Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • First of all welcome to the Forum. Do not worry about Drips+ -a dead sheep has more power so do not let them bother you and never contact them. It is a pity that you wrote to PE  which would be perfectly normal, except with crooks like PE  as you may have revealed you were the driver. You have lost the protection of POF A but it is not a fatal. Please do not even think of paying a penny. The amount may go higher in the short term but when the poor dears do not hear from you they get worried ( because they think to won't pay) do they start sending begging letters and reduce the amount owed.I One of the Site Team will be along shortly and give you a template to fill in which helps us to give you the best advice should they not give up. Just complete the form and post up photos of the signs at the entrance to the hotel and others around the car park and the terms on their ticket machine if there is one.
    • HI   You took possession of the Property in 2010 but when did you end the Tenancy Agreement?   Did you give them the required Notice to end your Tenancy?   You mention you paid a Deposit in 2010, was this returned when you ended the Tenancy?   You need to know exactly what they are claiming money owed is for and surprised that solicitors letter does not mention this.   Send the Landlord a Subject Access Request (SAR) asking for 'ALL DATA'  (ensure to send a copy to the Solicitor acting for them as well. 
    • yes only court...   can I confirm this was settled via Barclaycard and chargeback as it was a debit card, rather than section 75 via a creditcard?  
    • Hi   Sorry for the delay in getting back to you don't worry we have not forgot you.   So they have destroyed ALL DATA personal to you as you did not take the Property. (really they have put there foot in it)   If they hold no personal data then they have NO evidence of what was agreed to with your Holding Deposit and the refusal to return it.   Now if it was me I would let them drop themselves in it even further by responding to there SAR response.   Thank you for your SAR Response dated XX/XX/2019   Due to this response I require clarification of the following:   1. Have you followed the Data Protection Act 2018 & General Data Protection Regulations on Destroying My Personal Data?   2. If you have Destroyed All My Personal Data then what documentation do you hold that I have signed/agreed to the Holding Deposit being Non-Refundable and to provide copies of this documentation.   3. I require a copy of your Policy on Holding Deposits   Please bear in mind the above is what I would do.   I do think it is looking like you may have to go down the court route (make sure and have a good read of that link I previously gave you to the Tenants Fee Act).
    • HI   Firstly the parking in front of your drive, do you have a pavement with a Drop Kerb in front of your property to access your driveway, if so are they infringing on the Drop Kerb? (note your can ask the council to to paint a white line with lines at the end on the road in front of the drop kerb please note there may be a cost from the council to do so)   As for the CCTV look at this ICO link: https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/domestic-cctv-systems-guidance-for-people-using-cctv/   Due to the new DPA/GDPR if you have CCTV on your Property and it views outside of that Properties Bounderies they then need to register as a Data Controller with the ICO.   So I would make a Formal Complaint in writing to the Councils Data Controller, ICO (specifically asking if this individual is Registered with them as a Data Controller) & Police, you need to keep a good paper trail of this individuals actions.   I hope this individual knows the Law on Harassment as from your thread that is the impression I get is no matter what you do they will find something else to complaint about.  
  • Our picks

FightToTheEnd

Reply by Egg to "Approved Limit" point

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3518 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

I had drafted this reply which answers some of those points:

 

I refer to your letter of 13th January and, as ever, I still consider the account to be in serious dispute.

As you correctly state, schedule 6 does indeed state the requirement of a term “to state the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined”. Surely one would assume that this statement would, as a bare minimum, require the use of the phase “credit limit”?

As I have already mentioned, your agreement refers only to “approved limits” and “individual limits” which are in no way deemed to be credit limits. I will once again state that I consider this makes your agreement unenforceable due to a missing prescribed term.

Your comments concerning the Hurstanger case are also interesting and looking at this case again, it was stated in relation to the core prescribed terms that: “they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them”.

With the above points in mind, I cannot agree with you that the basic requirements are satisfied.

I also note that you have not advised where the term “approved limit” has been shown to be a “well established point of law” and wonder if this was just an oversight on your part.

