Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Excellent news! Thread title updated. Please do consider a donation in light of the help received here. The help we give is free, but try telling that to our server hosts!
    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
  • 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

LLOYDS CCA Reply- comments please


HOWLER
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3954 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

  • Replies 152
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Lloyds are as hopeless as the other banks.

 

I have had letters from a DCA saying Lloyds are dealing with my CCA request which they got in June 2010. But last week got a letter from Lloyds saying I have seven days to pay full balance or they will start legal action!!!

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Haven't heard from Lloyds or their DCA since August, following my complaint that the a/c should not have been passed to a DCA as it was in dispute.

 

This morning I have received two letters from Lloyds and one from the DCA all in the same post! The two Lloyds ones say, we are still looking at your complaint etc. get back to you in four weeks. The other says that they are requesting a copy of my loan agreement and loan terms, not too clever seeing as it's a credit card not a loan? Also that as they've been sending me monthly statements and etc. that I have accepted the validity of the arrangement, it's terms and conditions and thus its standing in contract law? The debt is now therefore being dealt with by the DCA although they have now stopped interest on it, except they've been adding this on since July when I declared the a/c in dispute due to the lack of a correct SAR and CCA. I have only ever received a printed of T&C's from a different date than when my account was opened, which bore no obvious relation to anything to do with my actual account and some years after my credit card was taken out.

 

The DCA letter says they are looking in to my complaint and will get back to me when they have heard from their client.

 

With the whole Carey vs HBS situation is it still viable to dispute the lack of CCA/ SAR etc. or is this now not going to hold any weight in the argument if it goes to Court. Also are Lloyds legally able to pass the debt to the DCA and continue to add interest when the account was plainly in dispute? Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Vancouver

 

It seems that when these idiots come up with the Cary v HSBC they only pick out bits they want. As I am in the same battle with lloyds as u and had the same letters, I reply to the comment on Cary v HSBC with the following.

 

With regard to the documents you have already supplied it is clear that substantial variation have been made. I would refer you to the case of Carey v HSBC. The following is a brief summary of point 4 in the summary.

 

(4) If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, the creditor must still provide a copy of the original agreement, as well as the varied terms;

E

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Elrib, I'm particularly annoyed to suddenly get them back on the case some 6 months since I last heard from them. Their attitude definitely seems to have been led by the Carey case as they allude to me trying to get out of the debt. The irony is, I'd originally asked for a mid term arrangement to get me through my current predicament and they would not even converse on the subject, despite me being a customer for 20 odd years and never previously missing a payment. After looking at threads on CAG I decided to question the entire agreement and they still have not managed to supply me with anything at all that relates to my account!

 

I will now respond to them and use your point from the Carey case and see what their response is. Of course six months ago they ignored my complaint that they had passed the A/C on to a DCA despite it being in dispute and I've never had an answer to this.

 

Thanks again, I was tempted to give up after reading the blog from Caro but I think it might be worth a few more letters and see who bottles it first!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a similar situation with LloydsTSB and originally my account was passed to AIC -- saw them off and then Apex Credit Management Ltd was instructed to act as an intermediary.

 

I complained about Apex's behaviour and low and behold LloydsTSB have voluntarily refunded over £1,500 in unlawful/penalty charges. They can be beaten - just follow the advise on here and be dogged in your determination!

 

Good Luck!

 

 

Impecunious! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

A big get stuffed is in order

my 5.5 k is with apex

pure amateurs!!!!! Laughable offer

 

Apex are incredible!!!! :-D Brilliant :-D

 

They recently sent me a six page letter explaining why I should pay them and giving pages and pages of reasons mentioning Judge Waksman case ................

 

Only small problem for them is .......................... hidden away on page three they have written "Lloyds Banking Group have confirmed that they are unable to supply you with a copy of your agreement. Hence as you have not been provided with a copy of your agreement your debt cannot be enforced through the courts" He He ..... Thank you Apex.

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes, H&L Legal - rent-a-letter solicitors for DCAs - I've had the pleasure of receiving their correspondence too. I just ignored them and told them I was contacting the OC instead to make arrangements!

 

 

I think there's quite a few threads on H&L on here too.

 

 

Good Luck!

 

Impecunious! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a similar situation with LloydsTSB and originally my account was passed to AIC -- saw them off and then Apex Credit Management Ltd was instructed to act as an intermediary.

 

I complained about Apex's behaviour and low and behold LloydsTSB have voluntarily refunded over £1,500 in unlawful/penalty charges. They can be beaten - just follow the advise on here and be dogged in your determination!

 

Good Luck!

 

 

Impecunious! :-)

 

 

Now I just have to get the idiots to refund me - not set cheque against o/d current account. DOH!!!

 

Impecunious! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...