Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Beachy v Barclaycard/Mercers take 2


beachcomber60
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3369 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

Happy Birthday (to Beachy's case) ;)

 

I assume you'll now write to FOS to seek clarification of how BC want to settle.

 

:)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 666
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks Slick (long time no contact ;) )

 

Barclaycard had already admitted mis selling, their offer was very poor & was rejected (Refund of premiums 2002 - 2004 (had card(s) since 1998) + 8% on that TOTAL.

 

Although their letter states 'return account to where it would be if PPI had not been applied'. Total contradiction to the offer.

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got this one ready for posting - any views on amending or editing ;)

 

As they say enough is enough - after this one, the only route is the courts after chrimbo.

 

 

 

Dear Sir,

Complaint Ref: ---------------------- (Barclays Bank plc t/a Barclaycard).

 

LETTER DELETED

 

Sent to FOS

Edited by beachcomber60
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

After informing the FOS that I wont sign any acceptence form until I actually see Barclaycards 'offer' I have received the following from the FOS Adjudicator.

Dear Beachy,

 

I can confirm that the offer made to you relates to a refund of all the payment protection premiums paid and any interest or charges in respect of those premiums.

As confirmed in our letter of ** ******** 2009, 8% simple interest will be added, if we the company are reconstructing the account the firm found that this produced a credit balance for any period (i.e. the firm -in this case Barclays- found a credit balanced in September 2006, 8% would be added from September 2006).

I note your comments relating to your disputed account and collection activity continuing whilst your account is in dispute.

 

I still dont think that this is acceptable, and theres no mention of them obtaining the missing statements from Barclaycard, I still maintain that I am entitled to all ppi premiums from Jan. '98 to Dec. 04 plus compound interest + 8% interest on those premiums and not 8% simply interest from '06.

 

Any views and/or comments would be greatly appreciated.

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Beachcomber60

 

In the same boat as yourself, FOS told Barclays to get back to me with an offer within 4 weeks, anyway 7 weeks and 2 phone calls to Barclays later i still hadn't had an offer or a reply from them.

 

Eventually got fed up so i issued an N1 at court for PPI Premiums + Compound interest and 8% Simple.

 

They have until the 18th December to file defence.

 

I will let you know what happens.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Gary,

 

Bit of an update :-

 

The ICO have found IN FAVOUR of Barclayshark, they do not have to suppy data older then 6 years - that means it appears that I cannot get details of ppi premiums '98 - '02 so thats 4 years premiums + interest I've lost :(

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Beachy,

 

Please read through my long fight with RBS,

 

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

I claimed initially on five claims. Two with Direct Loan Financial Services (DLFS) and Three with RBS. I later found out that DLFS had been legally transferred back to RBS. I submitted a claim to the ICO and it was upheld.

 

Because of my persistence through the ICO I eventually got information on another two claims I had overlooked :D I eventually got PPI repayments on seven loans and not five. RBS got a slap on the wrist for not playing ball on the Direct Line transfer. :eek:

 

Now I am not sure on the compatability of your claim with regard to my claim but I am posting in the hope there is something in my thread that may assist you.

 

Good luck

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Information Commissioners Office have found IN FAVOUR of Barclayshark, they do not have to suppy data older then 6 years - that means it appears that I cannot get details of ppi premiums '98 - '02 so thats 4 years premiums + interest I've lost :Cry:

 

Hiya Beachy,

 

Not necessarily there is nothing stopping you bring a court claim for those supposedly lost years.

 

A Judges ruling could be different to that of the ISO.

 

You would need a carefully worded defence to bring the judge around to your way of thinking.

 

Regards

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Guys, need a boost at the moment after the ICO reply.

 

The thing that has bugged me - no sorry - made me bl**dy angry is that when I sent Barclaycard a non compliance letter they replied that statements prior to 2002 were held on microfiche and as such were not part of a 'relevent' filing system & they weren't obliged to provide those statements.

 

They kept that line up until they admitted mis selling ppi & their story changed to 'oh sorry, we've destroyed your statements older then six years'. They have refused however to provide proof of that data destruction.

 

ICO have taken 8 months to deal with my complaint & 4 months after asking them to escalate my complaint due to BC saying they were going to destroy the data.

