Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Resume payments with the debt collectors? You say not to pay dca though do you not? 
    • yes they mostly would be enforceable, but that wasnt the point. even if they get a CCJ the very worst they could have done is get a restriction k which is useless to them. doesnt hurt anything. the CCJ would remain on file for 6yrs yes, but then gone same as a DN. the rest k charge does not show at all. and even so, the idea was to get your debts issued a default notice ASAP, them RESUME payments.. the advise is NOT conflicting, just you don't read things properly or understand.  oh well. dx
    • This is the dilemma I had then and still have it. The bit that stopped me was the post 2015 comments about them being enforceable now in most instances which I feel hasn’t been answered unless I am missing something. the bonus I guess is not all credit agreements now will be chasing me so less people chasing me down so to speak. this is the problem as there is conflicting messaging out there it is hard to plan a strategic way forward 
    • In 2017 my wife was given PIP and I finally, officially, became her carer. In 2019 she was reviewed and we were told it would be done by phone to make it easier for her as she has mobility issues and anxiety. The review was very simple, Has anything changed? No, ok, we'll stay as you are then. In 2022 a second review, this time by phone again but with an awkward given at the end for 5 years. Today, we got a new review letter (I know wait lists are bad, but I dont think the wait will take til 2027 for a decision). We're a bit confused because it's a letter, not a phone call as before. The form is just questions that ask "has anything changed" Now, since 2017, nothing has changed except we had our home adapted via disability grant. This was noted in the phone calls. So we should really write that nothing has changed in the last 2 years. The adaptations have been mentioned in both previous phone reviews, but not in writing so I guess we should bring it up. But we feel that they want us to explain everything as if it were a new claim again... And are worried if we miss something in the original claim or the phone calls she will risk losing part of the award (a 2 point swing could be really bad) It does just say "has anything changed?" But in dealing with ESA prior to getting PIP, answering the question asked "has your condition worsened or improved" at a review process with a simple "no, I'm still the same" somehow led to ESA ending and needing appeal. So just want a bit of guidance. How much detail is needed? Is minimal ok? Or should we be blunt with the fact nothing has changed, and bullet point the things she struggles with in each section?   I know the obvious thing is to just explain it all,but over 10 years the sheer amount of times the poor woman has had ESA or PIP stopped/refused just because something was missed out in their report, or they felt it meant a new claim should be made, or that they judged her healthy because we missed a tiny thing in our forms. During COVID it finally seemed like it was all just going to be smooth, especially with the phone reviews and the 5 year reward, but here we are. We just want to make sure we have the least chance to trip ourselves up, but making sure we have what is expected if you get me? I wish I still had a copy of the forms from 2017, because I could just verbatim copy them and add in about the adaptation, but (ironically) we lost our photocopies we kept of them when the house was being adapted
    • might of been better to have got them all defaulted 2yrs ago as we carefully explained before then you'd already be 1/3rd there and your current issue would not be one.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Morgan Stanley CCA- received Barclaycard terms in response**WON, THEN WON AGAIN!!!**


noomill060
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5487 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

The first tells of their desire to pay me the difference between charges incurred and the current £12 charge.

 

(All £20 charges+ contractual interest paid back after judgement. The few charges in this claim are at current amount.)

 

The second letter tells me after exhaustive investigations, they tell me that I was never charged a shilling in PPI nor was any request for PPI made nor has PPI ever been applied to this account!

 

(My copy statemets tell a different tale.)

 

The letter ends-

 

"I can confidently state that you have never been covered covered by the insurance policy"

 

Well, Mr Barclaycard, I can confidently state that you have neither a credit agreement, access to copy statements for this account or any documentation on the history of this account whatsoever!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 268
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

So- I now have:

 

1. An admission that BCard do not have any evidence that I applied for PPI

 

and

 

2. as any such application for PPI would have been made on the CC application form, they have tacitly confirmed that they dont have any such document!

