Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The problem is nuisance/ spoof calls could be coming from the UK or anywhere around the world ?   They are tricking caller display into showing number from "Example" 0161 123 4567" Manchester number, but the call can ordinate from the other side of the world.    BT and Ofcom are aware of this problem, but they are  not having much success in finding a solution as most these calls come from overseas and are outside the EU.   Another trick these scammers are using is, they have software set up on a computer that would dial every phone number Possible.   A computer with dial the code "Example" 0121 200 then dialling every number range from 0001 to 9999, then every time some answer call a operator is alerted, this is how scammers are even getting through to ex directory number.   Same with mobiles, a computer with dial the code "Example" 07661 then dialling every number range from 500000 to 599999.   Scammers are also using VOIP to make All these calls for very little cost to them or even free.   https://tinyurl.com/y64dvvh2     ...  
    • It is telling though that a week in and none of those contributors have had anything to say.
    • Before i fire off a SB letter to BW i have question.   I've read some threads re SB and there is some conflicting advice given   One is to send the SB, the other is not to as it invites letter tennis and the "yes it is, no it isnt"   Given that i have a PAPLOC, should i return that witin the 30 days, send the SB or do both?   Thanks   Martin
    • Thank you for your response. So the bit about being entitled to any VAT or PPI payments, are they entitled to this?
    • Thanks for your reply dx100uk appreciate your help. Is this the barred letter Updated Nov 19? So I not need to wait for agreement or send correspondence to Resolvecall? thanks 
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 4 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Claim Stayed – Due to Unenforceable CCA Test Cases.


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2968 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

right, i am led to believe that one of the cases at the comm court in london is going in an extremely positve manner for "our side" i.e the consumer side

 

i have to be careful in what info i give, but the agreement in question is most definately totally flawed with 3 prescribed term breaches.

 

the bank are again trying to use the defence of reporting to cras as not enforcement, but the arguments put forward by our side are destroying them and it seems 99% certain that the ruling will confirm that mcduff case was just that... a duff

 

and that if a lender is in default and then produces a flawed agreement or just terms and conditions... reporting them to cras is enforcement as is selling the account to a 3rd party.

 

stick that in your twisted mcduff case and smoke it.

 

you, and by you... i mean the Guests looking in... have always been on a loser.

 

and you have known it.

 

let the floodgates burst open with claims.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
right, i am led to believe that one of the cases at the comm court in london is going in an extremely positve manner for "our side" i.e the consumer side

 

i have to be careful in what info i give, but the agreement in question is most definately totally flawed with 3 prescribed term breaches.

 

the bank are again trying to use the defence of reporting to cras as not enforcement, but the arguments put forward by our side are destroying them and it seems 99% certain that the ruling will confirm that mcduff case was just that... a duff

 

and that if a lender is in default and then produces a flawed agreement or just terms and conditions... reporting them to cras is enforcement as is selling the account to a 3rd party.

 

stick that in your twisted mcduff case and smoke it.

 

you, and by you... i mean the Guests looking in... have always been on a loser.

 

and you have known it.

 

let the floodgates burst open with claims.

 

Baggio

 

Many thanks for your update, I can understand the need to be careful at this stage.

 

B40

Link to post
Share on other sites
right, i am led to believe that one of the cases at the comm court in london is going in an extremely positve manner for "our side" i.e the consumer side

 

i have to be careful in what info i give, but the agreement in question is most definately totally flawed with 3 prescribed term breaches.

 

the bank are again trying to use the defence of reporting to cras as not enforcement, but the arguments put forward by our side are destroying them and it seems 99% certain that the ruling will confirm that mcduff case was just that... a duff

 

and that if a lender is in default and then produces a flawed agreement or just terms and conditions... reporting them to cras is enforcement as is selling the account to a 3rd party.

 

stick that in your twisted mcduff case and smoke it.

 

you, and by you... i mean the Guests looking in... have always been on a loser.

 

and you have known it.

 

let the floodgates burst open with claims.

 

Lets hope the Judge sees it that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lets hope the Judge sees it that way.

