Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So technically you could push it via the courts with the clause in the AST (I remember seeing something about this recently)  However if one has left the country - It might make it hard to recover it all from the others.    How would you look to bring action against all parties involved? Do you know where all of them currently are?  You can service to last known address but as you know they have moved on - It could be held against you by a judge if it goes all the way.    I think you need to consult a solicitor on this one - Its a complex claim against multiple people rather than a simple Creditor vs Debtor claim we see here. 
    • Initially, the property was let to four foreign students, but they are no longer on student visas. During midterm, two of them moved out, and two new friends of theirs moved in, one of whom is the lead tenant's British girlfriend. The lead tenant got married to a her and became a dependent who is now one of the tenants in the AST agreement. The third tenant found a work permit visa, and the fourth left the country a few months ago. Recent contract only three.  Please see the attached AST, which seems that I may be able to claim any costs exceeding the deposit. All ASTs were signed electronically using the MUDHUT template. AST-name removed.pdf
    • I'm sorry Mystic I did miss it. My wife went into hospital around that time so while I read your WS I missed the Excel case and never had the time to respond to your WS. Fortunately Dave has done pretty much what I would have done though I would have added the point I made on post 117 . It's partly to embarrass UKPC in the hope that they withdraw the case and if they don't perhaps the Judge might query their truthful declaration. And I would still use the fact that being broken down is not parking as well as creating a frustration of contract. The Judge in Jopson v Homeguard spells out quite clearly what parking is and is not. He didn't use car breakdown as one of his examples but had he done so it would have been appropriate. It's just another argument to disincline UKPC from continuing. I know it's a bit of a hassle to alter your WS again but if it changes UKPC from pursuing you , it would be worthwhile.
    • You need to title your exhibits - EXHIBIT 1, EXHIBIT 2, etc. - and add them to the end of the WS. You can use the attached as EXHIBIT 3, you just need the one page, not the whole CoP. The WS and the five exhibits need to be e-mailed to both the court and UKPC.  You might as well hang on till Sunday just in case the other regulars have ideas. 17_extracted_Version91.2.2024.pdf
  • 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
      • 160 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/BOS saying section 78 DOES NOT require signature ???


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5384 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,

 

I have sent off the CCA requests to Halifax/BOS some time ago. I did not get any response from them at all despite sending the second letter 12 days later.

 

Then last week (3 months later). I received a letter from Halifax with a copy of a Credit Card Agreement and Conditions of Use, these documents were not originals but have clearly came straight off a printer, they do not have any dates, signatures, address, names or anything. It comes with a covering letter which states :-

 

"Please note that the information we have provided you with is all the information we are required to provide you with under section 78 of the consumer credit act. Please also note that we are not required to provide a copy of the original signed agreement under section 78 of the consumer credit act"

 

Please advise what I need to do now as I thought they were required to send the original copy to enable them to enforce it and I am not sure how to respond !

 

Thanks for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correction - on the CCA they have clerly typed in my current address (I was at a different address when I applied for this card) and on the conditions form it has my old address.

 

It is all undated and unsigned and the only siganture boxes available are cancellation ones. It does have a credit limit and interest rates.

 

Please advise.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be tempted to send them Scots letter below & see what their response is;

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

Thank you for your recent letter sent to me, the contents of which are noted. I appreciate your quick response to my original letter. However, the reply received by me does not fulfil your requirements under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The Act demands that I be supplied with a true copy of any properly executed credit agreement that exists in relation to the above account. I may ask for this on demand providing that a fee of £1.00 is paid. This fee was sent with my original letter.

 

My request remains outstanding. The items you sent in your reply, does not constitute a true copy of any credit agreement that may or may not have been signed by me on the opening of this account. It neither confirms that I am liable for any alleged debt to you, nor gives me any chance to evaluate whether any original agreement was ‘properly executed’.

 

I still require you to send me a true copy of the original credit agreement that you allege exists. As you will know, under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a judge is not permitted to make any enforcement order unless the creditor can provide a true signed copy of the original credit agreement. This means that unless you can produce such an agreement, this alleged debt is not enforceable in law.

 

You had until XX/XX/2008 to provide me with the true copy I requested. You are now in default of my request. Any account I hold with you is now in legal dispute. Whilst the account remains in dispute, you are not permitted to ask for any payment, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you. Furthermore, whilst the dispute remains, you are not entitled to charge any interest on the account, nor make any further charges to the account. Additionally, you are not entitled to register any information on this account with any credit reference agency.

 

To register information with a credit reference agency, you must have written consent from the customer to collate and share such information. This consent is given in the form of a signed credit agreement, so until you produce such an agreement, you may not do this.

 

The requirement for consent to share data is a clear requirement of the Data Protection Act 1998. any such attempts to share my data without my consent will be met with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office

 

To sum up, I will not be making any further payments to you until you provide me with the document I have requested. Whilst you remain in default of my request, you are not permitted to take any action against this account. This includes adding further charges and passing any information to the credit reference agencies.

 

Should you not have any signed credit agreement in relation to this alleged debt, please confirm this in writing to me.

 

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

Print name do not sign

 

**amend to suit your circumstances.**

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...