Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Updated, in bold, my apologies.   1. The Defendant contends that the Particulars of Claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.    2. Paragraphs 1 & 3 are denied .The Claimant claims £3897281 is owed under a regulated agreement with HBOS on 27/08/2016. I have had past financial dealing with HBOS but I do not recognise any details of the agreement number referenced. The Claimant fails state what type of credit this agreement relates to in their vague particulars of claim.    3. On receipt of the claim form, the Defendant sent on date 28 August 2020 a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement to the Claimant and on date 28 August 2020 a CPR 31:14 request to their solicitors. To Date both remain in default of my requests and have failed to reply.   4. Paragraph 2 is Denied. I have never received a Section 87 Default Notice form either the Original Creditor nor the Claimant dated 05/08/2019    5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:  (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and  (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice  (c) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and  (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;    6. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.    7. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82 A of the consumer credit Act 1974.    8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • I would suggest a couple of extra bits -   Dear Sirs please note that in July 2019 I lived at xxxxx but my current address is xxxxx. I would suggest you tell your client to either employ people with a modicum of common sense or intelligence or buy a better ANPR system that is capable of recognising a simple reg number error. On the day in question payment was made via the RingGo app according to the enclosed receipt.   A simple cursory cross-check of vehicle parking payments versus the ANPR records would show that Premier Park Ltd received payment for parking of a vehicle not detected by the cameras.   The timestamp of this payment coincides with the time when the vehicle specified above was picked up by ANPR.   No money was refunded so Premier Park Ltd have already been paid for the parking used on the day.   Their records should be updated accordingly.  If required I would provide this evidence in court to demonstrate that Premier Park Ltd have been paid for vehicle parking on the date in question and that the claim arose only due to an administrative error.   Your client have suffered no loss for which to pursue me.  I'm sure you're aware of the term “de minimis”. I also point you to new Appeals Charter from their supposed independent organisation the BPA, whereby they state ...this will remove many of the perceived and real injustices, for example, a permit falling off a dashboard or a simple keying error. I could do with financing a winter holiday so if your client wishes to proceed to court with this matter I shall enjoy obtaining a full costs order for unreasonable behaviour under CPR27.14(2)(g). Regards COPIED TO Premier Park Ltd.   As you've never told Premier Park your new address it's not impossible that they might try to resurrect this claim in future and send the court papers to your old address and you'd know nowt about it.  Another reason for also sending the letter to Premier Park is that this fleecing isn't confined to PPC v motorist, unscrupulous solicitors are quite willing to start court action even though they know their client will lose to get the £££ in. I've also been a bit more abusive to show them you're not frightened of their threats 😉      
    • Hi all   On checking my credit file, I found a CCJ from ASSET LINK CAPITAL. Upon checking with the court, they have sent the POC to me by email which states:    The particulars of the claim are:  THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS THE WHOLE OF THE         OUTSTANDING BALANCE DUE AND PAYABLE UNDER AN AGREEMENT REFERENCED 4929107********  AND    OPENED EFFECTIVE FROM XX/XX/2000. THE        AGREEMENT IS REGULATED BY THE CONSUMER       CREDIT ACT 1974, WAS SIGNED BY THE DEFENDANT AND FROM WHICH CREDIT WAS EXTENDED TO THE    DEFENDANT. THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO MAKE      PAYMENT AS REQUIRED AND BY **/12/2015 A      DEFAULT WAS RECORDED. AS AT 30/09/2016 THE   DEFENDANT OWED BARCLAYCARD PLC THE SUM OF    809046. BY AN AGREEMENT IN WRITING THE       BENEFIT OF THE DEBT HAS BEEN LEGALLY         ASSIGNED TO THE CLAIMANT EFFECTIVE           30/09/2016 AND MADE REGULAR UPON THE         CLAIMANT SERVING A NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT UPON THE DEFENDANT SHORTLY THEREAFTER. AND THE    CLAIMANT CLAIMS- 1. 81**** 2. INTEREST       PURSUANT TO SECTION 69 COUNTY COURT ACT      (1984) AT A RATE OF 8 % PER ANNUM FROM       30/09/2016 TO 14/02/2020 OF 208571 AND       THEREAFTER AT A DAILY RATE OF 171 TO DATE OF JUDGMENT OR SOONER PAYMENT. DATE 14/02/2020                                                 The claimant details are:  ASSET LINK CAPITAL (NO5)  LIMITED   The claim amount details are:   Amount Claimed  £10***.17 Court Fee  £457.93 Solicitor Costs  £100.00 Total     £10***.10   The claimant solicitors’ details are:   KEARNS SOLICITORS BRECON HOUSE 3 CAERPHILLY BUSINESS PARK CAERPHILLY CF83 3GQ Telephone: 0292 0808668 Reference: 4929107***********   I've removed certain info to try and provide some anonymity, I hope that doesn't muddy anything.   The CCJ was obtained by default after they wrote to my old address.   Back in 2015, I CCA'd Barclaycard and they sent a standard response with reconstituted EGG T&C's which state 'Applicable to customers who applied from 01 October 2001'.  As the POC confirms, I opened the account in 2000, before the supplied T&C's would have been applicable.   It also included a Barclaycard Credit Card Agreement with my details filled in (including my address in 2015, not in 2000)   I stopped payments at the time of sending the CCA.   I haven't made any payments since (though I appreciate it's not SB)   I want to apply for it to be set aside and would appreciate any help in what to use as a 'draft defence'   I don't believe that Barclaycard complied with the CCA request so would the account have been effectively in dispute since 2015?  If so, would it be wise of me to supply a draft defence along the lines that I wrote to Barclaycard in 2015 and consider the account to have been in dispute since that time?   My goal is to try and keep any application to set aside simple..    Alternatively, would it be better for me to simply state that without any documentation from the creditor, it's impossible for me to set out a complete defence and ask the DDJ to be set aside along with an order for the Claimant to provide all the necessary documentation?   Thanks in advance!    
    • Good afternoon Everyone,    Im new here and was advised to come here to try to help get some answers!   I recently received a letter from Lowell about some debt that is roughly 5 years old now.    It’s for EDF energy and capital one credit card both on the same claim form?   im not sure it’s even a legit claim form but how would I know?   I just don’t know what to do about it ? Ignore it or contact them?   thank you all In advance.     
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 4 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Complaints about the FOS


