Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • 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

Are Direct Line/RBS Loan agreements usaually CCA compliant and enforecable?


Bigdebtor
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5303 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 have been looking through many threads but see little or no mention of Direct line.

 

I have been sent a signed copy of my Loan Agreement.

This was for £15k - now just over £5k outstanding and all in arrears which I now can't afford to pay due to illness causing my self employed business to collapse, and now totally reliant on my wife's earnings.

 

 

This loan was taken out in May 2003 and on looking at what the "prescribed terms" should be I note my agreement states "Loan amount" instead of the required "Amount of Credit".

 

 

I also can't see anything about the following CCA 1974 requirement:

"The manner in which any of the number, amount, date and frequency of repayments may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable".

Do either of these make it unenforceable?

 

Also they refuse to take the £50 pe rmonth I have offered after advice from CCCS and their lawyers Spratt Endecot are threatening to take me to court.

 

 

They had previously offered a short settlememnt of 75%

- but I have been successful in getting other creditors to accept between 35% and 50% (That was before I knew to ask for agreements under CCA 1974).

 

Any advice from more experienced caggers welcome.

Edited by dx100uk
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Loan Amount" suffices as a prescribed term and the phrase about variability doesn't pertain as the repayment will be fixed. The easiest way to get more accurate advice is to scan the agreement on here blocking out all your personal details and we can have a look at it.

 

I had a 15k loan from Direct Line and they wrote it off. The calculations were wrong and 3 pages of a 5 page agreement were missing. There were no Terms and Conditions and no statements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pinky

 

Many thanks for this.

 

 

I have had a closer look at what I have been given and I have pages 1 and 3 of 3 - but no page 2.

 

 

I also note I have "agreed" to the terms of the offer and in the T&C's booklet.

 

 

I shall now check if the quoted APR of 7.4000% is correct based on the required monthly repayments and ask them to provide the missing info, including the T&C's pertaining at that date.

 

What happens if they can't give me the missing page or a true copy of the original T&C booklet?.

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is a page missing it is unenforceable - they would have to produce the original of the agreement in court. They must also give you a copy of the original Terms and Conditions. If they try to fob you off with current conditions that is not on. There would be no original T&Cs to say the conditions can be varied.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pinky

 

Thanks for this. I'll now ask for the missing info PDQ.

 

BTW did you have a major fight to get the £15k written off?

 

I am really surprised to see that there has not been much more on threads about Direct Line Loans as I have found them the most intransigent creditor I have currently.

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was very little exchange of letters. There wasn't much they could do with 3 pages missing and the calculations out by the legally accepted limits ( not more than minus 0.1% and plus 1%) and they knew I knew what I was talking about and I wasn't going to pay them. I then got a letter to say the account was closed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pinky

 

Thanks for that. I have just checked the interest charged and it seems to be more or less right. They quoted £2872.20 interest based on 7.4000% APR on £15000 repaid over 60 months and my spreadsheet (not too sophisticated) worked out it should be £2775 at 7.4%. I make £2872.50 equate to 7.66% APR - which is only 0.26% more - and I am also not sure I have got the absolutely correct formula.

 

Is this within acceptable limits or is my spreadsheet not sophisticated enough? If any cagger has a spreadsheet that works it out like Direct Line I'd appreciate them checking this out.

 

However I have just noticed the repayment schedule which states one repayment of £297.87 due 1 month after agreement date "but we will collect repayments in accordance with your instructions".

 

This raises two interesting points.

 

1. It was a DD - so they chose when to take the repayments - not me. I never actually instructed them to take any further repayments apart from signing a DD mandate (at least I think I did?).

 

2. What if I had said - take the monthly payments on the 4th of each month starting in January 2099? I am sure my great great grand kids would be pleased to pay the current equivalent of an ice cream every month to help out their long departed great great grandpa!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't sound as if you have anything to go on there. The calculations seem to be within the legal limits and signing a DD was you giving them permission to take the scheduled repayments as they became due. Had you wanted to change the date of payments, you could have. It's beginning to look as if the missing page and no copy of the T&Cs is your dispute with them, plus they must give you copies of statements saying what you have paid and what remains to be paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Pinky

 

I kinda thought that - but hoped I could make a bit of mischief for them;).

 

However I guess I could tell them I am exercising my right to and now instruct them that they can collect the remaining monthly payments any time they like after January 2099? :lol: Although I suppose some strait laced Judge might not think it any funnier than Direct Line's lawyers!

 

I did get the statement - so it looks like it's down to the missing page and T&C's.

 

Thanks again

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...