Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

County Court Claim received MBNA\Restons


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3665 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

  • Replies 449
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

LOST SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING :mad: THIS WAS A TRIAL NOT A QUICK YES THERE IS A CASE - NO THERES NOT.

 

Please do not think that I never put my case across well- I did, I had all documentation, I had all the files correctly labelled, extra copies and I came across well but the Judge was stuck on CAREY V HSBC - the once thing which I hope was not the nail in my coffin was that I could not find the reference to a "signature box" of creditor to be in same document.

 

The solicitors gave me their skeleton case just before we went in - informed Judge of this - wasn't bothered. They did not have a copy of my amended WS - gave them copies.

 

Carey V HSBC - they would not come away from it - Judge was happy that document conformed with s78 -happy that the Application Form became an Exectured Agreement - very satisfied that the "stamp" (quoted by solicitor - this is what it is) was the signature to make this a legally enforceable agreement. And that it does not have to be contained in a specific signrature box as long as it was there. Extremely happy with WS of Diane Powell. The Application Form contained the T&C's on the back and she confirmed this in her WS - I questioned all of Fluffy's points.

 

Judge would not accept Wilson V Hurstanger case - that was a fixed sum loan agreement and not a consumer credit agreement (something like that)

DN not faulty - just because I was charged PPI when I did not tick the box "you had read the terms and conditions very well because you knew not to tick the PPI box - therefore you were aware that this document became an agreement under the CCA 1974 blah blah"

 

The only thing he reduced was the PPI payments charged plus interest (about £300) - need to pay just under £10k within 14 days -crap!!!!!!

 

JUDGE ALSO TOLD ME TO BE GRATEFUL THAT THIS DID NOT GO TO FULL TIRAL AS i WOULD BE LOOKING AT EXCEPTIONAL COSTS!!!

 

OH is now in despair!!!!

 

Judge was not interested in the Wilson Case said everything conformed to s61

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Solicitor Asked Me Inbetween Waiting For The Judge To Decide - What Sites Do I Use - Do I Use Consumer Action Group? I Asked Him If He Patrols It - Told Me That He Had A Life!!!

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear your result :(

 

Can I ask how they dealt with the 'easily legible' issue as that in itself renders unacceptable, what they sent in respect of you S78 request.

Did you ask the other side to read aloud from the back of the agreement as suggested by emandcole?

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LB, I don't know what to say!

 

One is given to reasonably accept that they be allowed a fair hearing by a 'person' who is supposedly qualified to do so. Though it pains me to say it, you are but a victim of the 'DJ Lottery'. :mad:

 

Unfortunately that is of no comfort to you. I am sure our friends here who are far more experienced than I, will be along soon to advise if you have any form of recourse.

 

So sorry. :( xx

Notwithstanding the fact that I sometimes ramble and I'm such a worrier, all postings are made with the best intent and entirely without prejudice.

You are welcome to use any information you may find here entirely at your own risk. Please do not hold it against me! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
Very sorry to hear that LB. May I just ask, and apologies if this is obvious and I am missing it, but can you take this to appeal at a higher level?

 

Yes nodefaults, that is indeed an option as I inferred, but it would not be a decision to be made lightly. There are things that need to be considered and examined very carefully to ensure that there would be more than a reasonable prospect of success.

 

"Humbleman" is going down the appeal road at the moment and there are some useful comments on his thread.

 

I'm sure as and when the 'experts' pop in over the coming days, LB's options will be clear and she will be able to make an informed decision on the way to go.

 

Hang in there LB, it's not over just yet. :)

Notwithstanding the fact that I sometimes ramble and I'm such a worrier, all postings are made with the best intent and entirely without prejudice.

You are welcome to use any information you may find here entirely at your own risk. Please do not hold it against me! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, not sure what to say. Carey v HSC I think deals purely with documents for s78 and not for court.

 

Diane Powell, you could reach out to pompeyfaith or Langster in that respect.. I think they did some indepth research on her.

 

Yes, you would be able to appeal the decision, I think you should have said at the time of the hearing, but you can still swing into action if you want to. I will find some information on how to do this.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi LB,

 

So sorry, it's not the news any of us MBNAers want to hear, but maybe there is hope if you can get some seasoned experts on here.

 

I am sure they will be soon! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me but I can't see the difference between this case and plenty others that have been dismissed ,perhaps somebody can explain .

I feel for LB because it looks like the judge has ruled on subjective interpretation and not points of law .

