Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • occysrazor
      Evri lost my Ebay parcel £844 - court claim issued ***Judgment***

      By occysrazor · Posted

      Thank you everyone!  thought to share some points from my experience in court today that may help others who are taking Evri to court: The judge sets out how the hearing will go and how each party should behave; while i was certainly feeling anxious/nervous ahead of the hearing (and I'm sure @jk2054 may have also observed this), the judge really does try to put any non-legal persons at ease; refrain from talking to the other party and instead speak to the judge if you have any questions/responses; the judge and the advocate spoke about tort of negligence - i wasn't sure how this applied to my case but the judge was questionning the advocate about this so i chose to stay out of this; the judge made reference to a historical case of Donaghue v Stevenson which established a duty of care; the judge observed that some of the points in Evri's witness statement by george wood needed cross examination but george was not present today for questionning; While i was claiming 8% interest, the judge pointed out that is the upper limit and that today, savings accounts give 4-5%. I therefore opted for 5% interest which was agreed to by the judge and the advocate; above all else, ensure you know your court bundle and have any notes to help you refer to specific sections - it helped me to structure my answers to the judge/defendant's queries, and point to specific evidence where i was asked to prove e.g., the value of the item. @honeybee13 - yes, will confirm when payment is received. I have emailed the Evri.claims email with my bank details and also provided them after the hearing to the advocate. @BankFodder message received and i am replying to it
    • dx100uk
      Studio returns problems.

      By dx100uk · Posted

      Looks promising then.  Well done   Dx
    • JustAnOldGal
      Studio returns problems.

      By JustAnOldGal · Posted

      So a little update.  I sent a complaint to ico and have heard nothing. I just got the general reply email and that's it.  Sat twiddling my thumbs and thought about what I should do next. I searched for the CEO of Studio but then found that he'd left so as keep getting letters from studio about the arrears etc. I thought I'd email the David Twigg. Sent him all the bumpft and a copy of my original complaint and sars request.  Got no response. So didn't know what else to do. Then I thought I'd try through the financial difficulties option on the online form. One last try before I just give up and let them default me.  Then on the 5th June. I got an email from their customer services. That the items that had gone AWOL have all been cancelled. Nothing else on that email, so I had a look in an email account that I don't use anymore and there was an email from the customer service.  That they were sorry for the problems I've had for the last 9 months. That the sars info was emailed to me on 14/04, it wasn't I've kept all spam and deleted emails on that account, they have raised a complaint with their studio pay team regarding the issues, balance dispute, fee's and my credit file. They are hoping to resolve in 3 days but they have upto 56. They also said in regards to my other issues I have to raise a complaint with studio retail but haven't told me how I do that.  The sars info only goes upto the end of December 2023. It has my previous complaints on there but nothing after so I don't know how I get hold of that information. Luckily I've kept copies of every time I've contacted them. Every web chat or social media contact.  Apologies for the extremely long post but I wanted to add everything I could just incase.  I have checked my account balance and it's still minus 900 odd pounds but I'll keep checking to see if it's all cleared and on my credit file.  I'm hoping this is the end of the whole debacle and they close my account because I never want to do this again. Although it's been a learning experience.  Thanks to dx100uk for pointing me in the right direction. Much appreciated.   
    • NewsBot
      RBS International (clone of FCA authorised firm)

      By NewsBot · Posted

      Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • FTMDave
      MET/DCB(L) windscreen PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - electric bay abuse - ASDA Arla Old Dairy South Ruislip ***Claim Discontinued***

      By FTMDave · Posted

      If you want to cause DCBL trouble, then complain to the SRA.  It would be even more fun if mystic_bertie would complain at the same time, to show the SRA there is a pattern.

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Help with Egg Please

Honeypot

By Honeypot
in Debt Collection Agencies

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5216 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 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

vint1954

vint1954

Posted
Posted

Hi Honeypot. Have they paid your charges back yet: AC and BRW have covered this in great depth earlier in the thread.

