Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • receiving a default NOTICE (forget simple default cal markers) does not mean it will get sold on... OC's very very rarely do court themselves.  if it does you would receive a Notice of Assignment from the debt buyer/DCA.  as for reduced payment if it remains with the OC and they issue a DN, no harm in trying but lets get all your ducks inline first. dx  
    • okay thanks do you know how long it will take for it to get to the DCA or could the OC try and issue a CCJ? even though it's unlikely also for example would the OC agree to a reduction and a small payment over a super lengthy period of time if agreed? Rather than go through chasing apologies again for all the questions, just trying to understand all the possible scenarios.  
    • Currently - "the maximum daily price at 100p / kWh for electricity and 30p / kWh for gas – keep in mind that's a lot higher than the Ofgem Energy Price Cap, so if you can't afford prices to increase further, you're probably better off sticking with a protected tariff such as Flexible Octopus." Octopus Tracker is a product of our labs, available now to customers through our beta programme. Octopus Tracker is a beta product. Some things may not work the first time, and installations and processes may take longer than we'd like. Third party tech like In-home Displays won't always work, and on occasion data issues with smart meters can take significant time to fix or prevent things from working at all.   Copied straight from octopus   Feel free to shove it somewhere else    
    • depends what the fees are, typically nothing can be added once judgement is passed bar litigation costs. on document retention time limits etc at least 6yrs previous must be held though many hold complete info. as for acronyms and abbreviations ideally yes they should     
    • Still have to submit a statement either system....if they fail they can only give verbal because they failed to file and serve.
  • 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

Cahoot and Consumer Credit Act


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5379 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

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Really sorry to disappoint everyone but have now heard back from the FO and they have supported Cahoot. They say that we were kept informed regularly of the hikes in interest and could have paid up at any time. Very bad news

hopingforjustice:smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical FO ignoring the fact that we are trapped and cannot pay up, just as Cahoot know only too well. FO should consider it an Unfair Contract, but they are in the hands of the Financial Institutions, their paymasters and no doubt hosts at many big events.

 

Whole damn system waited against the powerless consumer. Take Financial Agreements we are meant to read and UNDERSTAND all that garbage and can even now be mislead on APR and Interest Rates, yet Agreement is enforceable by a court (post 1 Jan 2007). It is a disgrace and exploitation of consumers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats terrible news Hopkinson, thanks for updating the thread though.

 

Does this mean its no way out for us Cahoot customers?:confused:

 

The "could have paid up at anytime" bit makes me laugh, so we get 30 days notice of interest rate hikes and we are supposed to find the entire balance to clear the loan?

Link to post
Share on other sites

have asked for legal opinion on the agreement. In their opinion: Under paragraph titled Variations it is considered that this wording is ambiguous and unreasonable. It refers to paragraph 8 of the T&C and on the T&C sent to me that para is about care of cards etc and has no relevance therefore to that paragraph and this would make the agreement unenforceable. He also thinks that the para confirming "APR is calculated on an assumed credit limit of £100" is ambiguous as the credit limit is clearly more than that. He also wants to know if Cahoot can confirm they have a copy of the original agreement. Need to think about this all some more and would be grateful of anyone's input

hopingforjustice:smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Hopkinson,

 

I'm very glad that your still fighting this one! May i ask who is checking this out for you? PM me if you prefer. I had a company check out the agreement and they came back saying in there opinion it was enforceable :mad: Of course i do not know what elements in particular they were looking for, I know that due to these loans being "flexible" its not easy for someone to say whether it is enforceable or not as its neither a typical loan or a credit card but a mixture of both!

 

I have all my fingers crossed for us all!

 

Please please keep us updated!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I work in a Law department in a University. I have sought the advice of one of the tutors who teaches Contract law and Sale of Goods. He gave me the opinion. He also confirmed that it is often up to a judge on the day

hopingforjustice:smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

;2223810']Interesting hopkinson.

I will check my CCA once more but i still dont have a copy of the T&C's. :(

 

JayZ you can get a copy of the current T&Cs online at Cahoot; go to home page and scroll down to the very bottom, along the bottom you will see legal info (thats T&Cs) click on it to get the T&Cs.

 

I suspect they are updated to ensure compliance with CCA 1974 by now. I have a much earlier version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks useful post and information.

 

I have the original T&Cs as at Nov. 2001. I will pm you. The Variation clause is 13 in the current T&Cs you can obtain online at Legal Info.(Bottom of Home Page)

 

 

have asked for legal opinion on the agreement. In their opinion: Under paragraph titled Variations it is considered that this wording is ambiguous and unreasonable. It refers to paragraph 8 of the T&C and on the T&C sent to me that para is about care of cards etc and has no relevance therefore to that paragraph and this would make the agreement unenforceable. He also thinks that the para confirming "APR is calculated on an assumed credit limit of £100" is ambiguous as the credit limit is clearly more than that. He also wants to know if Cahoot can confirm they have a copy of the original agreement. Need to think about this all some more and would be grateful of anyone's input
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just about at the FSO stage now, having exhausted the Abbey complaints process re unreasonable hikes in interest rate. Very sorry to hear of your outcome hopkinson! If anyone else has any updates please do post as I need to decide whether to go to the FSO or not and how to present my arguments :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...