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1867 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

On your hypothetical situation, David, other variables would be factored into it, ie state of the economy, cost cutting plans or even outsourcing, or downsizing/upsizing, reputation and where the bank is placed on the high street. For example, if Sir Fred puts the bank in the middle of a field in the countryside where nobody resides(and he doesn't publicise it) then he may not be successful, but if he places it in an affluent area and near the Stock Exchange then he may well attract more people and therefore create turnover, ie mutlitple products sold to their clients.

Hypothetically, it will depend on area, types of clientele, demand, etc,etc,

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 441
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On your hypothetical situation, David, other variables would be factored into it, ie state of the economy, cost cutting plans or even outsourcing, or downsizing/upsizing, reputation and where the bank is placed on the high street. For example, if Sir Fred puts the bank in the middle of a field in the countryside where nobody resides(and he doesn't publicise it) then he may not be successful, but if he places it in an affluent area and near the Stock Exchange then he may well attract more people and therefore create turnover, ie mutlitple products sold to their clients.

Hypothetically, it will depend on area, types of clientele, demand, etc,etc,

 

ROTFL!

SFG - 2007 - anything you want

SFG - 2009 - (aged 50!) - no way! - however we like you and we said we would so here's 15 million in your pension pot - We want it back, hang on your contract states we'll give it to you and we cannot get out of it.

 

Sorry could not resist.

Michael

When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is. (Oscar Wilde)

--I like to be helpful wherever possible however I'm not qualified in this field. I do consider carefully anything important (normally from personal experience) however please understand that any actions taken are at your own risk--

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see them take that one to the FOS, This one would take more than charts and graphs..

