Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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

disputed claim passed on


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5267 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

I today received a letter from DLC regarding a disputed claim from Sainsburys bank. I requested a CCA from Iqor who were the DCA at the time and received a copy of an aplication form. I then heard no more from them. The letter today says they have taken over the collection of the alleged debt from HBOS and the debt is now owned by Hillesden Securities LTD trading as DLC.

 

The usual bumph about having 30 days to pay or else etc.

 

Where HBOS come into it I don't know. What should I do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Amend this...........

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

Dear Sir or Madam,

Account number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

 

I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to yourselves, as it is in dispute with the **original creditor/DCA** and has been since DATE 2009.

Not only is this a breach of OFT collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998

 

My last letter from **original creditor/DCA** was DATE and intimated that my complaint would be resolved on **DATE**, this obviously hasn’t happened.

As **original creditor/DCA** are now in default of my Consumer Credit Act request, OFT Collection Guidelines, *Subject Access request and have also breached *s10 Data Protection Act request , I consider this account to be in SERIOUS DISPUTE.

 

As you are aware while my Consumer Credit Act request remains in default enforcement action is NOT permitted, under s127 this constitutes a complete defence at law.

 

Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS.

 

Now I would respectfully suggest that this account is returned to the **original creditor/DCA** for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as **New DCA** cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities.

 

If **New DCA** chooses to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action.

 

After taking advice, I am of the opinion that any continued pursuit is in violation of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well as breaching a number of the OFT Collection Guidelines

 

I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

Regards.

 

Scott.

  • Haha 1
Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a template for this letter or do I just compose something myself?

 

Devo beat me to it, send the above..

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Me again. :grin:

 

I sent the above letter ( the one in the post above this one) to Hilsden Securites and they have sent me a letter dated 25th 09 saying they have suspended the account and requested the CCA from the origional creditor.

But with it they have sent all my statements from 14th of July 2003. In those statments there are charges for "credit care insurance" stated as being 69p per £100 nd there are all sorts of other charges like overlimit fees, late payment fees and interest. It makes interesting reading. The last payment I made we contacted them to say we wanted to make arrangements to pay and interest stopped being added shows I paid £50, but the interest was £51.21 and the over limit fee was £21. So I wasn't even covering the interest yet they still pilled on more fees.

 

The last "credit care" payment they took was on 15 09 2005 and was £29.70. Am I right in assuming I can claim some of these fees back and if so which ones?

 

Just one more question. Was HBOS the bank that Sainsbury used?

Edited by starling
Link to post
Share on other sites

Any charge applied to an account should be a. stated in the terms and conditions of the agreement, if it isn't there then they can';t charge it

and any charge applied ie late payment, overdraft charge etc should be in line with what it actually costs them.

 

If they charge you say £30 for exceeding your overdraft, then they would need to prove that it costs them £30 every time you go overdrawn.

 

If the charges applied to your account don't fall into the aforementioned criteria, then they are unlawful and should be reclaimed, in the case of ppi, if you didn't know what it was, then it's unlikely to be legitimate and should be reclaimed

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much is considered to be a reasonable amount?The last payment before we contacted them and interest etc was stopped was as follows.Overlimit fee £25Late fee £25Credit care £27.16interest £45.41As for the PPI I was never working as I am disabled and the ppi should never have been added as it is, as I understand, to cover you for unemployment.Where do I find the terms and conditions if I don't have a CCA?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much is considered to be a reasonable amount?The last payment before we contacted them and interest etc was stopped was as follows.Overlimit fee £25Late fee £25Credit care £27.16interest £45.41As for the PPI I was never working as I am disabled and the ppi should never have been added as it is, as I understand, to cover you for unemployment.Where do I find the terms and conditions if I don't have a CCA?

 

It doesn't matter whether the fees are considered to be "reasonable" or not, it's down to whether they can prove that the charge is representative of their cost, the costs that you have stated are most definately over the top by anyones standards and shold be reclaimed.

 

as for the Terms and Condisions of the account, you should be requesting the CCA at your earliest opportunity, usual CAG advice applies, ie. no phone calls, everything in writing, sign nothing and make sure you send everything recorded (registered is better) get proof of postage and delivery. at the very least this will prove if they have a legal right to collect against the debt.

 

If you are confident that the PPI shouldn't have been applied and/or it has been missold, then you should begin action to reclaim it.

 

The CCA letter and the process for reclaiming charges and PPI are elsewhere (in the templates library) in this forum, take a little time to browse the other threads on this and you will find that the process is quite straightforward.

 

I have just reclaimed nearly £500 from Halifax and it took me 2only 2 letters to do so, other institutions might not roll over as easilly, but they all know thast they have to repay the money, so will bottle it long before it gets to court

Link to post
Share on other sites

I requested the CCA, too long ago to remember. They have since passed the debt to 2 other companies and the company I am dealing with now, is called Hillsden securities, who have suspended the accout until HBOS find the CCA and it is Hillsden who have sent the statments.

The late fees and the over limit fees alone add up to £325. I haven't added up the credit care or interest yet and the are also a couple of payments called "card protection" of £18.

 

I will find out how to claim them back and get on to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hilsden sucurties are just not getting it. They have sent me a copy of an aplication form, the same one Iqor sent, along with an indept copy of a credit card agreement printed on A4 paper.

There is no sign of a sig on the printout.

 

The thing is this was already in dispute with iqor so they have ignored the latter I sent "account in dispute". They say my account will be restarted on a date I can't remember offhand. What should I do next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did DLC specifically say they had bought the account? If so, did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor before the OC sold the account? If they sold the account without issuing you with a DN, the account was unlawfully rescinded at the point of sale, which means 2 things 1) DLC have no right to be asking you for money for a rescinded account as they have no lawful right to be processing your personal data and 2) the OC could only ask you for any arrears up to the time the account was sold but they would have a hard time doing that as they no longer own the account. DLC are plonkers and keep purchasing accounts without the correct legal paperwork.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry dut I don't really understand. Who are the DLC?

 

 

Hillesden Securities LTD trading as DLC.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ohhh, sorry about that. Things are all begining to blur at the edges and run into one big mess.

 

Right What does a default notice look like? I've had many letters saying pay up or else, but not sure if that is a default notice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No - a Default Notice is not a letter asking for money. A DN is a Notice served under Section 87 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (or 2006) and has that as a heading. It gives you (or should give you) 14 days to remedy the alleged breach of the agreement by paying the arrears (stating the sum of arrears) then tells you what the creditor will do if you do not remedy the breach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...