Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. 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. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
    • Read these 6 things you can do to be empathetic to other people’s views and perspectives.View the full article
  • 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

google checkout distance selling act


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5551 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,

new to these forums so hello everybody.

I recently bought a guitar using my credit card through google checkout, I tried getting a refund for the guitar using the distance selling act, to cut a long story short the guitar is a counterfeit, the company i got it from won't give a refund and have pulled their website and won't answer anything, they have given what seems to be a false address. my credit card issuer says they won't do anything as section 75 doesn't apply because it went through google checkout and google checkout won't do anything because they say they are not responsible for anything the seller does.

trading standards have been informed about the seller.

Do I have any course to get my money back?

 

Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the site.

I think this is best posted in general consumer issues,and so will move there.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't look good. Google Checkout are acting as the Merchant card processor - but I think the response from your bank is incorrect. What difference does it make, it was YOUR money, and in the case of fraud the payment is always recalled and it would be up to GC to seek repayment from their merchant. Who is your card issuer, and was it Visa or MC?

 

Did you WRITE to request a refund? If you did it by phone, get the pen out and do it again. It would appear you still have the fake goods, which may also complicate things - if it is an obvious fake, then it's easy - but if not it becomes an issue of expertise....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

the seller had no phone,so requests were by email, I now know the site was dodgy, I requested a refund and said he could arrange for collection of the guitar which I am allowed to do but they are obviously just bandits, the reponse from the credit card issuer seems correct from other things I have read as using google checkout is classified as similar to transfering cash to a bank account and then writing a cheque. so things look bad, I was wondering if google were liable even though they say they aren't, and as we know some people say they aren't but consumer rights can override that, but I don't know in this case :( oh my credit card was mastercard through Lloyds TSB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Google will only help by contacting the seller but doesn't take any other action according to them. The only so called buyer protection is fraudulent use of your credit card details and not divulging your email addressThe website no longer exists but was MZonline.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Domain name:

mzonline.co.uk

 

Registrant:

ZENG JAMES

 

Trading as:

sammi wang

 

Registrant type:

UK Individual

 

Registrant's address:

76 winpcord Lane

Chester Street

Chester

Cheshire

CH1 4DF

GB

 

 

Neither name is in the electoral roll. The address does not exist in it's form/spelling above, but there is a Whipcord Ln at that postcode.

The only 76 is Cambrian View Whipcord Ln.

 

I would report this to the police as deliberate fraud and to your CC co and demand a chargeback.

 

This is from their Terms and Conditions:

Store shopping cart does not guarantee that its security procedures taken will prevent the loss of, alteration of, or improper access to your information.

 

It is definately a [problem] site set up on a temporary basis that takes orders and then runs.

 

You should report your Credit Card compromised to the company and ask for a new one and at the same time, demand a chargeback even though Google says they don't give you full number to the seller.

 

I believe this makes Google the Merchant so they will know in which bank the money was deposited and the name and address of the account holder.

 

Who were the delivery agents? They say they use Royal Mail. If this is how it was delivered to you, then after you have got your crime number from the police, I would write to Royal Mail, (or the company that delivered) and quoting the crime number, ask them where they picked up your parcel.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

google checkout is classified as similar to transfering cash to a bank account and then writing a cheque.

 

Sorry to hear your plight, good luck.

 

Google Checkout.

Perhaps this should be looked into as a separate topic and advice posted on the safe use of websites utilising Google Checkout for consumer protection.:idea:

I see it's briefly mentioned on moneysavings website but I also found a couple of links explaining Google Checkout complaints procedure and section 75 with Google Checkout

 

http://consumerist.com/consumer/google/we-interview-google-checkout-says-system-will-protect-consumers-221411.php

 

http://www.wheresmyrefund.co.uk/refunds-when-you-pay-credit-card.html

Edited by juliusceasor
additional info
Link to post
Share on other sites

Google say use chargeback but it does'nt seem to apply in the UK, or at least the banks have a get out clause saying it's not covered. maybe this sort of thing should have to be made very clear instead of being buried in all the terms and conditions, an update lloyds refused chargeback saying they have made their decision, so I have now contacted the Ombudsman, see how that goes.

Edited by tonedogg
update
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...