Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This must be part of the new tactic from Evri.  They know they are going to lose. They take it to the wire and then don't bother to turn up in order to save themselves costs and of course they don't give a damn about the cost to the British taxpayer and the extra court delays they cause. This is a nasty dishonest company – but rather in line with all of the parcel delivery industry which knows that their insurance requirements are unlawful. They know that their prohibited items are for the most part unfair terms. They know for the most part that a "safe place" is exactly what it means – are not left on somebody's doorstep in full view. They know that obtaining a signature means that they have to show the signature not simply claim that they received a signature. They are making huge profits especially from their unlawful and unenforceable insurance requirement. Although this is less valuable than the PPI scandal, in terms of the number of people who are affected nationwide, PPI pales into insignificance. I hope the paralegals working for Evri are proud of themselves and they tell their families what they have done during the day when they go home.
    • Your PCN does not comply with the Protection of freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9[2][a] (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The only time on the PCN is 17.14. That is only  a time for there to be a period there would have to be a start and and end time mentioned. of course they do show the ANPR arrival and departures  times but that is not the parking period and their times are on the photographs not on the PCN. They also failed to comply with S.9[2][f] as they omitted to say that they could only pursue the keeper if they complied with the Act. That means that they can only pursue the driver as the keeper cannot be held liable for the charge. As they do not know who was driving and Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person they will struggle to win. Especially as so many people are able to legally drive your car and you haven't appealed giving them no indication therefore of who was driving. Small nitpicking point-the date of Infringement was 22/04/2024. They appear to be saying that they can charge an extra amount [up to £70 ] if they have to use a debt collector. You do not have a contract with a debt collector so they cannot add that cost. You paid for four hours so it can only be the 15 minutes they are complaining about. You are entitled to a ten minute minimum grace period at the end of the parking period which would be easier to explain if the car park had been bigger. However if you allow for two minutes to park and two minutes to leave that gives you one minute to account for. Things like being held on the way out by cars in front waiting to get on to Northgate or even your own car being held up trying to get on to Northgate at a busy time. then other considerations like having to stop to allow pedestrians to walk in front of you or being held up by another car doing a u turn in front of your car. you would have to check with the driver and see if they could account for an extra one minute things like a disabled passenger or having to strap in a child . I am not advocating lying since that could lead to serious problems [like jail time] but there can be an awful lot of minor things that can cause a hold up of a minute even the engine not starting straight away or another car being badly parked as examples. Sadly you cannot include the 5 minute Consideration period as both IPC and BPA fail to comply with the convention that you can include that time with the Grace period.  
    • Defence struck out not case struck out...you have judgment  Well done topic title updated Regard's Please consider making a donation if not already to support us to help others.   Andy.   .
    • Hi all, I wanted to update you and thank you all for your help. I am delighted announce that after the case was struck out due to no response from Evri, judgement was issued after I submitted the forms and I was just about to take it to warrant.  today I received an email from the claims department requesting my bank details to make payment for my full award. The process has been long since the initial proceedings  in January i must say your help and guidance has been greatly appreciated.  
    • Quote of the century "Farage pops up when the country’s at a low ebb; like a kind of political herpes" - Frankie Boyle Updates
  • 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

Template to request CCA for Overdraft.


jon888999
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4964 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

Hi,

I might be being stupid here as it might already be on here,

but a friend of mine has a current account, with overdraft,

which has been in dispute due to over £2000 of charges.

 

Now to avoid the bank using the Supreme Courts ruling and start trying to collect,

we intend sending a cca request,

which we know doesn't exist,

as we've had full disclosure from a Sars request got over 5000 bits of paper! That really pleased TNT!

 

As it's an ovverdraft we know they will say a cca is required,

so is there a request that explains why it is required?

Thanks in advance.

