Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • FTMDave
      Countrywide ANPR PCN - in carpark for 10 mins - Disabled Parking Spot - appeal refused by CW - Kingswood Way Great Denham Bedford Bedfordshire MK40 4GH

      By FTMDave · Posted

      This time you do need to reply to them with a snotty letter to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did try court. We will help this evening.  
    • zyghom
      Lowell/Overdales Claimform - Paypal Credit

      By zyghom · Posted

      Hi, I just wanted to update the post and ask some further advice  I sent the CCA and CPR request on the 14th May, to date I have had no reply to the CCA but I received a load of paperwork from the CPR request a few days ago. I need to file the defence today and from the information I have read the following seems to be what is required.  I would be grateful if some one could confirm suitability. Many thanks   Claim The claim is for the sum of £255.69 due by the Defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a PayPal account with an account reference of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)  The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 15-09-21, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £0.00. The Claimant claims the sum of £255.69   Defence  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. 1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had financial dealings with PayPal  in the past but cannot recollect the account number referred to by the Claimant. 2. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor the Claimant refers to within its particulars of claim.  3. Paragraph 3 is noted. On the 14/5/2024 I requested information related to this claim by way of a Section 77 request, which was received and signed for by the claimant on 20/5/2024. As of today, the Claimant has failed to respond to this request, and therefore remains in default of the section 77 request and therefore unable to enforce any alleged agreement until its compliance. 4. Therefore it is 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 the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice Pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 5. Paypal (Europe) S.A.R.L is out of the juristriction of English Courts. 6. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed, or any relief.
    • Jaksmyboy
      IVA failure- Lowell Chasing Old CAp1 Card Debt

      By Jaksmyboy · Posted

      Thanks @dx100ukI followed the advice given on here... then it went very quiet!  The company was creditfix I think then transferred to Knightsbridge (or the other way around) The scammer independent advisor was Roger Wallis-having checked his LinkedIn profile just this morning, it does look like he's still scamming vulnerable people... I know I was stupid for taking his advice, but i do wonder how many others he has done this to over a longer period of time (it came as a  massive shock to him when our IVA suddenly failed). Lowell have our current address (and phone numbers if the rejected calls over the past couple of days is anything to go by!) No point trying the SB because of the correspondence in 2019? Thanks
    • mrscsmith
      Countrywide ANPR PCN - in carpark for 10 mins - Disabled Parking Spot - appeal refused by CW - Kingswood Way Great Denham Bedford Bedfordshire MK40 4GH

      By mrscsmith · Posted

      I have received the following letter from BW Legal today.  Also includes form if I admit the debt and wanting my income details.  Do I reply to this LETTER OF CLAIM please?  Looks like they are ready for court now??  Thank You BW Legal - Letter of Claim.pdf
    • FTMDave
      UKPA ANPR PCN - overstay - The Colonnades, Croydon, CR0 4RQ

      By FTMDave · Posted

      According to Wikipedia - yeah, I know - the site is owned by Croydon Council. It's at least worth a try to contact the council and ask for a contact in The Colonnades. You could then lay it on thick about being a genuine customer and ask them to call their dogs off. It's got to be worth a try  https://www.croydon.gov.uk/contact-us/contact-us  

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

MBNA and Aegis - No CCA received!

exchange

By exchange
in MBNA

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4922 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

exchange

exchange

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Realise now, as well, that as they have not sent me a copy of the T&C's from the time, they are in default still of my original CCA request and the account is most definitely therefore disputed by me and they should not be adding interest or default charges as they have not complied. I am also entitled to withold payment. The 'Financial and Related Conditions from (supposedly) the back of the application form clearly refers to 'MBNA Credit Card Terms and Conditions' as another document.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 453
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

basa48

basa48

Posted
Posted

I am playing devils advocate here and I don't want to upset anyones apple cart. I am in a similar position with MBNA, but I think we are missing the point somewhat.

 

To make an agreement irredeemably unenforceable one or more prescribed terms has to be missing or incorrectly stated.

 

That is from schedule 6:

 

  1. The credit limit or amount of credit or how it is determined.
  2. The interest rate for purchases and cash advances.
  3. Re-payment amount and timings.