 

They have already advised that the DN is faulty, where the arrears is made up of charges and arrears.

 

You say that your agreement is enforcable, however the regulations surrounding electronic signatures only, ( I am fairly sure but you need to check ) came in to force during 2006, so for this agreement they would have needed a signature as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
banker_rhymes_with

banker_rhymes_with

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hello Honeypot!

 

Further to vint1954's comments, I would not get too upset by the latest letter.

 

These cretins are only in business to harass and intimidate, it is what they do, so no need to get spooked when ever one pops up on your scope.

 

I regret I can't read the letter, it is just a bit too small. But take a good look at it, and see if ARC are now the owners of the alleged Debt, or if they are simply a gob on a stick being pointed at you by Egg.

 

If they do not own the alleged Debt, then they have no way to take you to Court themselves, and any threat to do so is nonsense.

 

It is also a likely breach of The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

 

I would keep the Default Notice issue to yourself, and never mention that until someone does take you to Court. That is the Ace up your sleeve, and the last thing you want to do is warn them they have trouble ahead if they wish to push the issue.

 

I do appreciate you feel the need to tell them the good news, but I regret it does not work like that in reality.

 

Egg will keep bothering you, but they will also keep bothering many other people too. If they do not do it themselves, then they will employ the pond life DCAs to do it for them. They may threaten Court, but taking that step is a big jump for them too, they incur Costs, and they will only do so if they are sure they have a chance, or if they think you are likely to think they are in with a chance.

 

Maybe send the latest DCA a CCA Request, just to make it clear you are informed, and while you are at it, maybe direct them to the above Act (CPUTR 2008 ). The point there, is many people they deal with have no idea about CAG, CCA or CPUTR 2008, so letting them know you do, might just be enough to make them wander off and seek a softer target.

 

In the interim, have another look at that Agreement, and see if it is really as water tight as all that. Even if someone on CAG thinks it might be enforceable, that is likely to be an opinion, however well considered. They may have missed something, so having another look might be productive.

 

You also have the Charges to fire back at them, and I would hold back on them until you need to bring them out of your bottom drawer in order to exploit to your full advantage.

 

In summary, no need to rush a response to ARC, take your time.

 

Make sure you kept the Envelope in which the ARC letter came, because that may help you one day. Keep all Envelopes no matter what, and pin them to the back of the letter.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Edited by banker_rhymes_with
Smiley Zap!
Link to post
Share on other sites
wacka006

wacka006

Posted
Posted

Hi folks,

 

Im newly registered but have been reading the site and views for a while.

My problem lies with 2 credit cards I hold.........1 with EGG and 1 with BARCLAYCARD.

 

Ok so here goes, BARCLAYCARD failed to lift a payment after i phoned them with my bank details, i dont know why they failed with this but they did. Ever since I have been being charged with interest and late payment charges as i have refuased to pay them, this has went on for about 5 months now so I used a letter to request my agreement and also told them of my worries that they were wrong in charging me as initially it was their fault! So they replied but have sent me my "Terms & Conditions" and didnt even answer my queries about the charges??

 

Are they correct or should they send me my initially signed agreement.

 

EGG have been fair, never missed payments but im getting nowhere fast with my payments so i advised them i was struggling to pay and requested my agreement aswell. No return as yet and i sent it about 2 weeks ago.

 

Thanks in advance folks, i really appreciate all your help and advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
king123

king123

Posted
Posted

Sorry to jump in, but Honeypot directed me here from her newer thread.

 

Can I just ask on what basis in law does the inclusion of penalty charges make a default notice invalid? I would say pretty much all of my defaulted accounts had charges on them and if what you're saying is correct this could be very useful to me! For reference, this is my Egg thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
banker_rhymes_with

banker_rhymes_with

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hello Folks!

 

Can I just ask on what basis in law does the inclusion of penalty charges make a default notice invalid?
Woodchester v Swayne & Co [1998] EWCA Civ 1209 (14 July 1998 )

 

This part is useful...

