Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi T911 and welcome to CAG. As you say, an interesting screw up. So much for quality control! Anyway, our regular advice is to ignore all of their increasingly threatening missives... UNLESS you get a letter of claim, then come back here and we'll help you write a "snotty letter" to help them decide whether to take it any further with their stoopid pics. If you get mail you're unsure of, just upload it for the team to have a look.
    • Thanks @lolerzthat's an extremely helpful post. There is no mention of a permit scheme in the lease and likewise, no variation was made to bring this system in. I recall seeing something like a quiet enjoyment clause, but will need to re-read it and confirm. VERY interesting point on the 1987 Act. There hasn't been an AGM in years and I've tried to get one to start to no avail. However, I'll aim to find out more about how the PPC was brought in and revert. Can I test with you and others on the logic of not parking for a few months? I'm ready to fight OPS, so if they go nuclear on me then surely it doesn't matter? I assume that I will keep getting PCNs as long as I live here, so it doesn't make sense for me to change the way that I park?  Unless... You are suggesting that having 5 or so outstanding PCNs, will negatively affect any court case e.g. through bad optics? Or are we trying to force their hand to go to court with only 2 outstanding PCNs?
    • That is so very tempting.   They are doing my annual review as we speak and I'm waiting for their response once I have it I will consider my next steps.    The debt camel website mentioned above is amzing and helping to. Education me alot    
    • Sending you a big hug. I’m sorry your going through this. The letters they send sound aweful, and the waiting game for them to stop. But these guys seem so knowledgable and these letters should stop. Hang in there, and keep in touch. Don’t feel alone 
    • In my time I've never seen a payout/commission from a PPC to a landlord/MA. Normally the installation of all the cameras/payment of warden patrols etc is free but PPCs keep 100% of the ticket revenue. Not saying it doesn't happen mind. I've done some more digging on this: Remember, what your lease doesn't say is just as important as what it does say. If your lease doesn't mention a parking scheme/employment of a PPC/Paying PCNs etc you're under no legal obligation to play along to the PPC's or the MA's "Terms and conditions". I highly doubt your lease had a variation in place to bring in this permit system. Your lease will likely have a "quiet enjoyment" clause for your demised space and the common areas and having to fight a PPC/MA just to park would breach that. Your lease has supremacy of contract, but I do agree it's worth keeping cool and not parking there (and hence getting PCNs) for a couple months just so that the PPC doesn't get blinded by greed and go nuclear on you if you have 4 or 5 PCNs outstanding. At your next AGM, bring it up that the parking controls need to be removed and mention the legal reasons why. One reason is that under S37(5b) Landlord and Tenant Act 1987,  more than 75% of leaseholders and/or the landlord would have needed to agree, and less than 10% opposed, for the variation to take place. I highly doubt a ballot even happened before the PPC was bought in so OPS even being there is unlawful, breaching the terms of your lease. In this legal sense,  the communal vote of the "directors" of the freehold company would have counted for ONE vote of however many flats there are (leases/tenants) + 1 (landlord). It's going to be interesting to see where this goes.  
  • 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

GE Money PPI on Mortgage & a Secured Loan


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4712 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 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks for the reply. Yes I would like some help with the POC please as I have not done this before, and I am looking to do with with cap one also :)

 

Your help is very much appreciated :D

 

Hi, Delcarik,

 

I think you'll enjoy the process, and the result even more!

 

Is your claim against Cap One a credit card charges claim? If so, have you got the statements for the last 6 years?

 

BAE :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, have the N1 form now and wanted to know what I put in the brief details of claim. Am I just putting there that I am claiming back charges relating to my account being in arrears ? Do I need to word it in a certain way?

 

Thanks for any help. Also, BAE are you able to help me with the POC? I don't know where to start with this :confused:

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Deli,

 

The brief details of claim section should specify the amounts you're claiming - so you need to do an estimate of the interest they've charged, (on their charges!) too. Don't get too wrapped up in getting a precise figure; if they complain about it being too much, they will have to provide a figure themselves.

 

Because it's at the court claim stage, you're also allowed to charge them 8% interest on the charges. Again, don't worry about getting an exact figure, just work it out as best you can.

 

* you can get rid of this part if you like - it's simply saying that you want to also claim from now until the day of judgment any further interest that is accrued. You work this out by doing the calculation below:

 

Amount of Claim x 0.00022

 

(so if amount of claim is £1200, you do £1200 x 0.00022 = £0.26 per day

 

So, something like this will suffice:

 

This is a money claim for the return of charges and associated interest applied to the Claimant's mortgage account, number XXXXXXXXXXXX by the Defendant.

 

Charges £xxx.xx

Interest on charges £xxx.xx

 

Interest at 8%, under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 £xxx.xx

*(and at a daily rate of £x.x until date of judgment)

 

TOTAL £ xxx.xx

BAE :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

. . . Just thought, the asterisk*** part of the previous post should be at the bottom!

 

Another thought - you can claim charges on your secured loan and mortgage on the same form, in case you weren't sure.

 

Now for the Particulars of Claim:

 

Below is a template which you can adapt to your circumstances - copy, paste, edit!

