Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 160 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

Mint - Is this agreement enforceable?


Surfer01
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5040 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

I sent CCA requests to RBS for three CCs (including Mint); they failed to respond for months, then sent T&Cs and a copy of the latest bill and said that was all they were required to send under s78. All this was sent on the same day they issued a DN (after 3 missed payments). When I wrote again, politely requesting a copy of the signed executed agreement, not under s78, they send a rude, threatening, aggressive letter and refused point blank to supply the agreement or even discuss the matter with me further.

 

I was going to send a Subject Access Request, specifically requesting the agreement, but I found on someone else's thread that they refuse to supply the executed agreement under Subject Access Request as well, stating that it is not in a relevant filing system and they are therefore not obliged to produce it:mad:

 

Sorry this doesn't answer your queries - just wanted to give you a heads up on their current modus operandii

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I think that MINT arfe another one that are going to hear from FOS within the near future. These people seem to make their own rules and blatantly ignore official regulations passed by Parliament!

Any other comments as I really would like to know if there is anything you can do legally if they failed to supply a true copy of the CCA. To escalate it to a criminal charge what does one need to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent CCA requests to RBS for three CCs (including Mint); they failed to respond for months, then sent T&Cs and a copy of the latest bill and said that was all they were required to send under s78. All this was sent on the same day they issued a DN (after 3 missed payments). When I wrote again, politely requesting a copy of the signed executed agreement, not under s78, they send a rude, threatening, aggressive letter and refused point blank to supply the agreement or even discuss the matter with me further.

 

I was going to send a Subject Access Request, specifically requesting the agreement, but I found on someone else's thread that they refuse to supply the executed agreement under Subject Access Request as well, stating that it is not in a relevant filing system and they are therefore not obliged to produce it:mad:

 

Sorry this doesn't answer your queries - just wanted to give you a heads up on their current modus operandii

 

Hi underdog,

 

I too have sent CCA and SARN to Mint who have also told me that they arent required to provide original CCA and default notice etc - I have argued this with them for months and recently I got their 'final response' basically telling me to sod off. I dont know whether to pass their details on to the FOS or just take them to court. All I want is the default notice removed from my account. I have an ongoing balance of something like £500 which I am paying them £15pm..no interest is being added as the amount is defaulted. What are you doing with yours? Im stuck on what to do now..:-|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lil ole me,

 

I've been wondering whether to write to the Information Commissioners Office.

 

Mint/RBS can argue that they have fulfilled a s78 request with T&Cs, but in a follow letter I asked them for a copy of my agreement, making it clear the request was not under s78 conditions, to confirm the status of the agreement and who I should address a Subject Access Request to. They failed to reply to any of those points and refused point blank to discuss it further.

 

As I see it, they have refused to comply with a data request. Unless someone would advise differently?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lil ole me,

 

I've been wondering whether to write to the Information Commissioners Office.

 

Mint/RBS can argue that they have fulfilled a s78 request with T&Cs, but in a follow letter I asked them for a copy of my agreement, making it clear the request was not under s78 conditions, to confirm the status of the agreement and who I should address a Subject Access Request to. They failed to reply to any of those points and refused point blank to discuss it further.

 

As I see it, they have refused to comply with a data request. Unless someone would advise differently?

 

I too was going to take this route with the Information Commissioners Office - I certainly threatened it a few times in my letters to Mint. I just dont see them helping as I have read mixed responses when trying to get the Information Commissioners Office involved. So have they not supplied the Subject Access Request documents that you have requested is that what you are saying? Did you send the SARN template letter along with the £10.00 fee? Apologies if I am going over old ground here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reply letter from RBS (MINT) went along these lines;

 

 

Dear Mr Surfer01,

 

I confirm receipt of your letter of the 16th December and previous request letter received on 2 December 2008.

 

Our response to a request under the Consumer Credit Act s78 stipulates that we should respond within 12 working days. However there is an additional deadline of a further month for us to send our response and our response will be sent accordingly wihin these timescales. (Can someone clarify this regarding them respoding with any letter and the timescale?)

