Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. 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 as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. 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 £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • 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

Court Action Started Against CRA and Lowell


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5031 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

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I intend to pursue this matter and now applying for compensation. The amount owed was for my costs pursuing the matter i am more than happy to chase them for more if they wanna play.

 

I have also notified the ICO of the letter they sent saying that the information i got from the ICO was not the way they wrote it and that i still need to pay. mmmmm sad that as the matter has just opened the case and that the ICO will ensure they remove the information about me if needed. I had a really helpful chat with them (for once).

 

This will no doubt generate further evidence for court as well so i get a win / win situation lol.

 

They can apply to set aside but will fight it also.

 

Finally the agreement doesn't have my name on it - So i hope they ready for the fun, 5 years of a default that was unlawful - how much compo is that worth.

 

:cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool:

 

I do hope equifax and experian are also prepared i have contacted my house insurance as have legal protection and feel this is a personal legal dispute, i also have a director policy too and as a member of a large institute that provide legal support. one or the other will no doubt assist with legal costs and challeneges.

 

Watch this space i will update as much as possible.

 

:):):):):):)

SBFIDO

 

Accredited Member of the CIEH

 

No more will I be bullied or harassed.

 

When informed that the call is recorded for training and monitoring I always say I don't want it used for training. :razz:

 

I always ask for the ICO registration information - they often dont have it, shame i never discuss my personal data unless I know they comply with the DPA.

 

Finally I always record calls and state at the start of there call. Although I don't have too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Have defense from CRA Equifax.

 

They ask for a strike out on the grouds that myclaim against them in respect of breaches of data protection act is not enforcable as they are Only Data Processes. (they are registered as data controllers)

 

Further more that i should have raised the issues with the ICO and they stated i didn't - Opps they didn't read the emails i sent them including the ruling of the ICO.

 

They also claimed i should have taken the person providing th information - opps they are the second defendant. the claim is against both parties.

 

Further more the other default they publish was removed after court action.

 

Think the solicitor needs to do her homework.

 

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

SBFIDO

 

Accredited Member of the CIEH

 

No more will I be bullied or harassed.

 

When informed that the call is recorded for training and monitoring I always say I don't want it used for training. :razz:

 

I always ask for the ICO registration information - they often dont have it, shame i never discuss my personal data unless I know they comply with the DPA.

 

Finally I always record calls and state at the start of there call. Although I don't have too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A reputable company like them wouldn't try to deceive would they? ;)

Retail Credit Company's extensive information holdings, and its willingness to sell them to anyone, attracted criticism of the company in the 1960s and 1970s. These included that it collected "...facts, statistics, inaccuracies and rumors… about virtually every phase of a person's life; his marital troubles, jobs, school history, childhood, sex life, and political activities." The company was also alleged to reward its employees for collecting negative information on consumers. Equifax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Link to post
Share on other sites

A reputable company like them wouldn't try to deceive would they? ;)

 

They think they have a statatory right - however the law is there for us all, and as my MP has now ask the ICO if they treat all data controllers the same - i am sure the CRA's are going to be in for a little ride. this is not about £500 costs its about my rights to be protected from private limited companies avoiding thier legal obligation and hiding behind facticious information that is not in legilsaton.;

 

hope they complied with the 8 principles. As they registered they would,

 

Information is accurate ????????????????? mmmmmm may be not looking forward to court in Rotherham.

SBFIDO

 

Accredited Member of the CIEH

 

No more will I be bullied or harassed.

 

When informed that the call is recorded for training and monitoring I always say I don't want it used for training. :razz:

 

I always ask for the ICO registration information - they often dont have it, shame i never discuss my personal data unless I know they comply with the DPA.

 

Finally I always record calls and state at the start of there call. Although I don't have too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just got off phone with information commisoners office -

 

EQUIFAX are joint data controllers and they therefore must comply with the principles of the data protection act.

 

They are confirming this in writing to me, there statement that they are data processes jointly with the providers.

 

It would appear that MP's have earned my respect on this occasions :lol:

SBFIDO

 

Accredited Member of the CIEH

 

No more will I be bullied or harassed.

 

When informed that the call is recorded for training and monitoring I always say I don't want it used for training. :razz:

 

I always ask for the ICO registration information - they often dont have it, shame i never discuss my personal data unless I know they comply with the DPA.

 

Finally I always record calls and state at the start of there call. Although I don't have too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive Not Enjoyed A Thread In Months

Sbfido, You Are A Credit And Inspiration And Take My Hat, If I Had One, Off To You

 

Still Cant Stop Laughing

 

Will post court details to be held in Rotherham in the very near future

 

Planned 3 hours - i only need 20 mins lol - can't wait to see the face of the soicitor l

SBFIDO

 

Accredited Member of the CIEH

 

No more will I be bullied or harassed.

 

When informed that the call is recorded for training and monitoring I always say I don't want it used for training. :razz:

 

I always ask for the ICO registration information - they often dont have it, shame i never discuss my personal data unless I know they comply with the DPA.

 

Finally I always record calls and state at the start of there call. Although I don't have too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I book a ticket?