Turning to your points about your collection procedures, I did not state that I felt you were breaching any rules, I simply advised that I found your actions to be disingenuous when I had heard nothing from you for months and then started to receive several emails and telephone calls a day once you have replied to my letter without giving me chance to respond.

May I once again reiterate that I will only deal with this matter in writing? I feel this is sensible as it gives us both time to consider our responses and also means there is a written record of anything agreed. I would therefore be grateful if you stop your (twice daily!) attempts to contact me by telephone with immediate effect.

Once again, I trust this letter makes my position perfectly clear and I look forward to hearing that you will not be perusing this matter further. May I also respectfully remind you of the restrictions placed upon Egg being as this account is still in serious dispute?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had drafted this reply which answers some of those points:

 

I refer to your letter of 13th January and, as ever, I still consider the account to be in serious dispute.

As you correctly state, schedule 6 does indeed state the requirement of a term “to state the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined”. Surely one would assume that this statement would, as a bare minimum, require the use of the phase “credit limit”? Completely agree.

As I have already mentioned, your agreement refers only to “approved limits” and “individual limits” which are in no way deemed to be credit limits. I will once again state that I consider this makes your agreement unenforceable due to a missing prescribed term. Good

Your comments concerning the Hurstanger case are also interesting and looking at this case again, it was stated in relation to the core prescribed terms that: “they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them”. Very good

With the above points in mind, I cannot agree with you that the basic requirements are satisfied.

I also note that you have not advised where the term “approved limit” has been shown to be a “well established point of law” and wonder if this was just an oversight on your part. Or ask them what their legal authorities (eg previous judgements/ OFT guidance etc) are in support of this claim

Turning to your points about your collection procedures, I did not state that I felt you were breaching any rules, I simply advised that I found your actions to be disingenuous when I had heard nothing from you for months and then started to receive several emails and telephone calls a day once you have replied to my letter without giving me chance to respond.

 

May I once again reiterate that I will only deal with this matter in writing? I feel this is sensible as it gives us both time to consider our responses and also means there is a written record of anything agreed. I would therefore be grateful if you stop your (twice daily!) attempts to contact me by telephone with immediate effect. dont justify this - just tell them that in writing is the only way you will deal with them. Otherwise you are giving them the basis of an argument imo

 

 

Once again, I trust this letter makes my position perfectly clear and I look forward to hearing that you will not be perusing this matter further. May I also respectfully remind you of the restrictions placed upon Egg being as this account is still in serious dispute?

 

 

See comments - hope they are helpful

SFU

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very helpful, thank you :-).

 

As much as anything, it's nice to know I'm heading down the right track...

Edited by FightToTheEnd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, don't you think it's interesting when reading this reply letter from Egg and their points about limits, they make a real effort not to mention approved or individual!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FTTE

 

I agree with all of SFU's comments - but would add one further point.

 

I am not being "picky" - but I think it is important to use the correct grammar, vocabulary and spelling in any such letters - you use "perusing" where I think you mean "pursuing" - always wise to use a spell checker and grammar checker if you are in doubt an dno one else is there to double check your responses - especially with letters which may end up before a "learned" judge.

 

Hope this does not offend!

 

BD


£50k saved and £7k charges refunded:

MBNA & A&L 35% F&F direct - saved £23k. Birmingham Midshires £1700 charges refunded

Abbey Loan/BCW 50% - saved £2k. Barclaycard/CSL 40% - saved £6k

Monument/DCA 35% - saved £1k. LTSB/Wescot 50% - saved £4k

HBOS Visa £5k charges refund via Blair Oliver Scott

RBS Direct Line/(genuine) solicitors June 2010 40% - saved £3k

Morgan Stanley/Aktiv Kapital £11k SB Nov 2010

Over £40k balance write off and charges refunds to fight for:

HBOS O/d Charges £5k. Egg Loan/Aktiv Kapital CCA Dispute £8k

Egg Card/Fredrickson taking £5 monthly but CCA & Charges Dispute £4k

Goldfish/1st Credit DN/TN Dispute £9k. Capital One/CSL charges claim £4k

Barclaycard/CSL taking £5 monthly on £10k debt

 

I hope I have helped - if I have please hit my star - and recognise the others who have helped too.

Bigdebtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BigDebtor. No offence taken at all, in fact I'm grateful!

 

I'm a bit of a bug*er for simple typo's and that one looks like it may be a spell check that has mis-corrected a word for me!

 

Thanks again, and yes, I agree about correct grammar etc and so will ask my wife to proof read future letters!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FTTE

 

Wives are very good proof readers - always trying to find fault with us and showing no mercy!

 

BD (aside) Yes Dear! (got to go - she's got my tea ready!)


£50k saved and £7k charges refunded:

MBNA & A&L 35% F&F direct - saved £23k. Birmingham Midshires £1700 charges refunded

Abbey Loan/BCW 50% - saved £2k. Barclaycard/CSL 40% - saved £6k

Monument/DCA 35% - saved £1k. LTSB/Wescot 50% - saved £4k

HBOS Visa £5k charges refund via Blair Oliver Scott

RBS Direct Line/(genuine) solicitors June 2010 40% - saved £3k

Morgan Stanley/Aktiv Kapital £11k SB Nov 2010

Over £40k balance write off and charges refunds to fight for:

HBOS O/d Charges £5k. Egg Loan/Aktiv Kapital CCA Dispute £8k

Egg Card/Fredrickson taking £5 monthly but CCA & Charges Dispute £4k

Goldfish/1st Credit DN/TN Dispute £9k. Capital One/CSL charges claim £4k

Barclaycard/CSL taking £5 monthly on £10k debt

 

I hope I have helped - if I have please hit my star - and recognise the others who have helped too.

Bigdebtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sub - at the same stage


Halifax Card (OH) -2.9% reinstated - Sucess!

Santander/House of Fraser (1) PPI Refund plus 8% plus LOC

Santander/House of Fraser (2) PPI Refunded plus 8% plus LOC

Penalty Charge Notice - Representation accepted and PN cancelled - £120

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, but what about the points he made. has anyone actually gone through the regs and checked to see if he's right?

 

if he IS right about any of the points eg default charges being allowable on a separate page, then its no use arguing, its a waste of time, and if it does go before a judge, you can look awkward and simply wanting to argue for the sake of it

 

so, has anyone bothered to check if he's right? Lets establish the facts and see where we stand rather than simply arguing with them


To those who give me reputation points, thanks. I don't usually pay attention to how much rep I receive, so I don't acknowledge it but I appreciate the favourable comments I receive when I sometimes talk sense.

"The attempt to combine wisdom and power has only rarely been successful and then only for a short while"Albert Einstein

 

"One should examine oneself for a very long time before thinking of condemning others".

Moliere (Jean-Baptiste Poquelin)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a big test case coming next month with PT2537 against Egg which should give us a ruling on Egg agreements. See the relevant thread by PT.

 

BD


£50k saved and £7k charges refunded:

MBNA & A&L 35% F&F direct - saved £23k. Birmingham Midshires £1700 charges refunded

Abbey Loan/BCW 50% - saved £2k. Barclaycard/CSL 40% - saved £6k

Monument/DCA 35% - saved £1k. LTSB/Wescot 50% - saved £4k

HBOS Visa £5k charges refund via Blair Oliver Scott

RBS Direct Line/(genuine) solicitors June 2010 40% - saved £3k

Morgan Stanley/Aktiv Kapital £11k SB Nov 2010

Over £40k balance write off and charges refunds to fight for:

HBOS O/d Charges £5k. Egg Loan/Aktiv Kapital CCA Dispute £8k

Egg Card/Fredrickson taking £5 monthly but CCA & Charges Dispute £4k

Goldfish/1st Credit DN/TN Dispute £9k. Capital One/CSL charges claim £4k

Barclaycard/CSL taking £5 monthly on £10k debt

 

I hope I have helped - if I have please hit my star - and recognise the others who have helped too.

Bigdebtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Regarding default charges being in a sepperate document. It is perfectly correct as i stated much earlier in this thread for default charges to be in another document in pre 2005 agreements. This is because the regs state that all schedule one section 1-19 must be contained together and as a whole , default charges are in section 22. This changed in 2005 when the ammended regulations came into force.

 

The other points raise in this response are also aablolutely correct as i also previously stated.

 

Peter

 

Peter


VT against welcome finance costs returned

Refund against jetline travel

Caital one settled 6th November

N1 Filed Yorkshire Bank 26/09/06

£677+£172int.+£80Chgs acknowledgemment of claim recieved 29th/09,Defence recieved 27th October Recieved AO 30t hOctt Settled in Full 8th December

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is a big test case coming next month with PT2537 against Egg which should give us a ruling on Egg agreements. See the relevant thread by PT.

 

BD

 

Cant seem to find the thread - could you point me in the right direction please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cant seem to find the thread - could you point me in the right direction please.

 

It's called "Egg credit agreements - what I think is wrong with them" Beware it is VERY long!

 

BD


£50k saved and £7k charges refunded:

MBNA & A&L 35% F&F direct - saved £23k. Birmingham Midshires £1700 charges refunded

Abbey Loan/BCW 50% - saved £2k. Barclaycard/CSL 40% - saved £6k

Monument/DCA 35% - saved £1k. LTSB/Wescot 50% - saved £4k

HBOS Visa £5k charges refund via Blair Oliver Scott

RBS Direct Line/(genuine) solicitors June 2010 40% - saved £3k

Morgan Stanley/Aktiv Kapital £11k SB Nov 2010

Over £40k balance write off and charges refunds to fight for:

HBOS O/d Charges £5k. Egg Loan/Aktiv Kapital CCA Dispute £8k

Egg Card/Fredrickson taking £5 monthly but CCA & Charges Dispute £4k

Goldfish/1st Credit DN/TN Dispute £9k. Capital One/CSL charges claim £4k

Barclaycard/CSL taking £5 monthly on £10k debt

 

I hope I have helped - if I have please hit my star - and recognise the others who have helped too.

Bigdebtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

Regarding default charges being in a sepperate document. It is perfectly correct as i stated much earlier in this thread for default charges to be in another document in pre 2005 agreements. This is because the regs state that all schedule one section 1-19 must be contained together and as a whole , default charges are in section 22. This changed in 2005 when the ammended regulations came into force.

 

The other points raise in this response are also aablolutely correct as i also previously stated.

 

Peter

 

 

Peter

 

PB do you actually have a genuine copy of the Agreement Regs? A known genuine copy?

 

The copy I have from the web has been amened all over the place and its impossible to actually work out what the pre 2005 Regs were. I think that may be the problem, people are reading what may be the 2005 Regs and think they're the 1983 Regs, so the discrepancies are put down as errors in the Agreement.


To those who give me reputation points, thanks. I don't usually pay attention to how much rep I receive, so I don't acknowledge it but I appreciate the favourable comments I receive when I sometimes talk sense.

"The attempt to combine wisdom and power has only rarely been successful and then only for a short while"Albert Einstein

 

"One should examine oneself for a very long time before thinking of condemning others".

Moliere (Jean-Baptiste Poquelin)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PB do you actually have a genuine copy of the Agreement Regs? A known genuine copy?

 

The copy I have from the web has been amened all over the place and its impossible to actually work out what the pre 2005 Regs were. I think that may be the problem, people are reading what may be the 2005 Regs and think they're the 1983 Regs, so the discrepancies are put down as errors in the Agreement.

 

 

Hi

 

Yes i have a copy of the orriginal Statutory Instrument.

This particular point is documented on PTs other thread and i think he even acknowledged the point, but it is however a fact unfortunately.