 

It is worth remembering that very often these type of contracts are, in fact, complicated in themselves, quite apart from the question of any default, that those who draw up the contracts, that is to say, the finance companies, have necessarily the obligation of being able to calculate what is owing thereunder.

 

As Mr Hodgkinson points out, the words of Section 88 (1) require the lender to "specify" not only the nature of the breach - which in this case was adequately described as failure to pay the rental specified on their due dates - but also what action is required to remedy the breach. In the context of this case that meant specifying accurately what sum of money had to be paid.

And this...

 

Here we are dealing with a statute which, for good and obvious reasons, requires a lender or owner to set out precisely what needs to be done to put right the alleged breach of contract. If a sum of money has to be paid it needs to be "specified". And if the figure given is more than the sum which the giver of the notice is entitled to demand, the notice, in my judgment, must be invalid.
Cheers,

BRW

Edited by banker_rhymes_with
Added bold
Link to post
Share on other sites
Honeypot

Honeypot

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

Here we are dealing with a statute which, for good and obvious reasons, requires a lender or owner to set out precisely what needs to be done to put right the alleged breach of contract. If a sum of money has to be paid it needs to be "specified". And if the figure given is more than the sum which the giver of the notice is entitled to demand, the notice, in my judgment, must be invalid.

 

 

'the giver of the notice is entitled to demand' seems important here to me.

 

If they are entitled to add penalty charges to the account then doesnt the above fall apart as the figure quoted on the DN will be higher?

 

Vicky

xxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites
banker_rhymes_with

banker_rhymes_with

Posted
Posted

Hello Vicky!

 

If the charges were unlawful, then I can't see how they would be entitled to demand them.

 

So, yes, their Default Notice would indeed fall apart if the default sum they wanted included sums they had no right to claim.

 

Beware the de minimis argument, but nothing in the above Case actually says that an error is acceptable. The Judge simply comments that a very small error may, I repeat may, be overlooked. He was clearly thinking along the lines of a few pence I would think, but the Judge only mentions this in passing.

 

The banks and DCAs are using the de minimis tactic to try and get them out of all sorts of problems with their Default Notices, and it's rubbish. Jump all over anyone who tries to evade real problems by trying to lump them under this vague Latin phrase.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites
banker_rhymes_with

banker_rhymes_with

Posted
Posted

Hello Vicky!

 

One last question are late charges & overlimit charges actually unlawful?

 

I'm not that experienced with Credit Card Charge re-claims, but I think if you read the Threads on CAG, you'll see that Credit Card Charges are unaffected by the the bank Account charge issue.

 

I won't embarrass myself by saying more, but read the Threads, and I think you will see that it is still Open Season on Card Charges!

 

They are still a safe Claim, and you will get that money back. If so, then they had no right to demand any payment that included them.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites
hackedoff007

hackedoff007

Posted
Posted (edited)
Agreement date: 2nd August 2005:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2789397.html

 

Looks like EGG have cocked up, again

 

 

What in laymans terms does this mean? (excuse my ignorance) My EGG agreement is dated Feb 2005? I assume if an agreement after may 05 it must conform to the new layout and terms? As mine is pre may 05 and as far as i can see has more flaws than a couterfeitors template!!!!

Edited by hackedoff007
Link to post
Share on other sites
Honeypot

Honeypot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
What in laymans terms does this mean? (excuse my ignorance) My EGG agreement is dated Feb 2005? I assume if an agreement after may 05 it must conform to the new layout and terms? As mine is pre may 05 and as far as i can see has more flaws than a couterfeitors template!!!!

 

Hi Hacked Off

 

My mate has a card dated feb 05 and hers has the words approved limit not credit limit (like mine). They must have rectified their errors after Feb 05. I've read these agreements are more likely to be flawed than the later ones. Check yours again.

 

Vicky

xxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...