 

Adjudicators conclusion on Goodwin case

 

"you the bank have admitted guilt of letting your ceo of running riot, doing as he wishes and inccuring losses of £52billion. and thousands of employees losing their jobs, However, as it was not your top solicitors that was dealing with paperwork and legal documents, it was wee girls and boys that were recsponsable for the legal documents, i believe it can be dismissed as A WEE MISTAKE,

 

Conclusion: no action to be taken against bank, infact we will have a word with our bosses, here's £15b just now to help you's out

 

 

Goodwin: youv'e been a very naughty boy, now heres £25mil pension, away you go and dont speak to anyone about this.

 

 

Goodwin

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL we should have a new thread on that subject alone.

... Oh hang on what's this letter I received today? - Not only will the DWP want £199.60 for over paid JSA from you Michael but have now added another £59 as 30% penalty on top. You should not have done training with pay and consider yourself lucky we did not imprison you! Yes we will agree to you paying it back at £1 a month (seriously!!).

Michael

When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is. (Oscar Wilde)

--I like to be helpful wherever possible however I'm not qualified in this field. I do consider carefully anything important (normally from personal experience) however please understand that any actions taken are at your own risk--

Link to post
Share on other sites

Debt collector complaints on rise ? so what to do if they come calling - Scotsman.com Business

 

"In most cases, according to the FOS, inquiries are followed by a call to the company involved from the ombudsman, and issues are quickly resolved."

In other words, the FOS call up the DCA and they say "we've done nufin gov" and the FOS say "ok thanks for clearing that up then." File Closed.

:!: -Any advise I give is based purely on my own experience. It should not be solely relied upon as I am NOT a legal expert and any major decisions you make should not be based on my opinion alone -

HFC Bank - Davey vs HFC

Barclays - Monthly payments made

Cahoot - Agreement received, awaiting 2nd agreement after DCA.

MBNA1&2 - Agreements received. (Currently in limbo)

Halifax - Davey vs Halifax/Cabot

MINT - Davey vs Mint

Amex - Davey vs Amex

Cap1 **WON** £1,500 Written Off Davey vs Cap1

 

Never Sign Anything

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Debt collector complaints on rise ? so what to do if they come calling - Scotsman.com Business

 

"In most cases, according to the FOS, inquiries are followed by a call to the company involved from the ombudsman, and issues are quickly resolved."

In other words, the FOS call up the DCA and they say "we've done nufin gov" and the FOS say "ok thanks for clearing that up then." File Closed.

 

The article is pretty informative IMHO, and clearly when an agency be it FOS/OFT or Consumer Direct call the agent that certain aspects of what has happened are resolved.

I do like the article which has some good advice. Any chance of a repost in the Financial issues in the media section, very informative article, davey.

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is nothing to do with the FOS complaint, and i don't want to get into trouble, but i thought i would give you's a laugh at the banks expence..

 

HAVE A READ.

 

 

A Glasgow man walks into a bank in Glasgow and asks for the loan officer.

He tells the loan officer that he is going to Australia on business

for two weeks and needs to borrow £5,000.

 

The bank officer tells him that the bank

will need some form of security for the loan,

so the Glasgow lad hands over the keys

and documents of new Ferrari parked

on the street in front of the bank.

He produces the Log Book and everything checks out.

The loan officer agrees to accept

the car as collateral for the loan.

 

The bank's Manager and its officers

all enjoy a good laugh at the rough looking Glaswegian

for using a £120,000 Ferrari

as collateral against a £5000 loan.

An employee of the bank then

drives the Ferrari into the bank's

underground garage and parks it there.

 

Two weeks later, the Glaswegian returns,

repays the £5,000 and the interest,

which comes to £15.41.

The loan officer says,

"Sir, we are very happy to have had your business,

and this transaction has worked out very nicely,

but we are a little puzzled.

While you were away,

we checked you out and found that you are a multi millionaire.

What puzzles us is, why would you bother to borrow "£5,000" ?

