Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • depends what the fees are, typically nothing can be added once judgement is passed bar litigation costs. on document retention time limits etc at least 6yrs previous must be held though many hold complete info. as for acronyms and abbreviations ideally yes they should     
    • Still have to submit a statement either system....if they fail they can only give verbal because they failed to file and serve.
    • OP stated they had been arrested, but not charged (let alone convicted). They DON'T have a criminal record, but do have an entry on the PNC. That information stays on the PNC (Police National Computer) for life, but doesn't get released in a standard DBS. It only MIGHT get released for an Enhanced DBS (eDBS) check  ... but it would be incredibly unlikely. (The rational behind this is that eDBS's allow for 'information at Chief Officer of Police's discretion' ..... this covers the 2 'barring lists' and is also intended for the scenario where someone has multiple arrests or investigations, where safeguarding is a concern .... it was brought in after the Soham murders / Ian Huntley case, where the information known about the now-convicted child murderer may have prevented his employment in a school, had it been made available). So, for the sake of accuracy and completeness, arrests stay on the PNC for life, wont appear in a standard DBS, MIGHT appear in an eDBS, but in reality, would be the exception rather than the norm, and I can't see them being released  to a defense barrister. What then if the defence found out a different way, and brought it up in court?. Again, unlikely, but the important feature is that the judge would make sure they trod very carefully!. They MIGHT consider using it if there were other factors that allowed them to try to cast doubts as to the truthfulness of your evidence, but on its own : No way. Anyone MIGHT be arrested (if a seemingly plausible complaint been made against them)! The approach to take if it did come up is to be truthful. "Yes, I was arrested. It arose from a vexatious complaint. I wasn't charged, let alone convicted. That could happen to any one of us, if a vexatious complaint gets made" Far better that than lying, saying you'd never been arrested, and getting caught in a lie : that would ruin your credibility. I'm incredibly doubtful it will even come up, though.
    • we dont get N157 because its new OCMC but no court dont have evidence either.   Just seems a bit of a pointless wait but oh well
  • 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

Welcome Finance - Is This Enforceable??


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4794 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 717
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • 4 weeks later...

I've checked the sums again -

 

£25k paid as 121 payments of £419.47 gives a TCC of £25755.87 and an APR of 17.3%

 

The TCC is correct if you add together the Interest, the acceptance fee and the indemnity fee. The APR is within the tolerance allowed by Schedule 7 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983.

 

I was confused before by the "Rate of interest.....= 14.00%" bit which I stilldon't understand.

 

But given that the TCC and APR are correct and the fees are in the TCC not in the loan amount, then the agreement is enforceable IMO.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

under total charge for credit they have:

 

acceptance fee + mortgage indemnity fee + interest charge

 

and the smallprint below it indicates that they charge interest on it???

 

it says:

interest will be calculated at the rate of interest on the daily balance outstanding of the total amount of credit and acceptance fee. it will be paid as part of your monthly payments.

 

surely not enforceable????

Link to post
Share on other sites

It just means they calculate the interest based on the TCC and acceptance fee (since TCC includes AF and interest).

 

The acceptance fee is included in the TCC, it is not part of the loan and interest has not been charged on it. Wilson v FCT does not apply to this agreement.

 

I'm afraid this agreement is enforceable (actually, I tink it is also properly exectuted as defined in s61).

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been reading a lot about this interest in acceptance fee on this site today. I have been charged an acceptance fee of 235 on our secured loan. I have got a breakdown of what our monthly payment is made up from off welcome themselves :

 

monthly payment off 284.96, divided up as follows :

credit/cash - 217.36

acceptance fee - 4.30

insurance - 63.31

 

this is over an 180month loan period. so surely from this i am paying interest on my acceptance fee by 4.30 x 180 = 774

 

This is not the 235 that is quoted on my loan, do I have this right and would this make it unenforceable ? Not sure if Im on the right lines, please help !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pinklily

 

As postggj says - start your own thread. If you can post your agreement that would be helpful too. We can't check the figures unless we have all of them and we would like to look at the other T&Cs too before we can answer your question

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have started my own thread welcome fiance - problems ! wasn't sure how to link it to here, would be very grateful if you could take the time to read it and offer any advice, thanks again

 

Here is the link http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-finance/214188-welcome-finance-problems.html

Edited by steven4064
Link added
Link to post
Share on other sites

Emanevs....you can either outline your dispute to Welcome and give them the chance to compensate you which would be a 'fair' thing to do in the first instance.....if they fail to compansate you or don't see it your way, then you could take it to the FOS or issue a LETTER BEFORE ACTION and get a judge to rule the agreement unenforceable....

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to be so daft.

 

Should I fdo the following in the order as written?

 

1) Dispute the account? - please can you put me in the correct direction where to find the letter template?

2) 'Compensate' me to the tune of writing off the balance of the loan???

3) Issue letter before action

 

I am a lttle unsure as to FOS means, and how I get a judge to rule the agreement enforceable?

 

please can you help?

many thanks,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...