 

The cca was improperly executed ,that's a given ,has the judge got blinded to Carey and assumed that it's ok because it suits the purpose of a s74 request and if so should we be using a different method to request the original executed cca ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have logged on and it is good to see postings - my email alerts have not come through so thought I was banished (lol) - although I do not feel like LOL - not quite picked myself up off the floor - had the "father-in-law" view yesterday "how do intelligent people get into this state?" and his coming round today ( he is a lovely man - so he in entitled to be upset and angry)

 

Perhaps S78 is not the way to go - this solicitor had this skeleton case based on CAREY with 4 points on it - I was just handed this as we went in and the Judge did not have a copy - I informed the Judge this has just been given to me and he said "OK". The solicor started with his four point csae - I did point out that this stage that CAREy was irrelevant because that deals with s78 and not s60 etc - and that the Wilson v Hurstanger etc and the solicitor and Judge stated that Wilson is not relevant as that is a Fixed Loan Agreement and not a Running Credit Card Agreement. When DP statement was read - I disputed who was Mr Hugh Chater, teh now named authorised officer - what, where, the fact that she had named the person responsible for the "squiggle of authorisation", who was that person, what was their title etc, where is the WS of Mr Hugh Chater, the solicitor stated that this was not a person this was a rubber stamp of "a signature" and that was the procedure - I felt that this was very important as it showed that DP's WS was incorrect. I questioned as to how hearsay evidence can be produced etc. With regard to the Application Form - the Judge kept repeating that I refer it as "Pre Contractual Application Form" but it is in fact the Credit Agreement because of the small wording under the title. He is satisfied that the reconstructed (his words) form was satisfactory with s78.

 

The T&C's on the back having different codes at the bottom, the fact that if you held the paper up to the light you can see that the reverse is bigger than the front it does not fit into the four corner markings as shown and he said in his summing up that the 2nd side had been reduced whilst photocopying! - by who not me that is how it was sent to me? As for the PPI he felt that I was entitled to £300 taken off the total owed - he asked the solicitor what my interest rate was - he replied 16.9% - even though I corrected him that it was 34.9% - the Judge felt that £300 was correct and in his summing up - stated that I was intelligent enough to understand that I had been charged for PPI therefore I am aware what I was signing. I stated that I knew there was a debt but the purpose of this hearing is to establish wheter the claimant has a legally executed enforceable agreement.

 

With regard to the WS stating that MBNA had never received my S78 request back in April 2009 - the fact that I had proof from Royal Mail by letter and that correspondence had been going back and forth since that time, acknowledged by MBNA on (dates and Exhibits) did not matter. The Judge just dismissed it as nothing.

 

I now have two weeks to get £10k - from quite where I do not know as I said to the Judge - he told me to go outside and discuss with the solicitor - what not - my income as self employed is not consistent and under £8k anyway -more worryingly is my OH's is again Application Form with squiggle - exactly the same although currently MBNA and Experto refusing SAR info to confirmwhen sold to DCA - but that's another thread!!

 

With regard to illegible documentation -the solictor was going through the T&C's on the reverse - i asked did he require a magnifying glass as they were illegible etc and the Judge said that the reconstructed T&C's supplied in a typed form were adequate under the act.

 

In hindsight perhaps a solicitor representing me may have affected the Judge's decision.

 

In hindsight - perhaps I should have dressed down for the occassion instead of having a clean and smart appearance, perhaps I should have like most of the people in the waiting area worn an old pair of jeans, with my bottom hanging out, all my documents in old worn out carrier bags and not neatly filed and labelled. Perhaps the solution may have not to appear intelligent and smart???? Because the other people all seemed to walk out of their hearings smiling. Sorry had to get my rant over with!!!!!

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

LB

 

I'm not sure I have seen a copy of the 'reconstructed T&Cs applicable at the time of signing'

 

Where are these?

 

Do they match the ones on the back?

 

Is the front of the form easily legible?

 

The signature issue i.e. showing that the form was pre-contractual and never intended as a regulated agreement is a very technical argument and it would seem that it was almost ignored.

 

On this point alone, IMHO SJ should not have been entered as again IMHO your defence had 'a chance'

 

BUT

Not only that but if the form/agreement was not easily legible together with every other document referred to within it as well then they did not carry out their obligations under S78 and therefore COULD NOT ENFORCE (also if they did not send a specific signed statement of account etc etc - Carey lists what needs to be sent in response to an S78 request)

 

This would be an error of Law by the DJ

 

However this would IMHO only delay them as they can rectify the default.

 

From what I can see you other argument centres around the first point about the form not being an executed agreement.

Was there anything else?

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, seen those - which is what the 'not easily legible' part was based on. (Unless of course the ones you have in your possession are easily legible - but I didn't think they were)

 

In your statement about the hearing you mentioned typed reconstructed T&Cs?

Where are these ones?

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also with regard to the front and back not matching my copy from MBNA was a two sided photcopy - the Judges copy and the solicitors were on two separate pages, I demonstrated that the T&C side does not fit the front four corner markings and the Judge in his summing up - commented that I had provided excellent paperwork and that my copy was far better quality as it showed that it was a double sided document as stated in DP WS - so did I hang myself there should I have made copies of separate pages instead of submitting the one I was sent?

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you denied that the T&Cs supplied were on the back and put the Claimant to strict proof then it would have been accepted anyway.

 

However IMHO you should have had the same docs as the other side and the DJ - very naughty ....... and this should have been queried - it does not make it a 'better copy' but more a 'misleading copy'

 

From single sided docs you can usually see the 'bleed through' and tell what was on the other side. Once you have a double sided doc then that is much harder.

 

Got the T&Cs yet?

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

looking - there are alot on my photobox

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the front of the form refer to 'overleaf' ? I cannot read it

 

It does refer to a document whose heading is NOT the one on the document you were sent.

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...