 

Because of BC's refusal to provide information as to exactly when it was destroyed & how it was done, I honestly believe they still have it on microfiche.

 

Thats it - rant over :)

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Guys, need a boost at the moment after the ICO reply.

 

The thing that has bugged me - no sorry - made me bl**dy angry is that when I sent Barclaycard a non compliance letter they replied that statements prior to 2002 were held on microfiche and as such were not part of a 'relevent' filing system & they weren't obliged to provide those statements.

 

They kept that line up until they admitted mis selling ppi & their story changed to 'oh sorry, we've destroyed your statements older then six years'. They have refused however to provide proof of that data destruction.

 

ICO have taken 8 months to deal with my complaint & 4 months after asking them to escalate my complaint due to BC saying they were going to destroy the data.

 

Because of BC's refusal to provide information as to exactly when it was destroyed & how it was done, I honestly believe they still have it on microfiche.

 

Thats it - rant over :)

 

Beachy

 

Smells of a serious cover up on the control of personal data IMO. Microfishe is a relevant filing system if they have mentioned it and it refers to you.

 

If you still have the letters referring to the above in bold I would tend to appeal against the ICO decision and copy any letters to the Financial Services Authority, (who now seem to have been given a government mandate to grow sharp teeth and get these companies to toe the line)

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ABSOLUTELY FUMING !

 

After eight months I finally got a response from the ICO, they didnt even take up my complaint with Barclaycard., CASE CLOSED

 

ICO1.jpg

 

ICO2.jpg

 

In Barclaycards first response they stated that what they sent is all they hold & statements older than six years are stored on microfiche which is not a relevent filing system.

 

They kept this stance right up to when they admitted mis selling PPI, when I tried again and their reply was that they had destoryed the data in line with group policy, this was passed to the ICO who advised me to inform Barclaycard not to destroy any data as I had filed a complaint with the ICO also to fax the ascalations team at the ICO and request that my complaint be ascalated due to Barclaycards response - heard no more from the ICO, however, I wrote to Barclaycard & demanded to know that if my data had been destroyed I wanted to know when, where, and who by together with proof that it had been destoryed, the reply I got was - 'We understand that you unhappy as you have been informed that Barclaycard have destroyed some records held regarding your Barclaycard account.

 

Barclaycard may only hold information that is up to date, accurate & relevent, all information which does not meet that criteria must be destroyed'.

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are chasing Barclaycard for missing statements have a read of this :-

 

After chasing Barclaycard for 12 months for my missing statements, and waiting eight months for the ICO to deal with my complaint, I have received this :-

 

ICO1.jpg

 

 

 

ICO2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Beachy,

 

Clearly, waiting 8 month's for the ICO to help was a fat lot of good !! :mad:

 

One would have hoped they might at least enquire of BC whether any data beyond 6 years still exists.

 

Personally, I'd reply to the ICO and ask if they have, in fact, satisfied themselves that BC have actually destroyed any older data.

 

Surely, the point is not whether it is reasonable for BC to only keep records for 6 years. It is whether BC have, in fact, provided you with all the a/c data they have, in response to your SAR.

 

It looks to me like the ICO have not even approached BC. :confused::mad:

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Slick,

 

My thoughts exactly, by the wording of their letter they have not even bothered to approach BC, I have already responded to this letter (didnt hold back in what I said either!).

 

Have asked that the complaint isnt closed & have appealed their decision, quoting that BC's microfiche system is a relevent filing system & I enclosed a copy of the ICO's letter to BC dated 15th December 2006 where they state that the ICO considers the microfiche system IS a relevent system under the DPA.

 

Have also point out that since Nov '08 until Aug '09 BC have maintained that statements older than six years ARE on microfiche & they arent obliged to supply them under the act - HOWEVER, after they admitted

misselling PPI when pressed for the missing statements, so I could evaluate the true amount of my ppi claim, they replied that the statements had been destroyed 'in line with group policy'.

 

Have also taken alanalana's advice and filed a complaint to the FSA & although the FOS have recently upheld my ppi complaint (more power to the elbow ready for court action after Xmas) I have also raised a second complaint regarding chasing a debt whilst in dispute ( BC have kindly put it in writing that a dispute does exist), adding monthly interest & late charges, two DN's from Mercers (in the space of three months for the same account), three threats of Doorstep collectors & a formal demand for the fully balance from Calders.

