Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Any update here?  I ask as we have others now taking on CPM.
    • I am sorry about getting your status mixed up.  I have noticed one thing in your excellent WS. On their claim they are only pursuing you as the keeper-I think it is  in their Point C that  states along the lines of -the driver did not pay , so the keeper is liable. So on your No keeper Liability section  You may prefer  to alter 13 to    . It is trite Law that the driver and the keeper cannot be regarded  as the same person and the claimant has failed to offer any proof who was driving.  BY  only pursuing the keeper  when the PCN does not comply with PoFA must mean that their claim fails. See what the Site team thinks as it should  stop the Judge from looking at who was driving as your statement preempts them from even thinking about it.
    • What would suffice as proof? I just emailed them back my date of birth. Should I send a copy of driving licence? 
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton   MCOL Northampton N1 ? Manual Claim CCMCC (Salford) ? New beta WWW.MONEYCLAIMS.SERVICE.GOV.UK ?   If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form.   This has been uploaded in my previous messages in the bundle of documents     Name of the Claimant ? Asset Link Capital (NO5) Limited   How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to./   14/02/2020   ^^^^^ NOTE : WHEN CALCULATING THE TIMELINE - PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE DATE ON THE CLAIMFORM IS ONE IN THE COUNT [example: Issue date 01.03.2014 + 19 days (5 days for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 19.03.2014 + 14 days to submit defence = 02.04.2014] = 33 days in total Not relevant as his claim was set aside, and has now been brought to the court again by the claimant       Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? Please see bundle of documents in previous thread   What is the total value of the claim? £10,734.1    Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  Yes - this is one of the grounds for getting it set aside   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ?  Apparently 2000   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? I do not recall entering into an agreement with Barclays   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ?  It was, but it is not anymore   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned to Asset Link   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? No - although they have provided a copy of the assignment notice in their bundle of docs for the hearing   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? I don't remember - but again a copy of a letter has been provided (see bundle on previous thread)   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No    Why did you cease payments?  2015   What was the date of your last payment? December 2015   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved?  I wrote to Barclaycard back in 2015 to ask them to send proof of the original agreement but they just sent me a reconstituted document which had no personal deals on relating to me   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? yes - step change took control and set up payments of £1 pm
  • 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

Sheriff puts Bank of Scotland to proof on bank charges


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4092 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

Yup - we had a 1p od that morphed into £900+ before they admitted the error of their ways and corrected. Well - they didn't, of course, admit anything but having gone head to head with their collections and them having been told in a variety of ways to 'do their worst' someone actually had a look. Took about 6 or 7 months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Apparently whichever Lender referred the overdraft information to Experian does not agree with BOS that banking contracts do not fall within the regulation of cca 1974

 

Post 151 Page 8

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/237096-overdrafts-covered-ccas.html

 

wouldn't it be ironic if it was RBS!!!!!!!!!!

 

m2ae

Edited by means2anend
Link to post
Share on other sites

m2ae, in long threads, if you just want to lift one post, if you click on the post no, it opens in a separate window, and you can then copy/paste that URL instead.

 

Like so:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-3004364.html

 

HTH

 

Or to take you that spot in the thread....

 

Just click on the Permalink hyperlink next to the post number and copy/paste the URL in your address line, it changes to the post number when you click on the hyperlink.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I would like to start a new thread on how many claimants have had their bank charges claim struck out and why. Can some one please show me how to do this please?

 

TheyrCriminals

 

At the top of this page click on "OFT Test Case Updates and Discussion" then on that page top left under all the adds etc but before the list of topics you will see a "new thread " button. Click that then create your thread.

 

M1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Theyrciminals :)

 

If you go into the main HSBC forum page , top or bottom left of the grids you'll find a 'NEW THREAD' button . Just click on that and off you go - give it a name that suits you purpose ....

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch 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.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry ,I was assuming that you were on HSBC .....but any main bank forum page will do ......

