved?

 

So like you, I'm trying to get capquest to return it to C1 as IT IS in dispute.

 

Regards,

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

you mean brandy, surely:D

 

It does concern me a bit that we (I'm as guilty as anyone) tell all to DIY this process. Initially, the copy paste of letters etc is simple enough but as this process advances the required knowledge increases as does the necessity to be able to process the information.

 

In court, where this looks likely, in most cases to end, the ability to recall relevant statute, think laterally and in real time, and maintain composure will become a task beyond for all but the most committed.

 

Are we driving lambs to the slaughter?

 

I wonder?

 

the fact that you are on this site shows for a start that you have a certain amount of desire to sort this out yourself.

 

on the other hand what have you to lose as a LIP (Litigant in person) the court will cut you a certain amount of slack in terms of your performance - and the WORSE that can happen is a CCJ and the payments you would have been offering to make

 

i have found that when you read and re read and look at the responses to your posts it all starts falling into place

 

you can always take a friend.

 

The vast majority don't get to court (even if it is threatened)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya aa,

 

Said on your other thread that I was behind you regarding capquest, sure enough letter arrived this morning.

 

They have had a response from c1 following my query (? Mine wasnt a query it was a complaint) they have respond with any dispute has been resolved & payment now due in full.

 

How can my dispute by resolved when they refuse to respond to any letters that I send.

 

The cca is unenforceable (like all are)

 

Debitas threaten legal action, so I exercised MY rights and sent a CPR 31.16 as THEY said they were taking court action - that requedt was ignored without any form of acknowledgement apart from them returning the account to C1.

 

So how can C1 say any dispute has been resolved?

 

So like you, I'm trying to get capquest to return it to C1 as IT IS in dispute.

 

Regards,

 

Beachy

 

again i may be corrected here but i think you are getting a defective agreement mixed up with the Sect 78 request.

 

If C1 have responded to your request even the agreement they sent is a defective agreement (they are not ALL defective ) then they have complied with your request and as such they are then not in default of cca sect 78 and are entitled to continue to demand payment.

 

whether they can substantiate their claim that the agreement is enforceable is not the same as being in default of sect 78.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the fact that you are on this site shows for a start that you have a certain amount of desire to sort this out yourself.

 

on the other hand what have you to lose as a LIP (Litigant in person) the court will cut you a certain amount of slack in terms of your performance - and the WORSE that can happen is a CCJ and the payments you would have been offering to make

 

i have found that when you read and re read and look at the responses to your posts it all starts falling into place

 

you can always take a friend.

 

The vast majority don't get to court (even if it is threatened)

 

Yeah, I know what you are saying but I wasn't really referring to me.

 

I guess I'm more fortunate than some (MENSA accredited, post grad degree) but.........

 

I'm starting to sound condescending now, and I don't mean to.

 

There will be many people who read these threads and shoot off letters risking being out of their depth when the plot unfolds. As I say, not intended as condescending, but there will be many who rush in and don't grasp the full implications.

 

I accept that many won't go to court, but some do, and court is a traumatic concept to those who rarely, if ever, use the process. They are in an alien environment, up against a major corporation with skilled legal representation.

 

I realise that LiPs get some consideration in the court room and people should stand up for their rights. They should also realise, ahead of time, what the expectations are.

 

I appreciate that you and Shadow are well ahead of the game (and me:-)) and the research you have done will stand you in good stead (if it hasn't already). I have spend weeks reading thousands of posts + researching the relevant legislation, but still fall short at the moment. Court is some way off for me and is unlikely, based on the responses so far.

 

My concern is for the many who will take this process too lightly.

 

I also have a feeling that I will come to regret this post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

again i may be corrected here but i think you are getting a defective agreement mixed up with the Sect 78 request.

 

If C1 have responded to your request even the agreement they sent is a defective agreement (they are not ALL defective ) then they have complied with your request and as such they are then not in default of cca sect 78 and are entitled to continue to demand payment.

 

whether they can substantiate their claim that the agreement is enforceable is not the same as being in default of sect 78.

 

So explain how you get a dca to return the account to the creditor?

 

My 'agreement' doesnt have the prescribed terms (confirmed by SITE TEAM), has unfair charges, which is grounds for a dispute. And they have ignored a cpr 31.16.

 

Apologises to aa99, although we are in the same mess with capquest!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So explain how you get a dca to return the account to the creditor?

 

My 'agreement' doesnt have the prescribed terms (confirmed by SITE TEAM), has unfair charges, which is grounds for a dispute. And they have ignored a cpr 31.16.

 

Apologises to aa99, although we are in the same mess with capquest!

 

That would depend if the DCA was acting as an agent, or wether the debt had been assigned to the DCA.