 

I therefore respectively request you refrain from sending such letters, as a response will be sent by 17 January 2009. (As they received the original letter on 2nd December I was under the impression that it would be a month from that date???)

 

All further 'dispute' and 'chaser' letters received from you whereby we have yet to send our response in the time allowed (as advised above) will not be acknowledged by us.

 

We do not consider any account to be in dispute and your indebtedness on the account remains due and payable.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Old bag at RBS

 

I sent them a CCa request which they received on 2nd Decmerb as admitted by them. When I never received the CCA or a reply to this request I then sent a letter to the Data Controller at RBS as MINT is part of the organisation. The letter was based on what 42man has written above. The latter they received on the 16th December as admitted by them. They have now taken the date for their month as from the date of my second letter and not the first.

 

Can they do this? If not, they have now committed an offence but to whom do I report it?

 

Can we please have some comments on the above letter from RBS (MINT).

 

What is my liability to MINT now?

 

Can I stop paying them or can I pay a lower amount without incurring any charges or additional interest.

 

Am I still liable for all charges and interest on the account going back to day one or can I claim these back?

 

I do not have any arrears with them or any other company however I have been made redundant and have to rein in all my outgoings.

Thanks.

 

Can any one offer any suggestions reagrding my questions especially the fact that they have not complied with my request?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can any one offer any suggestions reagrding my questions especially the fact that they have not complied with my request?

 

Hi Surfer01,

 

Im afraid I dont know what to do in this case, but I have read that if they cannot provide you with the Subject Access Request documentation, but later do, they are not defaulting on your request. If it were me, I'd probably just wait until 17th to see what they send, assuming they do actually send it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No I didn't bother with a Subject Access Request, as it seems RBS/Mint don't supply the agreements with this either.

 

My advice, take it or not, would be to follow through and send the SARN for the small cost of £10 and see WHAT they send you back. When I sent mine off, they openly admitted that they didnt have my CCA. I have it in black and white. It seems though that despite having this proof on B&W, that they dont care and still refuse to acknowledge the points raised in my letters arguing the default, based on the fact that they have no contract for me. Im still racking my brains on what to do, as I guess you are, but to have this letter from them saying they have no contract can only go against them should I send them to court.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

With my Subject Access Request, they left out a lot of info and stated in a letter my 'cca will be sent under different cover'. It never showed up, although I do have a diputable 'agreement' from an earlier cca request.

 

I've raised an Information Commissioners Office complaint, but their backlog is huge.

Edited by danson79
Link to post
Share on other sites

With my Subject Access Request, they left out a lot of info and stated in a letter my 'cca will be sent under different cover'. It never showed up, although I do have a diputable 'agreement' from an earlier cca request.

 

I've raised an Information Commissioners Office complaint, but their backlog is huge.

 

Hmmm. Thats strange them saying that, I wonder why they said that? What exactly did they send you on the CCA request - what was it that made it disputable?

 

I was temped to give Mint's details to the Information Commissioners Office but didnt bother, I am really not sure what to do with them. I wonder whether I just have some monkey writing to me and that if I got a response from someone else at Mint, that it may be different? Might look up sending them to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Lil old me; it seems it is worth sending off the Subject Access Request, then!

 

Having them admit in writing that they don't hold a contract is definately worth £10.

 

Thanks a lot for letting me know.:)

 

I certainly would. Worth every penny!! Good luck - and let me know what they send you back :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

My CCA request was apparently from computer or microfilm (it barely took up a quarter of the a4 page it was printed on). This means the original is probably long lost.

 

Although the prescribed terms were within the document, I believe the signature was a cut n paste job from another document. RBS are notorious for being a bit 'creative' (there are other posts on cag about the subject). and kennyruss, who has a thread on here (search kennyruss vs mint) has an agreement that's also the same as mine - except for the signature box. Why would a standard document, from the same year, be printed with varying signature boxes?

 

Both of our 'agreements' are on kennyruss's thread, if you feel like a game of 'spot the difference'. In addition, the didn't supply the correct terms and conditions and are now in rather serious default of my sar... I just wish the ICO would pull their finger out and get back to me!

