Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
  • 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

Squidward V Abbey Card MBNA


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5421 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 All

 

I have been posting in the General debt Issues forum but think it's time to

move it here I hope it's now found it's home !

 

The History,

 

On the 1st April 09 I sent a CCA Request to Abbey card MBNA to which I no reply On the 22nd April I put the Account into dispute and stopped paying them Had various phone calls to my home mobile and work :eek: many of the calls I ignored and a couple I answered just to ask were my CCA was!

 

Well today 22nd June I received the CCA the tear off strip variety with current T&C's, now my question is this enforceable as it looks to have the T&C's printed onto both sides and not within the 4 corners. It also refers to "condition 11" of the terms and conditions provided so a second document.

 

Para 1.4 (b) refers to other conditions in 2.4 3.5 and 3.6 there is no 3.5 or 3.6 ?

 

Any Ideas as to the enforceability of this CCA ?

 

Link to CCA Agreement

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2242346.html

 

Thanks

 

Squidward

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has the prescribed terms on one side and your signature on the other. It is enforceable unless you can persuade a court that the two bits are not part of the same document. However, I would say that the balance of probabilities is that they are. Unfortunately.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steven4064

 

Thank you for your reply

 

unfortunately they do seem to be the front and back of the agreement :mad:

 

Would there be any problems now in SAR and claiming back the charges?

 

Is there any other routes I can take as I really don't want to give these jokers any more of my money than I have to especially as I already paying 34.9% interest on a 9k balance !

 

Also while the account has been in dispute they have applied interest late payment and default charges no Default notice thou...

 

Any help on which way to go now gratefully received.

 

Cheers Squidward

 

P.S got this little gem in the post today.

scan0036copy.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you most certainly should reclaim charges. Start ASAP. If they take you to couurt in the meantime, countercalim for the charges.

 

And when I say charges, I mean charges plus the interest they levied on the charges at their rate of 30%, or whatever it is. And the 8% on top you are entilted to under s69 of the County Courts ACt 1984.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi One more question

 

The T&C's they sent are there current ones I believe they should have sent the T&C's from when the account was opened - does that mean there still in default or am I just clutching at straws ?

 

Cheers Squid ward

Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the regulations, they can send current T&Cs in reply to a request under s78. However, that doesn't constitute an enforceable agreement.

 

I have jsut explained this on another thread - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mbna/205714-cupcake-mbna-him.html#post2243723

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...