 

These should all be contained in the signed agreement, i.e. on the same page (including the reverse side) or on pages identifiable as linked. MBNA could argue the pages are two sides of the same document. You would have to insist on seeing the original (if it exists or MBNA admit it still exists) either at disclosure or in court. Their argument would be the original was destroyed and the copy presented is a true copy of the double sided document. Only a judge could decide if he believed them.

 

Other particulars can be on separate pages i.e. T&Cs without it being fatal to the agreement (although they should not be interspersed). But even then it would be enforceable if the judge decides.

 

IMO this agreement would be enforceable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
exchange

exchange

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi basa48, I don't mind you being contradictory and I have seen your threads on your own battle with MBNA on this and another website. I understand the prescribed terms rules. I would argue that the short version of the T&C's refers to a longer version and that this is only an extract, so where are the rest? How do I know that there are not T&C's that I might have objected to at the time I allegedly signed this application?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Elgrand

Elgrand

Posted
Posted
No Elgrand, I haven't SAR'd them but did go the CPR 31.16 route without a response to date to that, at least they do not refer to that request in any response so far.
I too have sent the CPR 31.16 with no response, but did the SAR and they came back with the same application.

If you can afford the £10 i would say it would be worthwhile as you get an awful lot of information, if they comply fully.

 

 

Thanks for your responses Elgrand. I do not think the two sides can be proved to be related but what is to stop MBNA copying both sides on to one sheet of paper and saying it is a true copy of what they gave me? The two sides have what appear to be two different date codes/reference numbers, i would be surprised if they could claim them to be of the same page.

 

There are no default charges mentioned in the last documents sent but they are shown in the T&C's sent previously and state £12, not the £25 or more that it would have been. As the agreement is from 1998 these are current T&C's not related to the application just sent to me. The financial related conditions look to be the old T&C's are almost identical to the one's they sent me. They also sent the current T&C's

This is why nothing correlates. They have not sent me the correct T&C's from the time. I should have spotted it before but obviously I was not concentrating on the detail enough. Any suggestions on my next course of action? I am inclined to let them trip over themselves further rather than initiate any action yet.

My action is to now dispute the oustanding amount they claim on the account due to the statements they have sent via the SAR.

 

They have not sent me a default to date, same as yours i believe, but what to do next is up to you. It does look as if you are trying to find out by way of the CPR 31.16 what they have if anything different from the application and you have obviously read Paul's thread on this course of action.

I too will be sending the follow up letter and attaching the proof of posting including a copy of my first letter to them.

I will if required take that all the way, but for now, i will await their response to the account balance question.

 

Sorry bit late posting this, got interrupted lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Blood Money

Blood Money

Posted
Posted
[ATTACH]9168[/ATTACH]

 

Latest from MBNA attached. I know it's not a proper default notice and I have written to them again reminding them to send me a copy of my agreement.

I gather I want them to terminate the account before issuing a proper default notice as this would be the wrong way round, would it not?

Just looking for reassurance that I have got this right.

Thanks in advance for any responses.

 

Just read this thread. What is the significance of terminating the agreement before issuing a default notice? I'm guessing this has to do with posting data with CRA's on a closed a/c & the legality of this - or am I being thick? BM

Link to post
Share on other sites
42man

42man

Posted
Posted

Hi Exchange a couple of things, firstly can I presume you have seen this thread ? - http://consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/609-mbna-agreementsapplication-forms And also they have not sent a correct default notice as required by the Consumer Credit Act...have they actually terminated the account as yet ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
exchange

exchange

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi 42man, thanks for responding.

I have looked at the applications/agreements and mine is the same as the 1998 one on there. I have the same scenario where there are no default charges mentioned and references to conditions which do not exist on the current T&C's they sent. There is a document missing from what they sent me which is the full T&C's at the time, which they refer to in the 'Financial Terms and Conditions' supposed to be from the back of the app. The reference numbers front and back are different.

They have not sent a correct DN yet nor have they terminated the account, although I am not in the UK so post takes a week or more to reach me often, particularly when they forget to put the right postage on the envelope!

Do I wait for there next move or respond, not sure what to do next?