 

But, next time you have a spare tenner, sar mint, it's worth it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a criminal offence anymore Surf.....I think you'll have to wait to see if they respond....but do keep us posted, also watch out for defaults on your credit file...

 

Up to this point I have no arrears on the account and it is up to date with payments however this month as I was made redundant in Oct 2008 I will be unable to pay the full minimum payment as funds have run out.

I am on a Debt Management Plan with CAB for lower paymenst but I am not sure if interest gets frozen when on a DMP which is why I am trying to hit MINT with a double whammy.

MINT (RBS) have not been able to produce a CCA and their time has now run out. I can stop paying them all together but I am still concerned about any effect on my credit file.

If there is no CCA can they legitimately charge me at a high interest rate or should it be at the BOE rate?

Can I claim back all charges that were imposed on my account even though I have already do so. They paid back the difference between the original charge and £12 and I had to sign a document to say I agreed with this but that was before I found out that they had no CCA.

Any advice on how to screw these guys appreciated and I am not trying to get out of debt, just the interest and penalty charges. I feel that I should be paying back what I borrowed orginally on the CC and not jumped up interest charges especially if there is no CCA to be seen.

In other words I would like to see a lower balance outstanding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

When you apply for a DMP, your interest should be frozen. I enetered a DMP a couple of years ago and to be fair, Mint were pretty quick to freeze interest and ok the DMP. (It's MBNA you need to watch out for...). Creditors are not obliged to do this, although given the circumstances they usually do (I used Consumer Credit Counselling Service for my DMP and they seem to have 'clout' in this respect - I would imagine the CAB does also).

 

If there's no agreement, expect them to continue to amend your credit file and farm your account out to DCAs. RBS will argue until they're blue in the face that they can do this, even if they write to you and say they can't find the agreement. Don't panic with the DCAs - although it can get frustrating at times, make sure you write to them advising that no CCA has been produced by RBS or CCA them instead and see what they come up with.

 

In your case,I would certainly find a tenner to Subject Access Request RBS, from personal experience and that of others on this forum, RBS tend to dig themselves into deeper dirt when a Subject Access Request has been requested.

 

If you need any letters to send in the case of any of the above scenarios, PM me.

Edited by danson79
Link to post
Share on other sites

In view of the pending DMP, I think I will need to send off the Subject Access Request as soon as possible although I have every single document they have ever sent me except the CCA. One of my faults is that I am meticulous with keeping documentation for several years.

In this situation do I assume that the normal SAR request is not sufficient? A template letter would be appreciated if this is a the case as I want to make my case water tight.

Edited by Surfer01
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about sending the Subject Access Request when the DMP is in place - do it when you can.

 

If you keep all of your documents, then I'm assuming you don't have a copy of the CCA because you were never given one for your own records?

Quite correct. I have copies of CCAs from other istitutions but not MINT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I received a copy of my MINT application form. It quite clearly states at the top "Application Form" and has my signature on it. Below this is states "Credit Agreement regulated by the consumer Credit Act 1978." Is the Application Form the same as the CCA? The T & Cs were sent seperately on several pages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the application form front part, no, it does not have any of the above, however they sent me a copy of the T & Cs on several seperate sheets that shows the APR current at the time but not the credit limit as they state the credit limit will be determined by MINT. T & Cs state that you must pay us at least the minmum payment shown on your statement. I am assuming that the T & Cs correspond to that era.

At present I am looking to challenge them on the CCA to recover all the £12 charges. I had a refund of the difference about 18 months ago. Secondly I am looking at acknowledging the debt but with an APR of 8% to reduce my payments. I am not trying to evade any debts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pay back the debt by all means, Surfer, but on your terms, not theirs!

 

I'm assuming the card was taken out before April 2007? If the application form/agreement doesn't have the prescribed terms it cannot be enforced in court.

 

There is a train of thought that says if the cred didn't have a properly executed agreement, they are not entitled to any interest....

 

Best of luck in your endeavours:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...