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Overdrafts aren't regulated by the CCA and so a CCA request won't yield anything unfortunately.
I understand from this site that bank accounts aren't but an overdraft requires some kind of CCA. Perhaps i'm wrong i'll have look fo`r the thread I saw before>
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand from this site that bank accounts aren't but an overdraft requires some kind of CCA. Perhaps i'm wrong i'll have look fo`r the thread I saw before>

This is one of the posts i've seen. With full disclosure there is no sign of the required letter, default notice etc.

#27 (permalink) hungrybear

Basic Account Holder

 

Worried about companies stealing your signature? Use our new digital signature service

Cagger since : Apr 2009

Posts: 641

reputation_pos.gifreputation_pos.gifreputation_pos.gif

 

 

icon1.gif Re: My First Solictor's Letter

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeftyHippo viewpost.gif

I know if they don't produce a CCA, they cannot pursue the credit card, so a CCA request is being sent, and that will reveal the enforceability or otherwise of the credit account, but the overdraft is not covered by the CCA and could still result in legal action.

 

.

 

WooooooooooW up a bit here.

 

An overdraft is a debtor creditor agreement as defined under section 8 and 13 of the CCA and is running account credit as defined in section 10. This has high court case law - coutts vs sebastyn.

 

When they say it is not CCA, what they mean is that there is part v exemption from the CCA but,

-they still need to show the contractual arrangement set up with 30 days of the o/d

-they still need a valid default notice

-they still need a termination notice.

 

A current account is covered by the banking code (FSA) and does not offer credit facilities. An overdraft is a credit agreement and as such CCA.

 

This is my specialist area I've seen off HSBC and LTSB on this. They will try to tell you that CCA does not apply to an o/d this utter nonsense. What tehy mean is that they have the part v exemption. So a Subject Access Request requesting specifically the default and termination notices plus the letter they sent you within 30 days of setting up the o/d (which must include interest rate and conditions such a limit) will tell you if they can enforce it. But I would still start with a CCA for the o/d it is for them to prove part v exemption.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been debated and concluded several times.

 

Overdrafts are backed by case law but I understand the conclusion is CCA's a not covered for OD.

 

Thank you for your letter dated the 13th ..... the contents of which have been noted.

 

Your letter states that overdrafts are not subject to the Section 77 of the Consumer Credit Act, as you will be no doubt be aware the case Coutts & Co v Sebestyen[2005] EWCA Civ 473 clearly states the opposite.

 

I require that you send me a true copy of the executed agreement as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. If you are unable to supply the requested documentation because no such agreement exists then I require written confirmation of this.

 

etc etc

 

WHAT IS BADLY NEEDED IS A LETTER TO COVER THE CHANGES TO BANK CHARGES RULE.

 

DCA's are gonna have a field day. All those OD charges on hold are now suddenly gonna be hounded by pond life and this is so unfair as £35.00 bank charge is still taking the p*ss, I don't care what the court says.

We live in an unmoderated country why should the net be any different?

Bring back free speech we miss it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

subbing and Jon888999...I sent off long ago to LTSB for my girlfriends overdraft CCA. I will have to dig the letter out as it was a while ago but was wondering if you could help me out and guide me through this process as you seem to have had success with them in particular??? Although the debt is now with Moorcroft DCA's :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

subbing and Jon888999...I sent off long ago to LTSB for my girlfriends overdraft CCA. I will have to dig the letter out as it was a while ago but was wondering if you could help me out and guide me through this process as you seem to have had success with them in particular??? Although the debt is now with Moorcroft DCA's :confused:

 

I don't have the answers yet.

 

Best thing to do is to post on bank charges forum and keep checking back.

 

There WILL be a letter produced and I think initially it will center around the interest on OD charges being claimed back which essentially puts the account in dispute until thhat aspect is returned.

 

I would not be too worried by the scare monkeys Moorcock and in my experience there pre-school (pre-court) division are one trick ponys with very little taste for the court although I don't know if this would change when CCA are debated by the courts.

We live in an unmoderated country why should the net be any different?

Bring back free speech we miss it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

At risk of hijacking this thread, I have a nasty letter from SCM regarding recovery of my LTSB overdraft. Any help out there?