 

if you catch a murderer... with dna evidence, the weapon, video evidence of the offence.... the judges can see whatever they want

 

not even the heaviest brown paper bag can shun the law of the land. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are right. There have never been any cases of the guilty walking free have there?:|

 

did i say that?

 

where the guilt is totally overriding.. i doubt it

 

miscarriages of justice due to a lack of real evidence are a different matter.

 

trust me, not even the largest brown paper bag will allow this to go against the consumer, the evidence and the LAW is overwhelmingly against the lenders on this occassion.

 

the mcduff case was a totally different matter, why cartel allowed that case to go forward is beyond most in the industry.

 

they done well to cover their connection to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
did i say that?

 

where the guilt is totally overriding.. i doubt it

 

miscarriages of justice due to a lack of real evidence are a different matter.

 

trust me, not even the largest brown paper bag will allow this to go against the consumer, the evidence and the LAW is overwhelmingly against the lenders on this occassion.

 

the mcduff case was a totally different matter, why cartel allowed that case to go forward is beyond most in the industry.

 

they done well to cover their connection to it.

 

OK Baggio, point taken. Keep us informed.:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the arguement submitted by the barrister in a case brought by some bank or other against a Mr Mitchell in the Leeds County Court and he was defended by CMC barrister who tried to argue that the fact that the agreement did not clearly state the credit limit rendered the agreement unenforceable.

Apparently Judge Langan reserved judgement yesterday but should hand it down in the next couple of weeks.

Whichever way it goes the other side is very likely to appeal but if the judgement is found to be against the lender it could have very significant implications

 

One of the prescribed terms within Schedule 6 of the Agreement Regulations is a term stating “the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or a statement that there is no credit limit”.It should be noted that the creditor has the option of choosing one of the three means of complying with the requirements of Schedule 6.In the present case the Claimant has most definitely not stated the credit limit within the credit agreement;it has not stated there is no credit limit.

That leaves only the option of stating”the manner in which the credit limit will be determined”.We are concerned therefore with the manner of determination.

It is submitted that the words” We set a credit limit and can change it.We will notify you of the limit and any changes” does not satisfy the requirements of Schedule 6.

The statement is meaningless in relation to how the credit limit will be set.

A determination is an ascertainment or fixing and the reference to “the manner” requires reference to some sort of methodology.

The claimant will no doubt respond that there are millions of credit agreements which use similar rubric and that the use of such phraseology has become an industry standard.But that misses the point .Parliament was quite specific in its requirements and as was found in Wilson v First County Trust there is no room fortolerance or deviation from the strict requirements of Schedule 6.If this case opens up floodgates then so be it.

What do the legal eagles on here think?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Any more news about the London case?

btw you look the spitting image of Owen Hargreaves :)

 

I look forward to any news as well.

Edited by pedross
Changed to avoid hijacking the thread.
Link to post
Share on other sites
has anyone had any dealings with Cartal Client review as they are a CMC and have contacted me, and are telling me some very good news and I really don't know if it is too good to be true.

 

Something to do with this, perhaps?

 

Case Law Update - Rosling King Blog Archive Banking Update: September 2009

Link to post
Share on other sites
Any more news about the London case?

btw you look the spitting image of Owen Hargreaves :)

lol

 

nothing new on the western front

 

its the end of this month that we get a number of rulings/updates

 

followed by the obvious appeals... tbf this could drag on for many many months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Thank you angry vat for that important piece of information. I did not take out any ppi but my loan will be fought on the grounds of unfair relationship. I was given a loan whilst I was on Income Support and on anti-depressants. My OH was self employed with no accounts, so if he failed to make payments how the hell would I have been able to, when my lender and broker were fully aware that I would not be able to meet the payments, yet they still loaned both of us the money.

 

I am waiting for some one from Client Cartel Review to get back to me and confirm if I have a case or not. I will be expected to pay a fee of £495 which is refundable if my case does not succeed, but the information I gave to the solicitor yesterday shocked her and she said that it would be very unlikely that I would lose my case. She is going for unenforcebility and said my case is very very strong.

