Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Incorrect as the debt will have been legally assigned to the DCA and they are therefore now the legal creditor. Read up on debt assignment.   Andy
    • Thanks Man in the Middle and everyone it's greatly appreciated form was filled in online yesterday now just have to wait and see
    • Hi,    I'm almost done. One question is should I include a header with " Claimant's Trial Documents" or something similar and include a copy of my WX from the trial since that has the claim form defence and documents that were relied upon at trial so that the judge can see that? or should I assume they will already have those documents on the file and so simply include a short statement of case to show the case I intend to prove at the appeal should permission be granted. Since I've made a shorter concise statement of case setting out what I intend to prove at an appeal hearing I'm thinking maybe removing the header of "Documents/Exhibits for use for Permission to Appeal   " since the permission to appeal focuses on the grounds of law and so I'm thinking of just having   Appellant's documents Statement Of Case Skeleton Argument    Then a seperate category named Trial Documents Claim Form Defence Claimant's Witness statement Exhibibts to Claimant's trial witness statement   I'm wondering you think would be better, only because I don't reference a single exhibit in my appeal statement of case since I am just explaining the undeveloped points of law around why the judge is wrong since the  statement only focuses on permission, not the outcome of the appeal so there is no reference to any exhibits?   Or should I just remove exhibits and not add trial documents or exhibits on the understanding the judge will already have the trial documents and that if permission is granted I then include them in my appeal bundle.   Thanks   N/B My statement of case doesn't have the claim form or defence or any witness staements in. it is simply a short 4 page document setting out the claim history and the points I intend to prove at the final appeal hearing should permission be granted.
    • Tory MPs didn't expect a July GE - and now they're furious. Tory MPs didn’t expect a July general election – and now they are rightly furious | Henry Hill | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Sunak’s party has plunged into a short campaign without a plan, says Henry Hill, the deputy editor of ConservativeHome  
    • What's the plan, @Reapstar? Perhaps you could update us on what's happened please. HB
  • 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

Riv's CCCA Journey...


rivendale0506
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5626 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

Hi all

 

I spent 13 hours!!!! trawling through the site yesterday so am a bit bog-eyed this morning. I cannot believe that amount of information on here!

 

Anyway, I have decided to CCA my credit card and loan companies to see whether they can provide an enforceable agreement.

 

I do however still have a few questions which I haven't been able to answer in my post reading...

 

1) I am currently up to date with all payments - if they cannot provide an enforceable agreement am I right in thinking that they cannot default me if I stop paying until they do?

 

2) Are loans covered by the CCA rules?

 

3)All of my cards and loans are pre-2005

 

They are:

 

Egg (green card) (prob pre 2000)

Nationwide (credit card) (prob pree 2000)

Amex Gold (prob pre 1995)

Egg Loan (pre 2000)

 

Given people's experiences what are the chances of these companies having enforceable agreements?

 

Thanks for taking the time to read this and for any help that might be available

 

Riv

Status:

 

Halifax - DPA sent 03/03/06.

Prelim Letter - Sent 27/03/06 ignored.

LBA sent 10/04/06 - Ignored

Moneyclaim filed - 26.04.06

Acknowledgement received 3rd May. Halifax state they intend to defend.

Halifax Settled in Full - 17 May 2006

 

If you've found this post helpful, I would be grateful if you could click on the 'Scales of Justice' button in the top right corner of this post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

believe me

if you stop making payments, they will default you

no agreement does not mean the debt does not exsist.

it puts you in a better position in negotiating with them.

no agreement means they dont have your permission to process your data, but this does not stop them

no agreement is a tool used if you have defaults on other accounts so another default means squat

 

its a real pain and takes a long time getting a default removed.

 

put it this way

 

if you have a decent credit file, why tarnish it for six years

Link to post
Share on other sites

believe me

if you stop making payments, they will default you

no agreement does not mean the debt does not exsist.

it puts you in a better position in negotiating with them.

no agreement means they dont have your permission to process your data, but this does not stop them

no agreement is a tool used if you have defaults on other accounts so another default means squat

 

its a real pain and takes a long time getting a default removed.

 

put it this way

 

if you have a decent credit file, why tarnish it for six years

 

 

Hmmmm I think I have misunderstood - I thought it was a criminal offence for them to register your details with a CRA if the debt was unenforceable and also against Data Protection etc. I am confused now!!

 

I dont currently have any other defaults, BUT this is only because I am robbing peter to pay paul every month and am so stressed with it.

 

I don't want defaults on my credit file, but at the end of the day I don't want more credit anyway so am thinking does it really matter if they do? Its just the principle of them doing it that ticks me off if it is illegal for them to do so. What recourse do you have in that case?

Status:

 

Halifax - DPA sent 03/03/06.

Prelim Letter - Sent 27/03/06 ignored.

LBA sent 10/04/06 - Ignored

Moneyclaim filed - 26.04.06

Acknowledgement received 3rd May. Halifax state they intend to defend.

Halifax Settled in Full - 17 May 2006

 

If you've found this post helpful, I would be grateful if you could click on the 'Scales of Justice' button in the top right corner of this post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dca,cra and creditors are a law unto them selves

they know that people who regulate them rarly get involved unless you push them

 

you are correct that they should not register your details with an out side agency with out an agreement but you will spend a year of letter writing and in the end it will be down to a court to decide to remove any negative info

 

its fine telling them to get stuffed with no agreement, but that will not stop any default on your cra

 

prepare for an onslaught from a number of dca

 

if you have not had the pleasure of that experience, i would not recomend it, that can be delt with but again takes time and letter writing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thnks for your reply.

 

Am really struggling financially and having read around on the forum, thought (maybe mistakenly) that if they can't come back with enforceable agreements I might be able to get them to accept reduced payments.

 

Maybe I should just write to them all with an income/expenditure form and ask them to accept recdued payments. BUT won't they still record these reduced payments on my credit card file?

 

Won't the final outcome still be the same? i.e. credit file will be rubbish

Status:

 

Halifax - DPA sent 03/03/06.

Prelim Letter - Sent 27/03/06 ignored.

LBA sent 10/04/06 - Ignored

Moneyclaim filed - 26.04.06

Acknowledgement received 3rd May. Halifax state they intend to defend.

Halifax Settled in Full - 17 May 2006

 

If you've found this post helpful, I would be grateful if you could click on the 'Scales of Justice' button in the top right corner of this post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...