Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • 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

PPI amalgamated into loan repayment?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5075 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 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

yes on the statement scans shows you interest being added on the balance them ppi prem added after that's how i cannot see any interst on the ppi

 

ida x

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello flyboyagain,

 

I have had a look at your posts and links. Now I am no financial expert but I would say you are indeed paying interest on the PPI.

 

The loan of £13000 would appear to include the insurance and IMO the loan and the PPI should be broken down into separate areas.

 

One for the loan amount with the interest rate

 

One for the PPI amount with the interest rate.

 

Your loan by virtue of the fact it is one loan amount that the PPI premium would be a single premium PPI which have now been banned.

 

I do not believe they can amalgamate the PPI into the loan amount and if they have they should clearly show the breakdown between loan figure and PPI figure on the Agreement.

 

You are paying interest on the PPI amount but who can tell what the loan amount was or the PPI amount was as single figures?

 

They have however managed to show the monthly PPI premium separately from the loan amount figure.

 

If you feel you were pressured into taking PPI cover on their say so then that is clearly mis-selling.

 

Please have a look through these links to get the info on the ways PPI has been mis-sold... PPI - Some Notes for Claimants..

 

Mis-sold PPI? Want your money back? use these links to help

 

these are from the mis-sold ppi link

 

THIS LINK IS IMPORTANT TO YOU ON RECLAIMING IT IS FROM 2001 FROM THE FOS

loan payment protection insurance and a quote from this link...

 

Quote:

When determining whether a policy is suitable, a seller – whether a lender or an agent for the insurer – must obviously take into consideration any information the prospective policyholder volunteers. However, we do not consider the seller’s duty is limited simply to recording what the borrower discloses. It is only by asking questions that the seller can properly determine suitability. These questions cannot cover every aspect of a borrower’s personal position and should not be expected to do so. To paraphrase the ABI Statement, only those matters deemed to be relevant by the insurer should be the subject of questions.

For claims before 2005 and the FSA ruling from which campaign

How to tell if you’ve been mis-sold PPI

 

Quick check: were you mis-sold? - How to tell if you’ve been mis-sold

 

PPI

 

there is a stack of other stuff that could help you as well.

 

 

From your post 11

 

My two main points are:-

 

1) Is the PPI allowed to be lumped in with the loan?

 

2) Is the agreement enforceable?

 

If Yes to 1), then the loan (credit) limit is incorrect. It's incorrect, anyway, as the repayments, as stated , are only meant to incude the laon, the admin fee and interest. Nowhere does it state that PPI is to be included in that figure! Also, there is no credit limit stated

 

 

for answers to your 1 and 2 see this: It is from the debt collection forum.

 

Is My Agreement Enforceable - Useful

 

 

you should get some answers there and you can also start a thread of your own to ask for further assistance.

 

bit long but hope it helps you.

 

aa

  • Haha 2

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry fly to nip yir heed again,

 

think iv'e got it.

 

the 13000 was for the loan and PPI. I thought the 13000 was what you got!

 

please tell i am right :confused:

 

 

Ida x

Please contact a member of the site team if you are offered help off the forum for a a paid or no win no fee service.

 

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

Click here to donate through PayPal (opens in a new window)

Link to post
Share on other sites

See this is what was confusing me...and to be honest, if the agreement was correct it shouldn't be this confusing or needing a huge discussion to see whats been borrowed!

 

They have not shown the Total Credit, Total Charge for Credit, what your PPI premium was, whether it was a single premium being added to the total credit - no Total amount payable, nothing!

 

Its one of the worst, most confusing agreements I've ever seen lol

Edited by Dipply75
spelling

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry fly to nip yir heed again,

 

think iv'e got it.

 

the 13000 was for the loan and PPI. I thought the 13000 was what you got!

 

please tell i am right :confused:

 

 

Ida x

 

 

 

The loan was for £13K. The PPI was a condition to us getting the loan as was the loan being tied to the house.

Edited by FlyboyAgain
Revision
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK now we've sorted that out:). Whats the next move, do you want to claim all the |PPI back or stop paying because of a dodgy agreement?

 

 

Stop paying? Good Lord, no! Not with the house involved! This one is going to be a slow burner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See this is what was confusing me...and to be honest, if the agreement was correct it shouldn't be this confusing or needing a huge discussion to see whats been borrowed!

 

They have not shown the Total Credit, Total Charge for Credit, what your PPI premium was, whether it was a single premium being added to the total credit - no Total amount payable, nothing!

 

Its one of the worst, most confusing agreements I've ever seen lol

 

The PPI premium is there, Dipply: £14.85. But I agree with you 100% on your other observations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to Site Team as well for their insights. In fact, thanks to everyone!

 

It is a mess of an agreement and has shown how gullible people can be when looking to consolidate. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, though, and I doubt I even stopped to look at that agreement back then whereas I would go over it with a spyglass now. Which is exactly waht I am doing.

 

Y'know I'm not trying to dodge out of my debts, but HBoS did really cruel and uncaring things to my wife and I a few years back and I have longed for my revenge upon them and all that carry-on on with their DCA over the last few years has reignited that desire to get them. That's why I'm doing this. And also to teach them a lesson.

Edited by FlyboyAgain
spelling;additions
Link to post
Share on other sites

Defo on the PPI, the S127 route will most likely end up with them trashing your credit files, so bear that in mind

 

They're trashed, anyway. But why and, indeed, how could they be allowed to do that if I won?

Link to post
Share on other sites

And heres my argument,

Consequently, where (which appears frequently to be the case) a borrower was told at

the time of taking out a loan that the taking of PPI was a condition of the loan or that

the loan would not be granted without the inclusion of the PPI, then the PPI would be

classed as mandatory insurance under paragraph 4 of the 1980 regulations and should

form part of the charge for credit. If in such circumstances the PPI was included in the

amount of credit rather than the charge for credit then the agreement will fail to

comply with the 1983 Regulations and will be unenforceable and in the case of

agreements entered into prior to 6th April 2007, as the amount of credit is a prescribed

term, the agreement will be irredeemably unenforceable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And heres my argument,

Consequently, where (which appears frequently to be the case) a borrower was told at

the time of taking out a loan that the taking of PPI was a condition of the loan or that

the loan would not be granted without the inclusion of the PPI, then the PPI would be

classed as mandatory insurance under paragraph 4 of the 1980 regulations and should

form part of the charge for credit. If in such circumstances the PPI was included in the

amount of credit rather than the charge for credit then the agreement will fail to

comply with the 1983 Regulations and will be unenforceable and in the case of

agreements entered into prior to 6th April 2007, as the amount of credit is a prescribed

term, the agreement will be irredeemably unenforceable.

 

 

Good arguement; my sentiments exactly, but can you back it up with legislation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here I took that little bit from the linked pdf, have a read.:)

http://www.stjameschambers.co.uk/PPI%20Nathan%20Banks.pdf

 

The link seems ok for virus.

 

Useful link bazaar would you mind if I copied it into my links thread in the stickies? It could help others on the road to reclaiming :grin:

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Useful link bazaar would you mind if I copied it into my links thread in the stickies? It could help others on the road to reclaiming :grin:

 

Not at all, anything that'll help people is what its all about:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...