Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
    • Have to agree with the above Health and safety legislation is specific in that the service provider in so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees and those not in the employ of the business. You claim is like saying you slipped in the swimming pool area while taking a dip. As rightly stated by by the leisure centre, a sports hall has dedicated equipment and you yourself personally have a legal obligation in mitigating danger or injury to yourself by taking account of your immediate surroundings. Where your claim will fail is if it is reasonable and proportionate to impose liability of the Leisure Centre? The answer has to be no.
  • 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

Returned cheque fees


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6500 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

During the course of the last year i had 3 rent cheques bounce, what i am wondering is if the land lord is on the right side of the law by charging me a 40 pound fee for each and every single cheque? To my knowledge i thought that under the Unfair terms act you could only claim your costs back!Can someone shed some light on the matter, it would be much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on whether the loss of your money at a particular time caused him to be out of pocket - say, if your cheque goes in for a certain date to pay a certain bill for him a few days later, no money from you, bill doesn't get paid, his bank charges him for unpaid DD/overdraft...ask! :D

-----

Click the scales if I've been useful! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer is probably no.

 

If they get hit with charges, tell the landlord that you appreciate his situation, but the amount the bank is charging them is criminally excessive, and it's really not your place to be compensating him for the bank's behaviour. If he disputes this, say "No, they really are unlawful" and point him our way. :)

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have wrote to my ex landlord and told him the situation and suggested that i pay him 10pounds for each cheque bounced (a quite generous offer i think!) and asked him to prove his costs he he thinks my offer was insufficient. He has written back suggesting "that all charges are written in my contract and are lawful" and pretty much refuses to cooperate. What can i do?Do you think i should pull the big guns out and go for him with the unfair terms in consumer contracts act 1999?

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has written back suggesting "that all charges are written in my contract and are lawful" and pretty much refuses to cooperate. What can i do?Do you think i should pull the big guns out and go for him with the unfair terms in consumer contracts act 1999?

 

You will need two highlighter pens. Print a copy of UTCCR (SI 1999:2083 - the more elaborate looking the citation, the more likely it is to have an impact), in one colour, highlight Regs 5(1) and 5(5), then Para 1(e) in Sch. 2. In the other, Regs 5(4) and 8(1). In the letter, point out that the first set make it clear that what he says isn't the case, and the second set say he has to prove the contract is reasonable before he can charge you. I find that it's handy when someone tells you what the law allwos them to do to actually wave the law in their face to prove them wrong :)

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
The landlord has recently contacted and stated that while i delay payment iam incurring a 10 pound a week late fee!!!????Cheeky sod!Does anyone reckon that is legal?

 

Only your landlord. They can't take you to court for not paying it, due to UTCCR, and they can't evict you for it, since when it comes to a court hearing for posession, you turn up and say that because of UTCCR you technically aren't in arrears. IIRC landlords need to give a valid reason for eviction - I would imagine the court would not grant a posession order without one.

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in a council house, I get charged £15 for a returned cheque.

This doesn't happen often, but just occasionally, they seem to put speedy clearance on my cheques ie: I hand it in Friday, it attempts to clear the following Tuesday. (not a good day in terms of bank balances! lol )

They also issue notice to seek letters if you pay your current rent fortnight 45 minutes after the 12pm deadline.

I've often wondered if this is done, purely to catch you out just so they can charge more!

Really must do summat about this paranoia lol

Halifax settled

Halifax (again) settled

Nationwide settled

Natwest settled

Don't forget to donate to this site, they gave us the backbone to put up a fight, we've learnt how to reclaim our rights and proved banks are all nothing but........ rubbish <wink>

Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in a council house, I get charged £15 for a returned cheque.

 

Same applies. You're entitled to ask for it back, and the council isn't entitled to boot you out if they're forced to fork it over.

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

"quote.........with ugly font and colours removed??"

wtf?

how chuffin anal is that?!!!

Halifax settled

Halifax (again) settled

Nationwide settled

Natwest settled

Don't forget to donate to this site, they gave us the backbone to put up a fight, we've learnt how to reclaim our rights and proved banks are all nothing but........ rubbish <wink>

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...