 

and

 

3. PPI premiums were debited on a monthly basis and noted as such on each statement, they tacitly confirm that they dont have any statements either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic news, Noomill :D. I can't wait for the next episode.

How's Alladdin going btw?

I'd come to cheer you on but I'm right at the other end of the country.

This Noomill V Barclaycard story is better than any old pantomime, but in the best tradition of pantos the good guy is making the baddy look like a complete fool :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Must let you all know. I just had a phone call from the most charming young man at Barclaycard (cashback), previously MS. He sounded an absolute sweetie and was very polite - I think he was a NewZealander, maybe South African - so I was very sweet back. He asked why I hadn't paid, and I said because they hadn't sent a copy of the CCA, and he asked if I would like the number to contact, and was sure they would send it, and understood why I hadn't been making the payments.

 

It must be his first day!!!!!

 

DD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received a copy MS credit card application.

 

Only thing is, its someone elses, and its unenforceable anyway!...:rolleyes:

 

'Tis my duty as an honourable citizen to send this document to the ICO along with a strongly worded official complaint and contact the person concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noomill,

 

If you are not too busy, and can scan in, could you let us see what they have sent. As you know, I'm waiting too. They just their current bcard t & cs when I first asked, so I'm interested to see what they are coming up with.

 

No probs if you can't. I'll have to be patient.

 

Thanks.

 

DD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Standard, early Morgan Stanley Dean Witter mailer application form that came through your letter box.

 

I will not be posting it up in any form as it isnt mine.

 

MSDW application forms have been posted up on CAG and can be found with a bit of searching.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Noomill.

 

I realized as soon as I had put up the first post that of course you couldn't post someone's else's details. Idiot!!

 

The last statements I have to hand are 2000 - others probably in the attic somewhere) - so I must have been 1999 or before. I've seen some other MS application forms, but don't know which one I had. Still waiting to see if they produce anything - at the second time of asking.

 

What fun you will have composing the letter to the ICO!!

 

DDxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Noomill,

 

This morning I received a copy of my original MSDW application form. It is such a bad copy that even if I had a scanner there wouldn't be any point in putting on here. However with a lot of effort it is possible to read it.

 

On the first page it refers to Terms and Conditions including Condition 16.

 

On the second sheet there are some sort of conditions, but this is headed

Financial and Related Particulars and there is no condition 16.

 

Will start own thread and type it all out.

 

DD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a phone conversation with Sharkley's PLC. :D

 

They are very keen to settle the monetary part of my claim, knocking this off my account balance, you know the one they dont have an agreement for...

Edited by noomill060
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sharkley person ummd and ahhd a bit, then said that at the moment, they werent prepared to consider that part of the claim.

 

At the moment. ;)

 

I took his direct phone number and said I would get back to them with my response. This was all (*coff*) Without Prejudice, at their request.

 

(*coff*)

 

:rolleyes:

 

Bit of bird flu going round Canary Wharf at the mo.

Edited by noomill060
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sharkley person ummd and ahhd a bit, then said that at the moment, they werent prepared to consider that part of the claim.

 

At the moment. ;)

 

I took his direct phone number and said I would get back to them with my response. This was all (*coff*) Without Prejudice, at their request.

 

(*coff*)

 

:rolleyes:

 

Bit of bird flu going round Canary Wharf at the mo.

:lol:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right-

 

Heres the deal Sharkley's-

 

1) You set the balance to zero

 

2) Permanently remove all neg CRA markers and mark account as "Settled"

 

3) Pay an amount of £12 per threat-o-matic phone call in compensation for harassment

 

4) Reimburse Court fee and postage in the sum of £80

 

5) In a legally binding agreement, you agree that I will not be penalised in any way in retaliation for bringing this claim against Sharkley's-

 

specifically:

 

a) Account will not be terminated

 

b) Credit limit remains unchanged for a period of at least 12 months

Edited by noomill060
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...