Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi LFI, With regard to the ANPR cameras in your post #65, while I was on the phone to the Planning Department, they did take a look at Google Streetview and went back to 2012 where they could see the ANPR cameras in place so therefore they would have deemed consent. I had previously read the T&C Planning Regulations and had read the section on deemed consent so I understood the point they made on the phone. It doesn't matter though, that doesn't harm my case any, and I shouldn't really mention this now, (this is what you reminded me of on another thread) but in the past I was a member of a scheme that gave me access to legal advice, I have spoken to a barrister previously through this scheme on another matter and I think I am still a member. I am going to check if I am still a member of the scheme, and if I am I will discuss my case with a barrister or solicitor, whichever the scheme deems appropriate. I will let you know the outcome. I am also going to take Bankfodders advice in the sticky and go to the local court and ask if I can sit in on a case in the Judges office.
    • deed?  you mean consent order you and her signed? concluding the case as long as you nor she break it's conditions signed upto? dx Yes sorry. they called it a deed at first in court.  Then Judge said she was happy to have it sealed as something else  exact names of orders in message above.     The disease was tested for when his cardiac testing was done immediately after purchase and part of the now sealed case.   However, results were disclosed incorrectly and I only found out  two days ago.   This disease did not form part of my knowledge during the case as I had been informed of a normal result that was not the case.   it is perfect clarity of a genetic disease where as the previous cardiac issue could be congenital until the pup is genetically tested. 
    • Hi, Halifax recently sold a credit card account of mine to Cabot. I am unemployed and have no assets and was thinking of making token £1 payments for 12-18 months in order to drag things out a bit and reduce the chance of Cabot being able to get the correct CCA documents from Halifax if I requested them in future. However, I saw on the pages on this forum about defending county court claims that one of the standard approaches when defending such claims is to say “I had an account with bank X, but I don’t remember the details and so don’t know if I owe this debt…”. If I made £1 payments to Cabot, would it prevent me from using such a defence in future? OC: Halifax DC: Cabot/Wescot Card account opened: 2016 Defaulted: 2023
    • Paperwork says sealed consent order and composite settlement agreement      YES  ADDISONS DISEASE 
    • Hi, This may be the wrong place for a thread BUT If you receive a defence, can you send a CPR 31.14 request for document mentioned in the defence, and then apply to proceed with the case only after (14) days passed or they respond OR is it only if you receive a claim I see @dx100uk thread is for when you receive a claim, but can you also do the same when you receive a defence?
  • 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

Monthly Credit Card Statements


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5642 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

Does anyone know the legality surrounding a companies obligation to provide monthly statements. Citcards have failed to supply me with monthly statements on two occasions now, the second time I totally forgot about making a payment, I pay my balance off in full every month but becaue I did not receive a statement I missed the payment date and they have applied a late payment charge plus interest on the o/s balance. I did wirte to them about this demanding a statement and also a refund on charges. They replied admitting that they had technical problems and the statement did not go out, neither could I get my statement online, and they still have not provided a statement. However in the same reply they said if I have a complaint I should phone their 0870 number to discuss this. Why should I, unless they are prepared to pay for my time and phone usage. Surely they have a legal obligation under the CCA to provide statements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Statements to be provided in relation to regulated credit agreements

6. Statements to be provided in relation to fixed-sum credit agreements

After section 77 of the 1974 Act insert –

"77A Statements to be provided in relation to fixed-sum credit agreements

(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for fixed-sum credit –

(a) shall, within the period of one year beginning with the day after the day on which the agreement is made, give the debtor a statement under this section; and

(b) after the giving of that statement, shall give the debtor further statements under this section at intervals of not more than one year.

(2) Regulations may make provision about the form and content of statements under this section.

(3) The debtor shall have no liability to pay any sum in connection with the preparation or the giving to him of a statement under this section.

(4) The creditor is not required to give the debtor any statement under this section once the following conditions are satisfied-

(a) that there is no sum payable under the agreement by the debtor; and

(b) that there is no sum which will or may become so payable.

(5) Subsection (6) applies if at a time before the conditions mentioned in subsection (4) are satisfied the creditor fails to give the debtor –

(a) a statement under this section within the period mentioned in subsection (1)(a); or

(b) such a statement within the period of one year beginning with the day after the day on which such a statement was last given to him.

(6) Where this subsection applies in relation to a failure to give a statement under this section to the debtor –

(a) the creditor shall not be entitled to enforce the agreement during the period of non-compliance;

(b) the debtor shall have no liability to pay any sum of interest to the extent calculated by reference to the period of non-compliance or to any part of it; and

© the debtor shall have no liability to pay any default sum which (apart from this paragraph) –

(i) would have become payable during the period of non-compliance; or

(ii) would have become payable after the end of that period in connection with a breach of the agreement which occurs during that period (whether or not the breach continues after the end of that period).

(7) In this section ‘the period of non-compliance’ means, in relation to a failure to give a statement under this section to the debtor, the period which –

(a) begins immediately after the end of the period mentioned in paragraph (a) or (as the case may be) paragraph (b) of subsection (5); and

(b) ends at the end of the day on which the statement is given to the debtor or on which the conditions mentioned in subsection (4) are satisfied, whichever is earlier.

(8) This section does not apply in relation to a non-commercial agreement or to a small agreement."

 

 

Further provision relating to statements

7. (1) In section 78 of the 1974 Act (duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement) after subsection (4) insert –

"(4A) Regulations may require a statement under subsection (4) to contain also information in the prescribed terms about the consequences of the debtor-

(a) failing to make payments as required by the agreement; or

(b) only making payments of a prescribed description in prescribed circumstances."

(2) In subsection (7) of that section for "(4) and (5)" substitute "(4) to (5)".

(3) In section 185 of that Act (agreement with more than one debtor or hirer) for subsection (2) substitute –

"(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1)(a), where credit is provided under an agreement to two or more debtors jointly, in performing his duties –

(a) in the case of fixed-sum credit, under section 77A, or

(b) in the case of running-account credit, under section 78(4), the creditor need not give statements to any debtor who has signed and given to him a notice (a ‘dispensing notice’) authorising him not to comply in the debtor's case with section 77A or (as the case may be) 78(4).

(2A) A dispensing notice given by a debtor is operative from when it is given to the creditor until it is revoked by a further notice given to the creditor by the debtor.

(2B) But subsection (2) does not apply if (apart from this subsection) dispensing notices would be operative in relation to all of the debtors to whom the credit is provided.

(2C) Any dispensing notices operative in relation to an agreement shall cease to have effect if any of the debtors dies.

(2D) A dispensing notice which is operative in relation to an agreement shall be operative also in relation to any subsequent agreement which, in relation to the earlier agreement, is a modifying agreement."

 

 

0870 as well as other premium numbers have been deemed as unnacceptable by the OFT

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...