 

see below, there are lot of caggers as we speak working on a draft letter, sit tight.

 

£35 charge I still don't get the part where this is fair. I would accept £5 as a charge for me not able to manage my money correctly, but £35 is just blantant profit.

 

Someone will sort the banks out and it won't be the OFT or the GOVERNMENT it will be CONSUMERS cos we've had enough of this p*sstaking

We live in an unmoderated country why should the net be any different?

Bring back free speech we miss it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

see below, there are lot of caggers as we speak working on a draft letter, sit tight.

 

£35 charge I still don't get the part where this is fair. I would accept £5 as a charge for me not able to manage my money correctly, but £35 is just blantant profit.

 

Someone will sort the banks out and it won't be the OFT or the GOVERNMENT it will be CONSUMERS cos we've had enough of this p*sstaking

 

many thanks!

 

(there was nothing to see below though, sadly!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

At risk of hijacking this thread, I have a nasty letter from SCM regarding recovery of my LTSB overdraft. Any help out there?

define nasty?

 

 

 

 

And to answer the original question, just send the standard cca request letter and see what reply you get.. The objective is to find out what they think covers an overdraft more than anything

Link to post
Share on other sites

define nasty?

 

 

 

 

And to answer the original question, just send the standard cca request letter and see what reply you get.. The objective is to find out what they think covers an overdraft more than anything

 

Letter opens: "We have been instructed by LTSB who advise us that despite several reminders your account remains out of order. etc...."

 

Final para: "EREMEMBER THIS IS A FORMAL DEMAND PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF LEGAL PROCEEEDINGS AND YOU ARE STRONGLY URGED TO MAKE IMMEDIATE PAYMENT TO AVOID THE ABOVE ACTION"

 

It's clearly a template as it begins dear sir/madam and ends "faithfully" scm solicitors. (the signature is a scrawly scm funnily enough!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter opens: "We have been instructed by LTSB who advise us that despite several reminders your account remains out of order. etc...."

 

Final para: "EREMEMBER THIS IS A FORMAL DEMAND PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF LEGAL PROCEEEDINGS AND YOU ARE STRONGLY URGED TO MAKE IMMEDIATE PAYMENT TO AVOID THE ABOVE ACTION"

 

It's clearly a template as it begins dear sir/madam and ends "faithfully" scm solicitors. (the signature is a scrawly scm funnily enough!)

 

 

Depends where you are up to on the merry-go-round. HAve they had a prove it and/or cca request? If not start there

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends where you are up to on the merry-go-round. HAve they had a prove it and/or cca request? If not start there

this is the beginning of the merry-go-round! I have been in financial difficulty for sometime (haven't we all?) and went into a temporary extended OD with them. In a nutshell, the OD went back to original figure and i've been unable to maintain it within the agreed figure despite all outgoings now being cancelled. Since their letter I have received a polite template letter from LTSB adding a further 250 quid in charges..... this is now the vicious circle from which i cannot escape. (When I phoned the bank I was told (recorded) that the account is in the hands of SCM and I should wait for them to contact me in afew days.)

 

So, to get this in my head right, are you suggesting I send them a CCA letter? To what end?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been debated and concluded several times.

 

Overdrafts are backed by case law but I understand the conclusion is CCA's a not covered for OD.

 

Thank you for your letter dated the 13th ..... the contents of which have been noted.

 

Your letter states that overdrafts are not subject to the Section 77 of the Consumer Credit Act, as you will be no doubt be aware the case Coutts & Co v Sebestyen[2005] EWCA Civ 473 clearly states the opposite.

 

I require that you send me a true copy of the executed agreement as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. If you are unable to supply the requested documentation because no such agreement exists then I require written confirmation of this.

 

etc etc

 

WHAT IS BADLY NEEDED IS A LETTER TO COVER THE CHANGES TO BANK CHARGES RULE.

 

DCA's are gonna have a field day. All those OD charges on hold are now suddenly gonna be hounded by pond life and this is so unfair as £35.00 bank charge is still taking the p*ss, I don't care what the court says.