 

I would suggest you should also add a whole new paragraph to the PoC regarding the recent FSA fines etc, of which you will know more than me!

 

 

 

IN THE XXXXXX COUNTY COURT

 

 

BETWEEN

 

 

 

XXXXXXXX

 

 

Claimant

 

 

 

 

 

and

 

 

 

 

 

GE Money

 

Defendant

 

 

 

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

 

 

 

 

The Agreement

 

 

1. The Claimant entered into an agreement with the Defendant on X/XX/XX, whereby the Defendant advanced a sum to the Claimant under a mortgage account, Account no XXXXXXXX

 

Summary

 

2. Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerous default charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimum payment on the due date and / or if a payment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in the attached schedule of charges sent to the defendant on XX/X/XX ).

 

3. The default charges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreement, which were:

 

a). A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable: and or

 

b) An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant.

 

4. The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly added to the Account.

 

 

The Charges

 

5. The Charges consisted of various amounts of £XX, £XX and £XXX. For each of these charges, the defendant merely sent out one electronic letter to inform the claimant of the charge, which I estimate at costing approximately £1.00.

 

(Add any further details here on what GE money actually ‘do’ when you’re in arrears, eg phone call, letters. You are basically attempting to prove that their costs are much lower than the charges!!!)

 

6. The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage that would have been suffered by the defendant in relation to the Claimant’s transgressions. This is confirmed in law in the case of Castaneda and others vs Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Company. Ltd. (1904) when the House of Lords held that a contractual party can only recover damages for actual or liquidated losses incurred from a breach of contract. This was confirmed in Dunlop Pneumatic Co vs New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd. (1915), which held that a penalty clause is void in its entirety and therefore unenforceable.

 

7. Therefore the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thus unenforceable at common law.

 

 

 

 

 

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999,

 

8. At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations.

 

9. At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Charges were unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to the requirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant.

 

10. Without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contention that the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion of the Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms.

 

(a)The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated.

 

(b)The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract.

 

©The Charges exceeded the costs which the defendant could have expected to incur in dealing with late payment or returned payment.

 

(d) Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimant for their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within the ambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfair term.

 

(e) As the Defendant knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement.

 

(f) As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges.

 

(g) Hence, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to the customer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of the parties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Defendant in a way which was inequitable.

 

11. Without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that the terms imposing the Charges are not core terms under regulation 6 of the Regulations, and will rely on the following matters:

 

(a) The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms that define the main or core subject matter of the Agreement.

 

(b) The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in other words, whether or not the relevant services were value for money).

 

12. By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the UTCCR 1999 Regulations.

 

13. The Defendant wrongly applied Charges and Interest to the Account, estimated at totalling some £ XX.XX between X/X/X and X/X/X. The defendant attaches a copy of the schedule of charges sent to the defendant on X/XX/XX.

 

 

 

The claimant’s attempts to settle the dispute:

 

 

14. On, XX/X/X, XX/X/XX and X/XX/XX, the Claimant requested repayment of the sums wrongly applied. (put details of GE’s response here)

 

 

In Conclusion:

 

15. Therefore the Claimant claims:

 

(a) Payment of the said sum of £XXX.XX plus the amount of interest accrued between XX/XX/XX(date of first ever charge) and X/XX/XX,(date of last charge), which the claimant estimates at £XX.XX. Total £XX.XX

 

(b) Interest of £XX.XX, pursuant to the County Courts Act 1984 (s69) at the rate of 8%, and claimed up to X/X/XX, and thereafter at the daily rate of £X.XX to the date of judgement or sooner payment.

 

© Court costs.

 

 

 

 

I believe that the facts stated in these particulars are true.

 

 

 

 

Dated

 

 

 

 

 

Signed

 

BAE :)

Edited by Blossomandebony
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 8 months later...

Well, I am back, I have been poorly for some time now, had a really bad few months, and as a result have not been able to do this. Can I still proceed or will I need to go back to them and tell them my intentions again? Thing is, I have just had to put another complaint into them for their shoddy work, I have just cleared my arrears, had a letter stating that I only owed them £35 yet they took almost £90 extra which is what we had been paying, so of course I queried this only to be told we still owed another £155! I was mortified, apparently its arrears on PPI??? first I have heard!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all,

 

Can I just check whether there are certain things to "look" for when trying to claim back mis-sold PPI?

 

I have a secured loan and a mortgage with the same company and both have PPI on them, I remember being told in both cases that we would not be considered for either the loan or the mortgage if we did not take it.

 

I have recently written to the mortgage department with regard to PPI as I want to cancel this, it is more than double I would pay if I took it elsewhere, am i able to just claim back what I have paid or is there more to it than this?

 

I haven't been on the forum for a while and it has all changed and I am still trying to navigate round it, any help pointing me in the right direction would be great.

 

Regards

Deli

Link to post
Share on other sites

with regard to PPI

 

i would certain use the PPI complain form on the FOS website

 

and have a read of the various 'example' case loads there too

which will outline the correct route/calc to do.

 

i pers, would do the complaint form and anSOC for each one

and fire it off to whomever you paid your premuims to

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...