Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • nothing you can do can product against the very rare judge lottery syndrome.
    • not sure why you added the blue line I've highlighted? that's no in the we gave you.   as for your question... PRAC's roboclaim computer knows when the account was taken out, after all it raised the claim and checked everything carefully first before issuing the request via northants bulk courts equally inept roboclaim computer... 
    • I've been researching in preparation of compiling my particularised defence/WS.    I'm none too happy that some judges still seem to be siding with DCAs and seemingly brushing aside anything that we have assumed to be "necessary" for DCAs to have a winning case.    Reading a recent "summary" from another poster (another thread with case similar to mine - very old, illegible application form, no default notice, reliance on their own software to prove it was ever sent) and the judgment made in favour of the DCA and even suggesting that there was no "agreement with the DCA, they simply owned the debt, not the agreement"  Makes me very nervous.    Especially if cases like this will be judged on "probability" - the probability that if I signed the original application form, then I must have taken out the credit card and racked up the alleged debt as shown in statements enclosed in their WS (and dated some ten years later).   Is it ok to post some "evidence" I've found from elsewhere?    This is in line with my fears that regardless of how hard one tries to rebut the "lack of evidence" produced by DCAs for chasing these very old "alleged" debts, it does appear to come down to the luck of what judge you get on the day and how much they can be swayed by the DCA solicitor.    A quick Google search produced the following - from one case - this related to a credit agreement - which resulted in someone being made bankrupt - that person appealed the bankruptcy order on the grounds of defective credit agreement and default notice and this was the appeal judge's decision:   The necessary formalities for the entry into the regulated consumer credit agreement (which related to the debt in issue) were not complied with; The default notice served in respect of that credit agreement was defective.   The First Ground The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.   Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make.   Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.   The Second Ground The Appellant also argued that the default notice upon which the Respondent relied did not comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice) Regulations 1989 because it stated the full balance of the account rather than the total of the missed payments. The Respondent argued that, as a result of the missed payments, it was contractually entitled to the entire balance subject to the service of the appropriate notice, a requirement which was fulfilled by the default notice itself and, consequently, the sum required to remedy the breach was the entire amount.   Mr Justice Mann agreed with the Respondent and the District Judge, holding that: “If by the time the default notice is served circumstances have arisen which entitle the lender to recover not merely sums which might be regarded as arrears, by which I assume is meant accumulated minimum payments, but also the whole of the sum, then they are entitled to claim that sum, and the sum to require to remedy the breach for non-payment of that sum is the payment of the whole sum due. The bank is not confined, at that stage, to claiming merely the amount of arrears if it has an accrued contractual right to have the whole of the sum.”   Do judgments like these not mean that a lot of what you guys do on here (and for which I and many others are VERY grateful) somewhat redundant. What is happening to judges just accepting "well, the terms must have been there if you signed it" -    Feeling quite nervous now.
    • we know it wasn't done to avoid enforcement we understand completely. but that doesn't take from away the fact that it happened   you can't appeal the pcn's on the basis that 'it was not his vehicle to levy upon'. the law clearly states otherwise.          
    • here is a question for you, is yu house divided up into a retail/business area  and domestic area for business rates purposes? If not why on earth are you paying business water rates? ceertainly not for tax purposes as you can claim any legit expense without having to reclassify your home as a business premises. i would be stopping this nonsense and goping back to whatever water supplier is the domestic one for your area. there is stuff all they can do to get the £40 from you whan you do that.
  • Our picks

ms mongoose

Grr - welscum defending my claim!

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3661 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

Hi there

 

I've been a long time lurker on this forum, and it's helped guide me through some tough times with the dreaded welscum.

 

Basically, they agreed to settle my claim for miss-selling insurance via the FOS. I've calculated that they have clawed 3K off me over the course of the loan becuase they're using compound interest (of course!)

 

After they gave me a date when they agreed they would settle by, they exceeded it. Like a monkey i sat around waiting for things to happen. when i realised they were'nt going to do anything, I told them that they needed to give me a date to settle or I'd take them to court. they ignored the Notice of Action until the last day possible, then called me and said they would try and settle soon, but would'nt put date in writing - it would just be 'early 2010'. I took this for what it was worth and submitted my claim through MCOL.

 

Anyway, yesterday I got a letter that was sent the day I submitted my claim - a letter saying that a. I would have to use the settlement against my loan and b. not including interest they had charged me for the insurance policy! basically it came to 1k - a third of what they really owe me :mad:

 

I've sent the cheque back today, along with an explaination of why I'm refusing it, a copy of the guidance they agreed to when they said they would settle, and my calculations. I also found out they've filed an acknowledgement of service, so I guess they're putting in a defence saying that they have already paid me.

 

Now my teeth are chattering a bit - have I done the right thing? I know these guys are slimy slimy balls of ick, and handmaids of evil, etc. I know I have all the paperwork showing the interest they have charged me, but I'm shaking in my shoes about what they might be up to! Has anyone had experiance of them in court over miss-selling PPI? do you think they really do intend to file a defence - or are they just assuming I've taken the cheque?

 

Just looking for toher's opinions and feelings - these scumbuckets have me all doubtful now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good For You

 

They Charged You At Contractual Obscene Interest

 

They Will Prob File A Defence To Stop A Ccj By Default

Saying That, A Few People Have Got A Ccj Judgement Because Welcome Even Ignored Court Docs

 

 

SIT TIGHT AND SEE WHAT WELCOME DO

 

IME WITH YOU ALL THE WAY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have missold PPI and are only proposing to return to you the premium wihtout the interest you have paid on the premium, then this is unfair.

