Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, You can't make EVRi investigate something. The only thing you could potentially look to do is take EVRi to court for the value of the lost parcel, however with a value of only £25 there will be limited point to doing that.
    • Is the letter headed Letter of Claim/before Claim or similar? If not, it sounds like more of the threatogram chain. If you're not sure, post up an anonymised copy of the letter and we'll check. HB
    • So guess what, we have received a final demand letter for £100. It states if payment is not made by 11/06 they will have no option but to forward the case to their litigation dept with a view to commence County Court Proceedings. So just wondering if anyone has any advice. Do we ignore this? or do we need to take action? Thanks 
    • hi dx, thanks for helping just re-reading everything this morning and I must have missed this one from uncle in his thread "What you should not do, is not contact the Banks and simply default on payments. "  are you in disagreement with this based on your last sentence?
    • Thanks for the reply and clarification, that might just explain why in my case contact has pretty much ceased. Though with such companies it doesn't mean they won't ever threaten to return to court as a tool to force one's hand if they feel they are not self informed on their chances etc.  But concerning how last year they tried to use the CCJ to get a charging order and the court granted an intirum order on our mortgage using the CCJ that would have been a good 2-3 months beyond the 6 years, should the court not have checked the age of the CCJ in the first case or would they always grant an interim order simply off the back of a CCJ being produced without even checking the age of it?.  Had I not defended that action at the time they may well have got a default using a CCJ older than 6 years which could be a concern going forwards. At the time when I contacted the court to question the paperwork for a final order application the clerk suggested people don't get informed when companies apply for interim charging orders, they are automatic if a claimant has a CCJ and people only get contacted once a date for a final order application goes through. kind of begs the question if such companies can continue a seemingly backdoor method to attempt default action if un-defended if the initial application doesn't need to check the age of a CCJ?.
  • 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

bobtheb v Barclaycard ***WON***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6329 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

:mad:Having received the two usual 'fob off' letters to my DPA request I have sent the following letter.

 

Barclaycard

PO Box 599

Manchester

M60 3NF

 

16th August 2006

 

 

 

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

 

Section 7 – Data Protection Act 1998

 

Dear Ms Lomas

 

 

 

 

Thank you for your letter dated 13/8/2006. You inform me you disagree with my legal analysis of case law, that is your right and only a judge can decide which of us is correct.

I am in receipt of the documents that you have supplied in response to my Data Protection Act information request dated 7/8/2006.

The disclosure of personal data is incomplete in that at least the following documents are missing.

You have failed to provide a complete list of transactions and charges for the period 1/8/2000 to 30/4/2004.

 

This is not an exhaustive list by any means; it is just an example of some of the information I am missing

 

Accordingly, I have to tell you that you have not yet complied with your obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

This letter has been sent to you by first class recorded delivery and you should be in receipt of it by 17/8/2006. You have a further 23 days to comply. As previously stated a complete set of statements for the period in question will be acceptable.

 

Should there be any further attempts to delay compliance, I will be left with no alternative but to commence a County Court action under section 7, and section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998, and in due course, escalate this matter into an official complaint to the Information Commissioner and the FSA.

 

 

does this look alright ?

:grin:amount WON so far £15,021.27(12 claims):D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I too wrote back to them after getting their second fob off letter I dont think it will change thier minds.

 

However, IMHO i think it better to formally reject theit rejection fi you get my drift. That way they know you are proposing to take it to court and wontlet them use the argument that you accepted their rejection.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

worked out an estimate using the two years they sent me,using the same monthly behaviour ,to stretch the informationtion out to 2001 ,when they assure me they started the unlawful charges.Does anyone know any different?

Sent them this estimate 12/09/06

:grin:amount WON so far £15,021.27(12 claims):D

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I estimated the charges ,I used one of the old spreadsheets total £4122.77

Now I have done it onVampiress's Chambers slightly more £4503 but

Ive worked out compound interest (22.5%) for when I fill in the MCOL:)another £2546 this should be interesting !

:grin:amount WON so far £15,021.27(12 claims):D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry about the LBA. if you used the template wording you told ythem you'd be adding interest (you never stated which interest).

 

I think you'll find your wording won't fit on an MCOL. There's no template yet for the N1 when claiming contractual interest or compound interest. I'm hoping to deal with this shortly too. Either prepare your own, or you can wait a while.

[

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Finally heard from Barclaycard re my non -compliance claim,they have offered to pay my costs( £90 ) and repeated the microfiche argument:mad:

Now what happens,I will accept the £90 but tell them I will continue with my claim for compliance:)

What is likely to happen if this goes to court??:?

:grin:amount WON so far £15,021.27(12 claims):D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bob

trying to give you some moral support here - own B'card issues are on ice atm - but following what you're doing, so thought I'd let you know, and I'm sure there's loads of others reading your thread, too.

Had some Glühwein tonight so hope this still makes sense...

We'll continue with our B'card "project" when the microfiche issues have been dealt with.

I'd better shut up, hun, I'm a bit too...Zzzzzzzzz.....

 

*good luck*;)

-Warms (Alexandra)-

---------------------------------------------

Whatever I post is just my opinion, no more, no less!:!:

.....................................................................

NatWest=>settled in full, no strings!:D

NatWest creditcard=>settled in full, no strings!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi just had my reply from the Information Commissioners Office ,three pages long and a bit confusing in places,but they say: following our visit(to Barclaycard)we concluded that the microfiche system used by Barclaycard is a relevent filing system for the purposes of the act. This means that in our view the informaton is personal data and should have been supplied as part of your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) within 40 days and for a maximum fee of £10:D

:grin:amount WON so far £15,021.27(12 claims):D

Link to post
Share on other sites

N150 HELP { F Proposed directions:}:-? if i use the template for filling in section H asking for standard disclosure,is this a direction,do I need to put anything in section F

:grin:amount WON so far £15,021.27(12 claims):D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...