The Glaswegian replies:

"Where else in Glasgow can I park my car

for two weeks for only £15.41

and expect it to be there when I return'"

 

Ah, the mind of the Glaswegian....

This is why they survive

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...

I have a complaint about the FOS. They are not interested in anything we say!!

 

They sent me a copy of an application form that Barclaycard had sent them. I wrote back saying "sorry, this is an application form, not a credit agreement".

 

Their response was "it has Credit Agreement written on it, so it must be a Credit agreement".

They also say they don't care if we have an agreement or not!

 

Plus, they say it's for ME to prove the debt is unenforceable, not for Barclayshark to prove it IS enforceable.

 

They suck!

 

See my threads here. Any advice greatly appreciated:-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/162487-hello-newbie-need-lots-5.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/245250-cca-1974-2006-updates.html

 

Cheers,

SamCam

Link to post
Share on other sites

You won't get anywhere on with the FOS on the legality of agreements. Their view is that is for courts to decide and it is reasonable to conclude you owe the debt. The FOS are paid by the banks, are bank-friendly and, as you have just discovered. are a complete waste of time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
  • 11 months later...

This thread is a year old might

be best to start a new one and

give som upto date details/.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...

Our claim through the FOS was against Barclay's partners. In brief we part exchanged several timeshares (valued at £30,000) for membership of a holiday club and took out finance of £17,000 for the rest on a Barclays partners credit card.

At the time we were given documentation to say that the loan was covered by Section75 of the CC Act 1974--- but no documentation saying that our timeshares were wortg £30,000 was given to us and none to say that the whole transaction was wotrth a total of £47.000 .

 

The company (Club Heritage International) were supposed to take over our timeshare

maintenance committments. They did not do this so we took the claim to the FOS.

 

After 6 months the person dealing with the claim said that because the total deal was worth £47,000 it fell outside the scope of section 75 despite there being mo paperwork to say this. We wonder why she had not picked up on this straight away if this was the case!!! The only CASH involved in the deal was £17,000 taken out on the credit card .

 

We appealed and submitted further evidence including an email from the company to say that the deal was NOT worth £47,000 and that the bank were never informed of this. After a further 6 months we received a shoddy letter from the ombudsman completely ignoring our further evidence and simply concurring with the first decision and stressing that section 75 refers to CASH ONLY. This is mystifting since the cash we dealt with was £17,000!!!!!

 

Do they even read any of the evidence?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

I have just received a final decision from FOS this week which actually took the FOS from beginning to end 2 years.

 

First I had lost a £2.2m company at the hands of RBS and FOS explained they could not deal with the issue.

 

In the process of losing the company I found myself left with a Personal Guarantee that had been given to RBS to support an Enterprise Loan. FOS said they could look at that but only that, so a small part of the actual problem.

 

RBS wrote to me in Sept 2011 demanding £45,000 I responded by asking them for the balance of the EFG Loan knowing the PG was 25% of the value of the loan. RBS insisted that my PG was fixed at £45,000 and not a % of the loan balance. This was just silly but after 7 months of getting nowhere RBS finally decided to take legal action against me. I raised a complaint with FOS covering a multitude of things RBS had done that were wrong including not conforming with Scottish Law.

 

After 2 years FOS finally reached their final decision, they agreed with me that the PG could not possibly be fixed at £45,000 but rather was 25% of the value of the loan and that reduced the PG to £32,044.32.

 

I was awarded £500 in compensation for the 2.5 years I had gone through the ordeal with the bank.

 

The Bank was awarded interest on the outstanding PG from Sept 2011 to May 2014 amounting to over £5,500.

 

The net result is that I was the victim of RBS trying to extort £13,000 too much on the PG, I got a inadequate £500 compensation award and the Bank got £5,500 in interest.

 

According to FOS this is justice, they have taken a £32,000 debt and increased it to a £37,000 debt.

 

Honestly I have never heard of anything so ridiculous in my life and as a matter of principle I shall be rejecting the decision.

 

Sincerely,

 

Mr C Fraser

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...