Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Our price is the same all day, but varies day to day. Yes there's a risk of high prices but it has never gone above SVR any time since I signed up. Last 30 days average 17.67p/kWh, max 20.67 and lowest was 11.83.  It saved just under £300 during 2023.  
    • It you had E7 in the past but have converted to single rate then the meter will still hold the last recorded Night readings. This introduces scope for error when manually reading. If the meter has only ever been used on single rate then there's only one figure that can be taken. For example ours shows "Rate 1" reading and a "Total import" reading, but they both give the sme figure. If it has ever been on E7 the total will be higher, including the retained night reading.
    • okay, perfect and thank you so much for the help once again. so firstly i am going to initiate the breathing space, during this time it's likely ill receive a default. when i receive the default are you aware of how long it will take for me to know whether the OC have sold it off to DCAs? Once it's with the DCAs i do not need to worry as they cannot issue a CCJ only the OCs can Even if i decide to come an arrangement with the DCAs no point as the default will remain for 6 years paid or not paid I should only consider repayment if the OC still won the debt and then issue a CCJ? Just to confirm the default will not be seen after 6 years? No one can tell I had one then after 6 years ill be all good?
    • I'm not sure we were on standard tariffs - I've uploaded as many proofs as I can for the ombudsman - ovo called last night uping the compensation to 100 from 50 pounds for the slip in customer service however they won't acknowledge the the problem them not acknowledging a fault has caused nor are they willing to remedy anything as they won't accept the meter or formula was wrong.   I'd appreciate more details on the economy 7 approach and I'll update the ombudsman with any information you can share. 
    • To re-iterate and highlight my urgent question on this one: The N24 from the court did not include any instructions to submit paperwork 28 days before the date, unlike the N157 received for other smaller claims. Do I have to submit a WS for this court date? Link has!...
  • 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

S78 (1) and Regulation2 illegible docs


gizmo7
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5473 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 Everyone, Need a bit of advice from one of you experienced people.

 

Firstly can somebody advise me if 2007 T&C's can be used for application forms signed in 1998/1999?? I understood the T&C's were to be within the signature document and not on seperate sheets.

 

Secondly, both agreements sent by Capital one and MBNA were illegible in places in particular the small print which i would assume to be the important bits if there was any in the first place. I have written to both companies quoting Regulation 2 (legibility of notices and copy docs) and advising them they have not complied with my S78 (1) request. Each letter i have sent i have demanded a legible copy. Nothing has appeared only threatening letters from their external agents. I was advised a while ago that when an account is in dispute it could not be passed to other agents or commence litigation. Please advise:confused:

Gizmo7

Link to post
Share on other sites

The prescribed terms must be within the four corners of the signed document, these include %APR, repayment terms & credit limit.

 

If you cannot read what they've sent they have not fullfilled your request, you are entitled to a legible copy.

 

Since you've already complained & disputed the a/c because of the illegibility of them & they are continuing to pursue make a complaint to the OFT.

[email protected]

 

tel: 020 7211 5823

Link to post
Share on other sites

The prescribed terms must be within the four corners of the signed document, these include %APR, repayment terms & credit limit.

 

If you cannot read what they've sent they have not fullfilled your request, you are entitled to a legible copy.

 

Since you've already complained & disputed the a/c because of the illegibility of them & they are continuing to pursue make a complaint to the OFT.

[email protected]

 

tel: 020 7211 5823

Hi, cerberusalert, I made a complaint to the OFT and Trading stds. Trading stds advised me that credit card companies can supply seperate T&C's and up to date ones for that matter on running accounts.

If these companies decide on court action how does the Regulation 2 fair in a court. Is it a valid defence in relation to illegible docs??

Thanks Gizmo7

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading stds advised me that credit card companies can supply seperate T&C's

Yes they can, but to comply with the CCA 1974 the agreement must have the prescibed terms within the four corners of the signed document.

 

If these companies decide on court action how does the Regulation 2 fair in a court. Is it a valid defence in relation to illegible docs??

If they were to go to court you could bring them to 'strict proof' which means they have to provide the original agreement not a copy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cerberasulert, Both these application forms were supplied with seperate terms and conditions showing things like apr etc. MBNA have sent 3 blown up copies each time i complained they got bigger but the same area's were illegible. When i mentioned the T&C's should be within the four corners of the page they sent a photocopy of the application form with the seperate T&C's on the back (double sided photocopying).

Cabot advised the capital one Application would have been legible when i signed it indicating it didn't need to be now.

Trading Standards were very negative saying they had no powers to do anything.

Gizmo7

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cerberusalert, I forgot to mention cabot advised in a letter to me they didn't have to provide an original true copy if it no longer existed. I assume the original was shredded and this is a computer copy

Gizmo7

Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention cabot advised in a letter to me they didn't have to provide an original true copy if it no longer existed. I assume the original was shredded and this is a computer copy

:D Oh but they do. :rolleyes:

 

If they were stupid enough to take it to court they would have to produce the original agreement, pure & simple. Without one they are stuffed you would have an absolute defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cerberusalert, Trading stds did not seem to be aware of Regulation 2. Furthermore he reconed if it went to court the Judge may rule in their favour. Whats your take on things as they stand and what further action should i take if any.

Trading stds advised me to futher contact MBNA even though they have not written to me since the start or March.

Thanks

Gizmo7

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest the average joe in TS doesn't have a clue when it comes to the CCA 1974 & rather than brush up on it they'd rather not get involved.

 

A judge would not be able to rule in their favour with the absence of an enforceable CCA. As I said it's a complete defence.

 

I wouldn't bother doing anything myself, the balls firmly in their court now so you might as well wait to see what their next move is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The debts will be sold on to a DCA first, but in the absence of an enforceable agreement most of them will drop it like a hot potato. In the unlikely event that a DCA tried to obtain a CCJ, some of them use the Northampton Bulk Centre but when you defend it'll be transferred to your local court. Again in a lot of cases when they realise that you will defend they drop it.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have sent you an inky blob as an agreement, you ask them in court to please show the court where it says in the agreement (that you allegedly signed) where the repayment terms are and what they say; where the interest rates are and what they say etc.. When their legal eagle reads out blobby, blobby, blob, blob they would tend to lose credibility IMHO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve, The signature is legible its other parts that are not for example the Cap one application info under Consumer credit agreement is totally illegible. 2007 T&C's are supplied on 2 seperate sheets which show apr etc are legible but seperate from the signature doc never the less.

The MBNA one has patches of illegibility on both the application form and seperate T&C's.

Gizmo7:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...