Don't worry, you have done the right thing.

 

Post here when they file their defence and we will have a look.

 

Make sure that you have assembled all of your evidence in a systematic way and also write out a detailed account of everything that has happened.

 

I would aslo like to see your POC because I expect that you haven't claimed restitutionary damages and I think that you could do so.

 

If this interests you and you would like some help then let us know.

 

This is a nasty piece of bullying by this company and I think that they have lined themselves up for a bloody nose by not being straightdealing with you


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much for the support!

 

The Ombudsman gave me 200.00 in compensation for 'distress and inconveniance' - To be honest, I've been fighting Welcome for a year and a half to get to this point, so as an hourley rate that's a bit poor! But anyway, better than nothing.

 

Sorry, Bankfodder, what's a POC? I've got loads of docs on the case since I did an SAR!

 

To give you some background, the loan was (sorry postggj!) an unsecured personal loan. The PPI was single premium, £563.00 on a loan of only 1500.00, plus an acceptance fee that then had interest charged on it as well at the same rate as the rest of the loan - I have a hunch that's illegal, am I correct? The interest rate was collossal, if I had'nt been desperate I might have thought twice.

 

I've already had them over a barrel for charges made to my account, and i think they tried the same thing they're doing now - first they refunded the charges without interest; then after a couple of letters they refunded the whole amount.

 

it got me really upset last night, wondering whether I'd loose in court - but then my OH reminded me this is just what they're like, bullies, and they might not even file a defence now that I've returned the cheque to them, as they won't be able to claim they've already paid me.

 

I honestly can't think how they could defend against my claim - I calculated the interest for this in the same way as I did for my charges, so it's not that, otherwise I could prove they've accepted it before. It can't be that the don't owe me money, because the FOS have a copy of their letter offering to, and I have the details of their attempt to pay.

 

Oh, they make me so mad! even after all this time, I'm surprised how demonic they are! :mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay so gulp.

 

Got this from MCOL today - what are welcome doing? Double gulp - does this mean I actually have to go to court??? Have they really submitted a defence, or is this just the next step becuase they have said they are? Argh, I don't understand - what could they defend? What possible defence can they offer? Oh lord my shattered nerves.:shock:

 

Thank you for your e-mail. Well the claim has now been transferred to Leicester County Court for a hearing. You will receive written notification of this in due course along with your copy of the defendants' defence. Due to the transfer you will no longer be able to use the online service for this claim and should direct all future queries to the local court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hopefully someone will come alone soon to help you with this ms mongoose. Bank or post will help you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you may need to go to court. Don't worry about it though.

What you haven't done yet is to respond to my request to see your POC. If you don't know what this is then you need to do more reading on the forum but you do have one, I can assure you.

 

Also I would like to see correspondence from the FOS - especially their offer to you and can you tell us that you haven't responded with a letter of acceptance at all.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure thing - I'm sure I can find out what you mean.

 

Yes, I did respond to the FOS and Welcome directly with an acceptance of the principle of a settlement; I can post all correspondance on Monday.

 

Just laughed when I saw the ack of service form they had filed - they are defending the whole claim, apparantly; which is hilarious, becuase they've already agreed to and attempted to pay. Big sigh of releif!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you have done the right thing and welcome have some explaning to do

 

the judge will ask

 

why have you not gone to the fos before bothering me with this

 

but i have sir

 

then he will look over to welcome and want an explanation

 

good for you

 

welcome defending is part of the course to waste more time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have accepted the FOS solution then you have put yourself in a difficult position to reject it later


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the fos was accepted and welcome refuse to contact the account holder

 

whats left to do

 

go back to the fos and wait another 12 months

 

we all know welcome are trying for every penny at the moment and refunds will be the last thing on there minds

 

sugestions for future reference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, it is difficult to piece the entire story together in a logical sequence.

 

I understand that you made a complaint to the ombudsman about mis-selling by Welcome.

 

The ombudsman began their investigation -- then it is not clear whether they found against Welcome -- or Welcome simply caved in.

 

Some time limit was setfor Welcome to settle. -- What was that time limit?

 

They have exceeded the time limit and you have lost patience. Also either Welcome all the ombudsman and made an award or suggested a figure which you consider as unfair.

 

As a result of this you have begun your own court action.

 

I don't think that I really had the story accurately. Maybe you could let us have it fully bullet pointed format


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I Agree

 

Lets Not Jump The Gun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya - actually, what happened was I took welcome to the FOS, and welcome agreed to settle my claim, offering to do it in a letter to the FOS. That was July. I agreed to the settlement in principle, and awaited a response. The FOS of course have strict guidelines that the offer must be made under.

 

Now, Welcome told them it would take eight weeks to settle in writing - that time passed, and in spite of me and the FOS chasing them, they did'nt do anything further. Eventually they emailed the FOs to say it would take ' some time'.The FOS told me they could'nt really do anything, so I took action

 

Then I sent a Notice of Action. They ignored me until the day I was filing papers, then said they'd 'expedite'. I advised them i would only consider this if they put a new date to pay in writing. They refused. I filed papers.

 

Then they sent a letter to me, clearly before they had received the court papers, setting out a settlement where the value was used against the outstanding loan, and secondly, did'nt include interest!

 

So I politely declined.

 

Hope that helps make things clearer!

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...