 

I ain't got a clue what's going to happen but she said that my case is more likely to be settled before court as the lender does not want to go to court or cause ay bad publicity. Lets see what happens hey

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Fret,

 

 

I appreciate this is not on topic for this thread and using cmc's is frowned upon by many on here but I am using Cartel.

 

I can only give you my experience of them.

 

It sounds to me like you have had your visit from the Cartel Rep who sells you the process.

 

This is my first gripe. At that point I was informed the process would take approx 9-12 months. 12 months being the mortgage cases. I am now over 12 months and all I have had is questionnaires to fill out for 7 out of the 10 items I submitted with little or no feedback whatsoever on all but one of these case's to date.

I accept that in the early days there may have been a quicker turn around and as banks get wise to the systems it may add time. All they had to do was write to tell me and I would have been more patient however, not a word.

 

I then took the Cartel reps advice to put the cost of these claims on a card that would be paid off having been through their assessment procedure based on the likelihood of success.

 

Gripe two I am paying interest on that amount and have done so for over a year without an end in sight. My friend who put me in touch with Cartel in the first instance has had contact with them stating that although Cartel thought they had a case on two of his mortgages in fact they feel the case is not strong enough, even though it went for assessment. If this happens with the account I have placed the fees on I am in a position to have to pay it off having left it stood with interest for over a year.

 

As already mentioned I have had little feedback except for one case where they informed me that it was at the point of proceeding to court. However the solictors CCLS are awaiting for the outcome of a case due in court before proceeding. If I had not pushed for this information I would be still left in the dark. Even then the information provided was only just enough to keep me off the phone.

 

Mentioning the phone gripe 3, if you wish to speak to anyone regarding your cases you can phone them. After ending up leaving a recorded message with a promise of a call back you never receive one. I have done this numerous times with the same result. Nothing.

 

Gripe 4 questionnaires. You will get these through the post probably your second piece of contact with them since an acknowledgement letter you receive at the outset. Again previously mentioned but I still have not received anything at all for three items I submitted over a year ago. The questionnaires ask you to repeat information already provided or what is contained within the original documents. You will be doing the work for a company you have paid up front to employ and will be be claiming legal expenses at the back end from whichever credit company. In essence paid twice for work you have done for them.

 

Gripe 5,Lost documents. Fortunately I have scanned all the documents I have sent them. I was requested to pass onto them some original agreement documents which I did. Eight months later I was asked again for the same items. I pointed out to them that they had already been sent. To date I still do not know if they have been found after numerous phone calls many of which have gone unanswered. Considering the importance of such documents in a case based on their contents I am genuinely concerned.

 

So to summarise, if you want to use a company that makes promises of success to find out a year later it is not the case. Be left in the dark for months on end frustrated at the lack of contact from them or opportunity to speak to someone about the progress of something you have paid £500 in advance for then use Cartel.

 

Why am I still with them??( I can see you asking )

 

Because I have been committed to them for over a year now in the hope I get a result on at least one case to get my money back.

There may be other reputable CMC's to look at or use these guys to have a go yourself. Something I should have done however daunting it may seem.

Edited by BoristheBlade
Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you angry vat for that important piece of information. I did not take out any ppi but my loan will be fought on the grounds of unfair relationship. I was given a loan whilst I was on Income Support and on anti-depressants. My OH was self employed with no accounts, so if he failed to make payments how the hell would I have been able to, when my lender and broker were fully aware that I would not be able to meet the payments, yet they still loaned both of us the money.

 

I am waiting for some one from Client Cartel Review to get back to me and confirm if I have a case or not. I will be expected to pay a fee of £495 which is refundable if my case does not succeed, but the information I gave to the solicitor yesterday shocked her and she said that it would be very unlikely that I would lose my case. She is going for unenforcebility and said my case is very very strong.

 

I ain't got a clue what's going to happen but she said that my case is more likely to be settled before court as the lender does not want to go to court or cause ay bad publicity. Lets see what happens hey

 

Thats interesting!

Who is/was the lender?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Way to go David Jack!

__________________________________________

I came into this world with nothing and I still have most of it left.

__________________________________________

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...