:)

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch 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.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I would like to start a new thread on how many claimants have had their bank charges claim struck out and why. Can some one please show me how to do this please?

 

TheyrCriminals

 

 

This will help you TC - Users Guide Written by our very own bookworm so it has to be good :)

HTH (Hope This Helps) RDM2006

 

THE FORCE (OF CAG) IS WITH YOU

;)

 

We've Helped You To Claim - Now Help Us Remain

A live Site - Make a Donation

 

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

However, if you have found any advice you have been given helpful.

Why not show your gratitude And

Click the * on the post you found helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If asked under the freedom of Information Act I imagine they'd have to disclose this, breeze .......

 

But they've already admitted to the Supreme Court that their charges are designed to make about a third of their profits and give free banking to those who are rich enough not to need it ........ :rolleyes:

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch 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.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

If asked under the freedom of Information Act I imagine they'd have to disclose this, breeze .......

 

But they've already admitted to the Supreme Court that their charges are designed to make about a third of their profits and give free banking to those who are rich enough not to need it ........ :rolleyes:

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch 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.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

OOPS double post .! :oops:

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch 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.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

If asked under the freedom of Information Act I imagine they'd have to disclose this, breeze .......

 

But they've already admitted to the Supreme Court that their charges are designed to make about a third of their profits and give free banking to those who are rich enough not to need it ........ :rolleyes:

 

If memory serves FOI only applies to public bodies not private forms.

 

Of course lloyds muddies the water somwhat

 

S.

Edited by the_shadow
Damn mobile browsing and typing :-(
Link to post
Share on other sites

BREEZE........no the Scottish courts have placed the evidential burden of proof on the Banks as to why they think their charges should be looked on as fair.

 

BAsically its up to the Bank to prove their charges are fair....end of!

 

If they were, it would take no more than a week or two to produce that evidence from ANY organisation if they were!

 

Why has it taken 4 months and technical legal wrangles just to try and move the case to a higher track?

 

The Banks are on the ropes and are hoping to abuse their dominant position once again to win against the intersts of fairness and justice. THey are hoping that they can force the LIP to drop the case due to lack of funds.

 

A thought strikes me as to the fact that if the Bank charges regieme is fair, then not only prove it (Banks) but lets get a test case in the Court to settle it!!!!!!

 

If the public can see through this and which also goes against the Human Rights legislation and the Overiding Objective then surely the Judges will to?

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just look at the Supreme Court judgement, they have just encouraged the banks with their judgement - 'it's their core business', previously they didn't make any profit from it, the charges merely covered their costs. They will just carry on ripping

off people who can't afford to be ripped off.

The only place to get justice is Europe, and the contridiction above stacks up well.

 

 

'If the public can see through this and which also goes against the Human Rights legislation and the Overiding Objective then surely the Judges will to?'

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the public can see through this and which also goes against the Human Rights legislation and the Overiding Objective then surely the Judges will to?

 

 

I gave up on the idea of "blind justice" long ago as soon as I realised that it appears the way to win in court is to have loads of dosh or well backed. Most I could wish for is a sympathetic judge tbh.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I gave up on the idea of "blind justice" long ago as soon as I realised that it appears the way to win in court is to have loads of dosh or well backed. Most I could wish for is a sympathetic judge tbh.

 

S.

 

Are they not a dying breed Shadow :rolleyes:

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites

In all fairness to the Judges, they can only act on the information and the way the case is presented with the guidance within the Law to make an informed Judgement.

 

Remember they have to give a reasoned argument (Solomons Judgemet) as to why they have given the judgement and if any fact pertinent to your case has been omitted then don't cry foul.

 

It really is up to the Claimant (in our cases) to keep on top of the Judge if they make mistakes or have failed to take into account any fact etc etc to ensure that we brow beat them into submission. ;)

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember the Law and the Judges will work for us if we use the Law and facts to our advantage and prevent the Banks from twisting it, in other words ensure your case is not taken out of your control!!

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...