 

I was under the impression that overdrafts ARE CCA regulated but are exempt from Part V of the act (The form and content of agreements) ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that overdrafts ARE CCA regulated but are exempt from Part V of the act (The form and content of agreements) ?

 

yes that is correct. Although technically they are only exempt if the bank has registered with the oft.

 

What I advise normally, esp with a dca and an od that shall we say lapsed a couple of years ago, is to send a cca initially. Their reply will give you an insight into the tack they will take. Some will say od's are not cca at all n which case you can simply ask them what laws cover them - that makes their heads spin:D. Others will state the exemption and you can then attack them on that.

 

What is often missed is that the determination does not get rid of the need for an agreement, item 2 of the determination gives the timescale under which they must send a letter detailing the apr, terms, and contractual arrangement.

 

The main thing to watch out for is the common practice 'con' of saying that current accounts are not covered by the cca - this is true because a current account under the banking code cannot offer any credit facilities, an overdraft is a separate arrangement and is section 10 running account credit.

 

(I'm sure you know this sequenci, but it's worth stating for the benefit of the OP)

Link to post
Share on other sites

DG2007, have you had a default notice?

Is this the first letter you have had from SCM? - who you should know are pet, tame and internal to the bank, ie the desk next to the one that send you the bank letters.

 

If you do send a cca - and there's no harm in it - then I would not mention coutts at all, let them educate themselves, and it would be section 78 in theory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DG2007, have you had a default notice?

Is this the first letter you have had from SCM? - who you should know are pet, tame and internal to the bank, ie the desk next to the one that send you the bank letters.

 

If you do send a cca - and there's no harm in it - then I would not mention coutts at all, let them educate themselves, and it would be section 78 in theory.

 

Hi HB, thanks for your interest and assistance. No default yet, this is the first letter from SCM. (I have had past dealings with them on DPA non-compliance and my charges claim so not totally unaware of their petness and ineptitude!)

 

I haven't elaborated on the basic CCA template and have used s78 as that applies to rolling credit........ regarding Coutts, I never put food on their plate so only share my "knowledge" when necessary... Just need to refresh my memory on the reply time limits now and sit back and relax for a fortnight!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi HB, thanks for your interest and assistance. No default yet, this is the first letter from SCM. (I have had past dealings with them on DPA non-compliance and my charges claim so not totally unaware of their petness and ineptitude!)

 

I haven't elaborated on the basic CCA template and have used s78 as that applies to rolling credit........ regarding Coutts, I never put food on their plate so only share my "knowledge" when necessary... Just need to refresh my memory on the reply time limits now and sit back and relax for a fortnight!

 

Will be interesting to see what approach their reply takes.

 

Technically you should have got a DN prior to going to scm (sections 87/88 are not in part v)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will be interesting to see what approach their reply takes.

 

Technically you should have got a DN prior to going to scm (sections 87/88 are not in part v)

 

 

Thats interesting. Should I mention the DN? Ask for it?

 

Their first letter does mention a default in passing, but not one that specifically relates to me. They simply mention that if I settle the debt within the prescribed period it will be recorded (on my credit file) but will not lead to the original default being removed.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats interesting. Should I mention the DN? Ask for it?

 

Their first letter does mention a default in passing, but not one that specifically relates to me. They simply mention that if I settle the debt within the prescribed period it will be recorded (on my credit file) but will not lead to the original default being removed.....

 

 

NO NO NO

 

you want them to terminate without a DN and/or take you to court without a DN. This would constitute unlawful rescission and is the best easiest defence for an od.

 

 

the default they refer to is the cra default which is nothing to do with the actual cca default.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NO NO NO

 

you want them to terminate without a DN and/or take you to court without a DN. This would constitute unlawful rescission and is the best easiest defence for an od.

 

 

the default they refer to is the cra default which is nothing to do with the actual cca default.

 

gotcha! cheers! So, letter will be posted first thing..........

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...