Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.View the full article
    • Well done.   Please let us know how it goes or come back with any questions. HB
  • 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

Halifax cca ????


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5443 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

unenforcable IMO..they havent sent you historic Terms..In 2004 the late and overlimit charges were 20.00 not 12.00..No precribed Terms within sig doc..And they have sent you current terms send them this.. Amend to suit

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

This account is in Dispute .

 

On xx/xx/2007 I wrote to xxxxxxxxx requesting that xxxxxxx supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account.

In response to this request I was supplied a mere application form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain any of the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553 for the definition of what is required. Suffice to say none of the terms are present in the document

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974, which states

 

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

 

This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

I require you to produce a compliant copy of my credit agreement to confirm I am liable to you or any organisation, which you represent for this alleged debt, if you cannot do so I require written clarification that this is the case. Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40

 

Since the agreement is unenforceable and the default notice is non compliant, it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for your client to write the debt off. I suggest you give serious consideration to this as any attempt of litigation will be vigorously defended and I will counter claim for all quantifiable damages

 

I respectfully request a response to this letter in 14 days

 

 

I trust this out lines the situation

__________________

 

 

 

 

Head the letter

 

 

 

I Do Not Acknowledge Any Debt To Your Company or Any Company You Claim To Represent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

unenforcable IMO..they havent sent you historic Terms..In 2004 the late and overlimit charges were 20.00 not 12.00..No precribed Terms within sig doc..And they have sent you current terms send them this.. Amend to suit

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

This account is in Dispute .

 

On xx/xx/2007 I wrote to xxxxxxxxx requesting that xxxxxxx supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account.

In response to this request I was supplied a mere application form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain any of the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553 for the definition of what is required. Suffice to say none of the terms are present in the document

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974, which states

 

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

 

This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

I require you to produce a compliant copy of my credit agreement to confirm I am liable to you or any organisation, which you represent for this alleged debt, if you cannot do so I require written clarification that this is the case. Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40

 

Since the agreement is unenforceable and the default notice is non compliant, it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for your client to write the debt off. I suggest you give serious consideration to this as any attempt of litigation will be vigorously defended and I will counter claim for all quantifiable damages

 

I respectfully request a response to this letter in 14 days

 

 

I trust this out lines the situation

__________________

 

 

 

 

Head the letter

 

 

 

I Do Not Acknowledge Any Debt To Your Company or Any Company You Claim To Represent

 

 

Hi there thanks for that,

They also attached a copt of there usual t's and c's that they have tried to pass off as there present ones but they are the same as the others.

I will post this letter of in the next couple of days and see what happens,

dont think apex will take it well but hey ho:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey

 

No Worris ...The only reason that Apex wont like it is coz you are learning the law..DCAs tend to back off when that happens :) Keep us informed

 

I think i will put in a SAR to them as well hit them with it all at the same time just to see what they have got on us and see what charges ( if any) that we can claim back :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, could someone have a look at my wifes HALIFAX cca and tell me what you think

 

2e4ciuw.jpg

2vcua77.jpg

vigpvt.jpg

b6a6hd.jpg

347fyc4.jpg

sux1k7.jpg

 

This account was sold to apex on the 28th october 2008 so now she have recieved they want us to pay up now:grin::grin:

 

 

Can i just confirm a couple of points about my cca above??

Do the APR, AND CREDIT LIMIT HAVE TO BE O THE SIGNITURE PAGE ?????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Yes the prescribed terms should be on the sig page and can not be found in another document ...However the prescribed terms can be found on the reverse of the page..But there has to be some kind of link to say this IE overleaf ..pto ..reference numbers or page numbers :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Yes the prescribed terms should be on the sig page and can not be found in another document ...However the prescribed terms can be found on the reverse of the page..But there has to be some kind of link to say this IE overleaf ..pto ..reference numbers or page numbers :)

 

Hi there thanks for that,

Yes they are on the other side of the signiture page which i had not noticed untill you said, they are not in a A4 format they are way smaller than the page and there is no reference to it on the signiture page,

Surley these should be on the signituer page for you to read before you sign to the affect of the terms and conditions.

Think i will send thnem a letter stating i require a true copy and that the cca is unenforcable, what do you think ??????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

i too have the same CCa has you..On the reverse of mine i have CONDITIONS OF USE..Theres no reference to the Terms being on the reverse in fact if you read in the box above the sig it says YOU HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF which avers to the terms being in a separate document, this is unexceptable..Also on the front of the doc it gives you cancellation rights..on the back of mine it gives cancellation rights again,this time different to the ones on the front of the CCA..there wouldnt be to diff cancellation rights on one form..let alone different ones..It very easy for someone to copy terms on the reverse..I truely beleive these wasnt there when we signed..I havent payed halifax for 15 mths..account has gone from halifax to blair to capquest to robinson way all who have passed back to halifax..I think if halifax had any ammo they would of used it by now :).Sending a letter is good...you could also point out to them your concerns,then see what they come back with,i asked to view mine at my local branch they ignored the question ,,i wonder why

Edited by babydoll0141917
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

i too have the same CCa has you..On the reverse of mine i have CONDITIONS OF USE..Theres no reference to the Terms being on the reverse in fact if you read in the box above the sig it says YOU HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF which avers to the terms being in a separate document, this is unexceptable..Also on the front of the doc it gives you cancellation rights..on the back of mine it gives cancellation rights again,this time different to the ones on the front of the CCA..there wouldnt be to diff cancellation rights on one form..let alone different ones..It very easy for someone to copy terms on the reverse..I truely beleive these wasnt there when we signed..I havent payed halifax for 15 mths..account has gone from halifax to blair to capquest to robinson way all who have passed back to halifax..I think if halifax had any ammo they would of used it by now :).Sending a letter is good...you could also point out to them your concerns,then see what they come back with,i asked to view mine at my local branch they ignored the question ,,i wonder why

 

just a bit concerned because apex own the account now as it was sold to them, so dont know how they will react to me sending them any letter to say its unenforceable what is the worst they could do?? take me to court??? and then what, just abit worried,

I want to get it all right before i start with course of action, as long as i can 100 percent sure the cca is uneforcable i will be fine.

thanks for your responce how far are you down the line with it all

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

No one knows for sure if theses CCA are enfocable..as it stands they are improperly executed so can only be enforced by court..If we could all remember if the T & C were on the back then that would help us,,but we cant remember..the only way u would find out is if it went to court..

 

Did u CCA Apex or Halifax??

 

Quoting how far i am down the line ..as i said in the last post mine has been passed from 1 DCA to another ..they have now passed it back to halifax..not heard a word in 2 mths..maybe they know i have an invalid DEFAULT notice..instead of me paying the full amount wich is 16.000 they are only entitled to the arrears on default notice wich is about 2.000..mind you there are unlawful charges on there so they will prob end up with not alot ;)..If the cca did turn out enforcable ..wich i think its not ..and it went to court ..the judge will never ask you to pay more than u can afford..and also if they issued court papers then u defend on the basis of the CCA they sent you ..stating what you think is wrong with it..Are u a home owner?? employed ??

 

Did you get a notice of assignment from Apex and halifax??

 

Have you been issued with a default notice??

 

There is a guy on here called fingers he has the same CCa he is getting his looked at proffesionally to see if it enforcable or not...Look up another thread SUSSEX1 i think thats a good thread bout a CCa the same as yours

Edited by babydoll0141917
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there thanks for your time.

I cca'd apex who then asked halifax for the cca, also we did recieve a notice of assignment

just typing out my SAR's to mbna.barclaycard, egg and halifax, think i've had enough now just going to see what they've got on me, start stirring the ****

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...