 

GK

 

will post date on here lol

SBFIDO

 

Accredited Member of the CIEH

 

No more will I be bullied or harassed.

 

When informed that the call is recorded for training and monitoring I always say I don't want it used for training. :razz:

 

I always ask for the ICO registration information - they often dont have it, shame i never discuss my personal data unless I know they comply with the DPA.

 

Finally I always record calls and state at the start of there call. Although I don't have too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll bet it doesnt end up getting to court after full particulars are scrutinized by their legal team and they realise they have stepped in an enormous steaming pile of their very own bovine pooh.

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have the ICO not hit lowells with an enforcement notice. I have sent Lowell -life a SAR request which they sent back with my £10 Postal order saying

 

"Upon further investigation, we are now able to confirm that we have contacted you erroneously and that you are not, in fact, our debtor.

 

As such please accept our apologies for having troubled you, along with our assurances that your personal details have been removed from our databases. Please also be assured that this will not affect your credit rating at your address in anyway."

 

Pity they have already put a default for this on my credit file with gues who.....Equifax. I am also going to send a SAR to equifax to see what evidence they had to add it in the first place seeing as it was not mine.

 

I added this bit to the second SAR to lowells

 

 

"The Commissioner can now serve you with an 'information notice' requiring you to provide certain information within set time limits. Failure to comply with such notice, or providing deliberately false information, is a criminal offence. If the Commissioner concludes that there has been a breach of the Act, she may then serve you with an 'enforcement notice'. This could force you to cease processing personal data, or cease processing data in a particular way. Failure to comply with an enforcement notice is a criminal offence.

Criminal liability does not lie just with the data controller. It is possible for officers of a company, such as its directors or managers, to be personally criminally liable if the offence has been committed with their consent, connivance or neglect. Employees may also incur criminal liability in certain limited circumstances if they disclose or obtain personal data without authority of the data subject controller"

 

Perhaps the ICO should start biting instead of just barking all the time

 

Have you considered reporting it to the Finacial Ombudsmen and CSA to get them struck off.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have Lowells settled the CCJ yet? Or applied to have it set aside?

 

No they haven't settled it

 

and no they haven't applied for it to be set aside, hwoever can't see them doing this as the ICO investigation concluded they acted unlawfully.

SBFIDO

 

Accredited Member of the CIEH

 

No more will I be bullied or harassed.

 

When informed that the call is recorded for training and monitoring I always say I don't want it used for training. :razz:

 

I always ask for the ICO registration information - they often dont have it, shame i never discuss my personal data unless I know they comply with the DPA.

 

Finally I always record calls and state at the start of there call. Although I don't have too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BUMP

 

Caggers -

 

As you may be aware my legal dispute in relation to the relationships with third parties and CRA's has resulted in a formal complaint against the ICO for the two tier standards.

 

This investigation has concluded and i can now inform you that the ICO consider CRA as JOINT DATA CONTROLLERS!!!!!!!!!

 

THE DPA STATES IN SECTION 4(4) THAT IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF THE DATA CONTROLLER TO COMPLY WITH THE DATA POTECTION PRINCIPLES. (I HAVE THIS IN FORMAL LETTER FROM ICO)

 

THEREFORE THE CREDIT REFERENCE AGENCIES AND THE SUPPLIERS ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE PRINCIPLES.

 

A LITTLE LATER IN THE LETTER IT THEN GOES ON TO STATE: WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL DOES SUPPLY THE CRA WITH CLEAR EVIDENCE OF INACCURATE INFORMATION THEN WE WOULD NOT EXPECT THEM TO WAIT FOR THE ORGANISATION BEFORE ACTING UPON THE REQUEST. IT IS CLEAR THE CREDIT REFERENCE AGENCY SHOULD INFORM THE PROVIDER OF THE ACTION THEY HAVE TAKEN.

 

I WILL BE UPLOADING THIS INFORMATION ONCE I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS WITH THE SITE TEAM. THIS HAS SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS FOR CRA'S AND ALSO FOR THE COURT CASE I HAVE ONGOING WITH EQUIFAX. THERE ENTIRE DEFENSE HAS JUST MELTED.

 

WE ARE ONLY DATA SUPPLIERS

THE CLAIMANT COULD HAVE RAISED A COMPLAINT WITH THE ICO

 

OPPPSSSSSS WELL LOOKS LIKE I DID AND GLAD OF IT TOO.

SBFIDO

 

Accredited Member of the CIEH

 

No more will I be bullied or harassed.

 

When informed that the call is recorded for training and monitoring I always say I don't want it used for training. :razz:

 

I always ask for the ICO registration information - they often dont have it, shame i never discuss my personal data unless I know they comply with the DPA.

 

Finally I always record calls and state at the start of there call. Although I don't have too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading & loving this.

 

Fair play & the very best of luck to you Sbfido, your actions could & hopefully will be the start of, a mini revolution in regards the to unlawful & blatant disregard for the law & the way they just make the rules up as they go along.

 

 

Middxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

More than that though, it may make the CRA realize that they are not an extension of the banks (even though most of them have links with them) and the law is there for everyone to obey. Not to pick just the bits they can use to cover themselves!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...