Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 12mph (beyond any UK limit) will certainly qualify for a Fixed Penalty. So you should received an offer of a FP for each of the remaining two offences. Be sure to submit your licence details as instructed when you accept the offer. If you don't your £100 will be returned to you and the police will prosecute you in court.
    • and it will be also now written off under age related criteria anyway.
    • @dx100ukThanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe consequences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points? @Man in the middleI've been searching the forum and you seem very knowledgeable. Would you mind giving a look at my query please? Thanks in advance!!
    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
    • Been perusing the actual figures on the polls above wondering where the '16% claimed for deform comes from? I understand that there are 'weighted' end results based on secret calculations ...   Probably going to repeat this later, but remember that the ukip/brexit/reform/deform party has ALWAYS had poll speculation FAR better than their actual  performance at elections - by large margins. SO: The labor and Tory votes come largely from simply the people who say they will vote for them - sorted Lab 43% Tory 20%, with maybe another small 1-2% coming from the weightings of the 'not sures' Greens largely get what is declared from 'other' , although with another declared green bit from the 'pressed' question   So as the share of the voting displayed in 'other' granted to reform/deform is around 11%, where does the '16% too often being reported come from? Seems that reform has been granted as beneficiary of effectively ALL the don't knows and wont says, who when pressed didn't actually declare for someone else ... effectively adding 40%+ to their reported polling % - rather strange given their consistent under-performance compared to polling - or perhaps that is the cause of the higher rating eh?   Now I admit the possibility (probability?) of wingers being ashamed of declaring their support for the yuckey lemon end of the spectrum ... but surely  that should affect the 'Torys as well? Maybe the statisticians have simply weighted in that deform wingers are simply more likely to lie?   But - without 'weightings' and assumptions that faragits will get everything that isnt declared as a definite and unequivocal 'not that Piers Morgan' - reform is on around 11% it seems.   Add to that the history of polling a lot less than the hype - and the simple fact that faragit wingers seem to be spread across the country (presumably skulking in their moms spare room despite being 45+) and greens and lib dems seem to be community minded - I think two seats will be an epic result for farage. Hardly the opposition - far more raving wingnut party.   and importantly - Has farage got a home in clacton yet?
  • 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

Robinson way Court Claimform - old Yorkshire bank credit card


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5149 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

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

PW-

 

The agreement is a regulated agreement and is for the provision of running account credit within the meaning of section 10(a) of the Act

 

. Pursuant to section 61(1)(a) of the Act such an agreement must be in the prescribed form and contain all the prescribed terms.

 

By Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 the agreement must contain specified terms. One such term is that agreements for running account credit must contain a term stating the rate of interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement, furthermore the agreement must state the credit limit...

 

AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

PW-

 

The agreement is a regulated agreement and is for the provision of running account credit within the meaning of section 10(a) of the Act

 

. Pursuant to section 61(1)(a) of the Act such an agreement must be in the prescribed form and contain all the prescribed terms.

 

By Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 the agreement must contain specified terms. One such term is that agreements for running account credit must contain a term stating the rate of interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement, furthermore the agreement must state the credit limit...

 

AC

 

Correct.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

edited

 

Paul, could you please edit out the account number and re-post this document.

 

PS fantastic stuff :-D

 

 

 

rwdeed-1.jpg

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

The hearing is tomorrow morning with a time estimate of two hours - If the Judge is on the ball it shouldn't take more than ten minutes.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

paul

 

may be worth referring to this judgment too

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/citicards/8726-martin3030-citibank-update-12th-6.html#post2272342

 

kinda says all really and blows their witness statement outta the water

 

also if you need any regulations or case law, just holler matey, ive also got a good extract from Goode Consumer credit law which may help i think, if i have it on this machine

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck mate, hope it all goes well tomorrow!!

 

UF

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

paul

 

may be worth referring to this judgment too

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/citicards/8726-martin3030-citibank-update-12th-6.html#post2272342

 

kinda says all really and blows their witness statement outta the water

 

also if you need any regulations or case law, just holler matey, ive also got a good extract from Goode Consumer credit law which may help i think, if i have it on this machine

 

I have Goodes take on the matter (from you) and the regs which will blow their witness statement to pieces.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Outrageously judgment was entered for the Claimant.

 

Another Judge taking the moral stance - Permission to appeal refused on the grounds of no reasonable success.

 

Paul

Edited by paulwlton

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

good grief.....where is that bit in the statutes?

 

sorry paul, unbelievable....

Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Judges parting shot was " If you didn't want to pay back the money why did you use the card" was it worth spending over an hour presenting case law, regulations, Goode's take on the matter and relevant sections of the CCA 1974.

 

To rub salt in the wounds all charges levied to the account were not found to be penalties and therefore are subsumed in the judgment....Discracefull.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

To rub salt in the wounds all charges levied to the account were not found to be penalties and therefore are subsumed in the judgment....Discracefull.

 

Paul

 

Unbelievable!!!

 

I wonder if the judge knew the Act and Regs. as well as you?

 

How can penalty charges not to be found to be penalty charges?

 

One has to pose the questions;

is there really any consumer protection?

what is the point of having the CCA and Regs, if the judges refuse to abide by them?

 

Astonished and totally disgusted.

 

AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Judges parting shot was " If you didn't want to pay back the money why did you use the card" was it worth spending over an hour presenting case law, regulations, Goode's take on the matter and relevant sections of the CCA 1974.

 

Paul

But the law was on your side. Is there no redress?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get the tapes Paul asap

 

PS whilst minded of the current HoL OFT v the banks the judge deciding the penalty charges are lawful is IMHO enough to have the judgement set aside

 

Also if you appeal you might get HH Judge Halbert:D

 

paul

 

may be worth referring to this judgment too

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/citicards/8726-martin3030-citibank-update-12th-6.html#post2272342

 

kinda says all really and blows their witness statement outta the water

 

also if you need any regulations or case law, just holler matey, ive also got a good extract from Goode Consumer credit law which may help i think, if i have it on this machine

 

PT I sent you a PM did you get it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

that's a total disgrace

 

are these judges in the pay of the banks or something?

 

how can a local judge overturn the opinion of the House of Lords,the highest court in the land?I don't get it,can some please explain that or am I missing something?

I don't understand it either?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...