Link to post
Share on other sites
griffin036

griffin036

Posted
Posted

I would say, and it is only my opinion, that the two documents in post 30 are unrelated. In addition the related terms and conditions refer to a condition 14.1 in 10© and condition 15 in condition 12. Now I cannot see conditions 14.1 or 15 on that document. Also on the application side nowhere does it mention any reference to "Terms and Conditions" overleaf, but it does say "I have received a copy of and agree to be bound by the MBNA credit card terms and conditions" which implies they are on a separate document, and as we all know the prescribed terms should be present within the four corners of the agreement. Your application form does not have the prescribed terms present.

Link to post
Share on other sites
exchange

exchange

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks griffin036 for responding. Nothing they have sent me seems to tie together so thanks for confirming what I suspect which is that they would struggle to produce an original or true copy of an agreement which made any sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
basa48

basa48

Posted
Posted
................Also on the application side nowhere does it mention any reference to "Terms and Conditions" overleaf, but it does say "I have received a copy of and agree to be bound by the MBNA credit card terms and conditions" which implies they are on a separate document, and as we all know the prescribed terms should be present within the four corners of the agreement. Your application form does not have the prescribed terms present.

 

I would kiss you !!

 

Despite my reservations regarding convincing a judge the terms & conditions photocopied to give the impression they are on the reverse side of the application. I now have another arrow in my quiver because my application says:

 

"I have received a copy of and agree to be bound by the MBNA terms & conditions........"

 

Not, I think, what you would write if they were on the reverse!! The writing on the back (so far as it is legible - which isn't far at all) is referred to as terms & conditions. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
steven4064

steven4064

Posted
Posted

The agreement in post #30 is in 2 bits - the first has your signature and the second has the prescribed terms (credit limit, repayment terms and interest rate). To be enforceable by a court, signature and prescribed terms must be in th same document. Whether a court would enforce your agreement or not depends entirely on whether the court considers that the balance of probabilities is that the two bits are part of the same document.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
exchange

exchange

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the replies, seems front and back matching is the big issue and with different date codes on them I do not think thet can be proved to be from the same document.

Link to post
Share on other sites
exchange

exchange

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi basa48, my application also says 'I have received a copy of and agree to be bound by the MBNA T&C's...' so they were a separate document for me to but they have not provided me with a copy of these, only current ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites
basa48

basa48

Posted
Posted
Hi basa48, my application also says 'I have received a copy of and agree to be bound by the MBNA T&C's...' so they were a separate document for me to but they have not provided me with a copy of these, only current ones.

 

The t&cs in the document in your post #30 don't look current, not with an interest rate of 17.9%.

 

The application I have for my account is similar but also refers in a couple of places to it being an application, e.g. "if your application is approved", "applicants must be aged 18 or over" etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
exchange

exchange

Posted
  • Author
Posted

basa48, you're right, but that is the supposed back of the application which has a different reference number to the front and is the 'Financial and Related Conditions' not the 'MBNA Credit Card Terms and Conditions' they refer to as a separate document of which I have not received a copy. The T&C's they sent me are in post 23 and have default charges as £12 and APR of 24.9% and are the only full T&C's they have sent to me. Hope this makes sense to you.

I believe I am missing the full T&C's that they refer to on the alleged back of the application and that the back is not related to the front.

It does say applicant all over mine too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
steven4064

steven4064

Posted
Posted

MBNA always use application forms which (supposedly) double as agreements an dthey say "credit agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974" on them as well. If they have sent recent T&Cs as well, then they have complied with the requirements of s78 of the CCA 1974.

 

However, s127(3) is quite clear - a court can only enforce an agreement if it has your signature and the prescribed terms on the same document. A court would have to rule that the balance of probabilities was that the T&Cs and the application form were part of the same document if they were to enforce it. Clearly, in your case, this cannot be so. Therefore the 'agreement' is unenforceable.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
basa48

basa48

Posted
Posted
MBNA always use application forms which (supposedly) double as agreements an dthey say "credit agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974" on them as well. If they have sent recent T&Cs as well, then they have complied with the requirements of s78 of the CCA 1974.

 

However, s127(3) is quite clear - a court can only enforce an agreement if it has your signature and the prescribed terms on the same document. A court would have to rule that the balance of probabilities was that the T&Cs and the application form were part of the same document if they were to enforce it. Clearly, in your case, this cannot be so. Therefore the 'agreement' is unenforceable.

 

Aren't the prescribed terms on the reverse and referred to on the front??

 

Proving they weren't originally on the same form is another ball game I'm afraid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...