 

FOS also wants me to sign a ppi settlement acceptance form BEFORE BC makes a refund offer (already rejected this & told the FOS I will sign if & when BC makes an offer that is exceptable).

 

Me thinks county court will be busy with this one :-)

 

Beachy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barclays are swines to say the least.

I'm still getting nowhere with them myself!!

 

Can i ask how you put the letter in your last post?

IF YOU FEEL I HAVE HELPED YOU AT ALL PLEASE FEEL FREE TO TIP MY SCALES.

 

NATWEST PPI SUCCESS £490 25/08/09

 

NATWEST PPI 2nd CLAIM WON £1135 02/10/09

 

A & L PPI £395 WON

 

CREATION CLAIM PARTIAL REFUND £1825 01/04/10 NOW OFF TO FOS FOR THE REST

 

BARCLAYCARD STILL PENDING

 

LITTLEWOODS DCA . DEBT WIPED OUT AND CREDIT FILE UPDATED 23/09/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya LDG,

 

To upload letters etc to your thread I use photobucket.com, Just scan with your scanner then login to your photobucket account and upload them to there.

 

Once this is done you can used the editing tools (rubber) to delete personel details from the letter etc.

 

Then just copy and paste the IMG code into your thread using the image link button above.

 

Regards

 

PF

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Guys

Sorry to sound stupid but which is the image link button? :confused:

IF YOU FEEL I HAVE HELPED YOU AT ALL PLEASE FEEL FREE TO TIP MY SCALES.

 

NATWEST PPI SUCCESS £490 25/08/09

 

NATWEST PPI 2nd CLAIM WON £1135 02/10/09

 

A & L PPI £395 WON

 

CREATION CLAIM PARTIAL REFUND £1825 01/04/10 NOW OFF TO FOS FOR THE REST

 

BARCLAYCARD STILL PENDING

 

LITTLEWOODS DCA . DEBT WIPED OUT AND CREDIT FILE UPDATED 23/09/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Beachy

I gave it a go . If you look at my thread you'll see it .But its come up as a small image

IF YOU FEEL I HAVE HELPED YOU AT ALL PLEASE FEEL FREE TO TIP MY SCALES.

 

NATWEST PPI SUCCESS £490 25/08/09

 

NATWEST PPI 2nd CLAIM WON £1135 02/10/09

 

A & L PPI £395 WON

 

CREATION CLAIM PARTIAL REFUND £1825 01/04/10 NOW OFF TO FOS FOR THE REST

 

BARCLAYCARD STILL PENDING

 

LITTLEWOODS DCA . DEBT WIPED OUT AND CREDIT FILE UPDATED 23/09/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barclays Update

 

Had a letter from Barclays solicitors (Simmons & Simmons) this morning.

 

As you are aware, the defence in this matter is due on the 17th December.

The claim form in this matter raises complex legal issues.

Further our client requires more time to retrieve all of its documents relating to this matter. On those bases, it is unlikely that our client will be able to file its defence by the due date.

In order to save both parties the additional time and costs involved in applying to the court for an extension of time, please confirm that you will agree to grant our client a further 28 days to file a defence.

 

Can't believe the cheek of the letter, its only been ongoing for over a year, and the FOS have already ruled in my favour, but there still quibbling.

Also why would it cost me money if they apply for the extension through the courts

 

Needless to say i will be trying to block the extension.

 

They even sent my charges sheet back and said it related to an MBNA account and that i must have sent the wrong sheet by error.

When i checked it, it clearly says Morgan Stanley and is correct.

 

They don't seem to know what they are doing.

 

In case your puzzled original claim was against Morgan Stanley who was bought out by Goldfish and then Barclays.

 

I will post if i hear anymore news.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update to the second barclayloan (Business) ppi, they have had eight weeks (expired last week) however received a letter this morning stating that they are still investigating complaint and next update will be 12th July 2009, am now able to complain the FOS if I do not accept their latest response. :mad:

 

Beachy

 

 

Didn't start a seperate thread on the above loan, however, I did complain to the FOS & have just received a letter from them upholding my complaint & Barclays to refund the PPI, althouth the FOS want me to sign an acceptence form BEFORE Barclays provide the settlement figure.

 

Beachy :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...