 

Peter


VT against welcome finance costs returned

Refund against jetline travel

Caital one settled 6th November

N1 Filed Yorkshire Bank 26/09/06

£677+£172int.+£80Chgs acknowledgemment of claim recieved 29th/09,Defence recieved 27th October Recieved AO 30t hOctt Settled in Full 8th December

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes, but what about the points he made. has anyone actually gone through the regs and checked to see if he's right?

 

if he IS right about any of the points eg default charges being allowable on a separate page, then its no use arguing, its a waste of time, and if it does go before a judge, you can look awkward and simply wanting to argue for the sake of it

 

so, has anyone bothered to check if he's right? Lets establish the facts and see where we stand rather than simply arguing with them

 

Hi

 

Yes always check for yourself the regs are all there on the net somewhere.

 

Peter


VT against welcome finance costs returned

Refund against jetline travel

Caital one settled 6th November

N1 Filed Yorkshire Bank 26/09/06

£677+£172int.+£80Chgs acknowledgemment of claim recieved 29th/09,Defence recieved 27th October Recieved AO 30t hOctt Settled in Full 8th December

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a letter from Egg to advise me that as I haven't complied with their recent DN notice they have now terminated my account. This is most odd as I thought they had already terminated it 2 years ogo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PB do you actually have a genuine copy of the Agreement Regs? A known genuine copy?

 

The copy I have from the web has been amened all over the place and its impossible to actually work out what the pre 2005 Regs were. I think that may be the problem, people are reading what may be the 2005 Regs and think they're the 1983 Regs, so the discrepancies are put down as errors in the Agreement.

 

I'm sure i got these off cag somewhere.

 

M1

Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983.pdf

Edited by mystery1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just had a letter from Egg to advise me that as I haven't complied with their recent DN notice they have now terminated my account. This is most odd as I thought they had already terminated it 2 years ogo!

 

i would be inclined to write and point out that they already unlawfully repudiated the agreement a couple of years ago, which you accepted and you are bemused as to their attempt to serve a DN post termination on an agreement which no longer endures

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just had a letter from Egg to advise me that as I haven't complied with their recent DN notice they have now terminated my account. This is most odd as I thought they had already terminated it 2 years ogo!

 

Hi

I would guess the earlier termination was under section 98 of the act and meerly terminate your rights uder the agreement. The later one may be a section 87 termination which is nessesary if the creditor is to take proceedings to court.

 

Peter


VT against welcome finance costs returned

Refund against jetline travel

Caital one settled 6th November

N1 Filed Yorkshire Bank 26/09/06

£677+£172int.+£80Chgs acknowledgemment of claim recieved 29th/09,Defence recieved 27th October Recieved AO 30t hOctt Settled in Full 8th December

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying desperatly not to be ignorant here, but surely you can only terminate something once by it's very definition? How can they terminate specific bits they want to and leave others in place, makes a complete mockery of any agreement? They could make it very favourable for the borrower and then later down the line just "terminate" the bits they no longer want to offer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, Its either terminated, or not, nothing in between.


There is no such thing as a 0% credit card....... someone out there is paying for it, and for once its not going to be me.:razz:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

You know this is something that has always given me problems. How can you terminate something twice?

I had an argument once with Barclays because they kept trying to debit a terminated account with ppi payments, complained to the FSO and the just backed up Barclays line that I should cancel with the insurer.

Doesn’t make sense to me either,

I asked a legal chum about it once, he said that you should think about the contract as a train, whilst the train is running, so is the contract, once the train has stopped so the contract has terminated. The train still however exits. it just does not function. If it did not exist it would be void.

Not fully convinced by this analogy and have never been able to find anything to support the idea, it does seem to fit some of the facts

peter


VT against welcome finance costs returned

Refund against jetline travel

Caital one settled 6th November

N1 Filed Yorkshire Bank 26/09/06

£677+£172int.+£80Chgs acknowledgemment of claim recieved 29th/09,Defence recieved 27th October Recieved AO 30t hOctt Settled in Full 8th December

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...