 

If there acting as agents, you just ignore them, as they have no legal power in there own right, but if the debt has been assigned it cant be returned to the OC, as it has been sold, it no longer belongs to the OC.

 

Thats putting it very simply, but it seems to me people are missing a point here, even if an account is in dispute, or in default of a CCA request, it can still be assigned.

 

So the question is who actually owns the debt right now beachcomber60

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would depend if the DCA was acting as an agent, or wether the debt had been assigned to the DCA.

 

If there acting as agents, you just ignore them, as they have no legal power in there own right, but if the debt has been assigned it cant be returned to the OC, as it has been sold, it no longer belongs to the OC.

 

Thats putting it very simply, but it seems to me people are missing a point here, even if an account is in dispute, or in default of a CCA request, it can still be assigned.

 

So the question is who actually owns the debt right now beachcomber60

 

Thanks muchly,

 

Capone - capquest are acting as agents for their client (capone)

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then they have nothing to return;-)

 

An agent cannot start, or threaten they will start legal action (well they shouldnt) as they cannot do so, only the OC, or the 'owner' of the debt can do that.

 

Now regarding in dispute, not in dispute ping pong game, if you are 100% shure it is unenforceable, which it sounds as if you are, there is nothing more to say to capone or capquest, end of story.

 

This is the trap i fell into, you feel like you have to respond, but once you have put in writing that the account is in dispute, validated in writing why, and until they correct the problem or whatever, the account will remain in dispute as far as your concerned, what more is there left to say?

 

Nothing!

 

Of course they will disagree, but if you know your right let them, they wont change there tune, niether will you, so your in a stalemate.

 

So sit back and wait, if they have the balls they will issue a court claim, if not they will eventually give up.

 

In the mean time all you can do is report them to OFT & TS for breach of guidelines, and hope they do there job

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then they have nothing to return;-)

 

An agent cannot start, or threaten they will start legal action (well they shouldnt) as they cannot do so, only the OC, or the 'owner' of the debt can do that.

 

Now regarding in dispute, not in dispute ping pong game, if you are 100% shure it is unenforceable, which it sounds as if you are, there is nothing more to say to capone or capquest, end of story.

 

This is the trap i fell into, you feel like you have to respond, but once you have put in writing that the account is in dispute, validated in writing why, and until they correct the problem or whatever, the account will remain in dispute as far as your concerned, what more is there left to say?

 

Nothing!

 

Of course they will disagree, but if you know your right let them, they wont change there tune, niether will you, so your in a stalemate.

 

So sit back and wait, if they have the balls they will issue a court claim, if not they will eventually give up.

 

In the mean time all you can do is report them to OFT & TS for breach of guidelines, and hope they do there job

 

Thanks for your help, hope it reassures AA99 also when she resds it.

 

Have 'tickled' your scales :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking through my folder, all the 3rd parties I've dealt with so far do not refer to having been 'assigned' the debt, they are just DCA's and a couple of solicitors thrown in with may's and should's etc....

 

However, did find a letter from CapOne (apologies for these big copies, first they were too small to read and now they're too big, will work on it!)

 

Cap18989StatementofDefault10Feb09.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if that is there idea of a DN, with a judge that knows there stuff, they would be even more stuffed, unless you got a real DN cos that aint one;):p

 

Had the same thought so went to check....

 

Went back through the posts to check and a DN was issued with 28 days remedy :-( :-(

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

whoooaaaa , hold on a cotton picking minute pardner

 

 

are you telling me you received this termination notice and you previously haev NOt received a default notice telling you you are in default and you must rectify the fault within 14 days?

 

if not then break out the bubbly sweetie

 

if you do have a default notice [post it up for us to see

 

if not then the good news is you owe them only 32.80 against which you will counter claim the damages for unfair recission of contract (which will be a lot more) .

Link to post
Share on other sites

was it dated before or after the above?

 

Oh hold on I'll go back to post 1 and check for you shall I [sarcastic tone]

 

:-D

 

13th Jan Default notice issued... but its not been posted up... AA99 get it up on here for us to look at :-D

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh hold on I'll go back to post 1 and check for you shall I [sarcastic tone]

 

:-D

 

13th Jan Default notice issued... but its not been posted up... AA99 get it up on here for us to look at :-D

 

S.

doh!!! thats why i cant find it i was looking for a posted copy, not in the text:oops::p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh hold on I'll go back to post 1 and check for you shall I [sarcastic tone]

 

:-D

 

13th Jan Default notice issued... but its not been posted up... AA99 get it up on here for us to look at :-D

 

S.

 

lol i only asked because i went through them 3 times and could not find it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cap18989StatementofDefault10Feb09.jpg

 

 

Actually this is interesting, because a statement of Default is one they MUST send out.. some new regulation since October 2008.

 

However, they are saying they have terminated your account.

 

What was your default notice like :D

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...