Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Last month was confirmed to be the hottest-ever May on record, in terms of global average temperatures, completing an entire calendar year of month-by-month records.  The average temperature last month was 1.52C above the pre-industrial average, according to the Copernicus Climate Change Service, known as C3S. The average global temperature for the 12-month period to the end of May was 1.63C (2.9F) above the pre-industrial average
    • This time you do need to reply to them with a snotty letter to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did try court. We will help this evening.  
    • Hi, I just wanted to update the post and ask some further advice  I sent the CCA and CPR request on the 14th May, to date I have had no reply to the CCA but I received a load of paperwork from the CPR request a few days ago. I need to file the defence today and from the information I have read the following seems to be what is required.  I would be grateful if some one could confirm suitability. Many thanks   Claim The claim is for the sum of £255.69 due by the Defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a PayPal account with an account reference of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)  The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 15-09-21, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £0.00. The Claimant claims the sum of £255.69   Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had financial dealings with PayPal  in the past but cannot recollect the account number referred to by the Claimant. 2. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor the Claimant refers to within its particulars of claim.  3. Paragraph 3 is noted. On the 17/5/2024 I requested information related to this claim by way of a Section 77 request, which was received and signed for by the claimant on 20/5/2024. As of today, the Claimant has failed to respond to this request, and therefore remains in default of the section 77 request and therefore unable to enforce any alleged agreement until its compliance. 4. Therefore it is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and: (b) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice Pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 5. Paypal (Europe) S.A.R.L is out of the juristriction of English Courts. 6. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed, or any relief.
    • Thanks @dx100ukI followed the advice given on here... then it went very quiet!  The company was creditfix I think then transferred to Knightsbridge (or the other way around) The scammer independent advisor was Roger Wallis-having checked his LinkedIn profile just this morning, it does look like he's still scamming vulnerable people... I know I was stupid for taking his advice, but i do wonder how many others he has done this to over a longer period of time (it came as a  massive shock to him when our IVA suddenly failed). Lowell have our current address (and phone numbers if the rejected calls over the past couple of days is anything to go by!) No point trying the SB because of the correspondence in 2019? Thanks
    • I have received the following letter from BW Legal today.  Also includes form if I admit the debt and wanting my income details.  Do I reply to this LETTER OF CLAIM please?  Looks like they are ready for court now??  Thank You BW Legal - Letter of Claim.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

VT against British Credit Trust


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5205 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

Hey,

 

My girlfirend is 23 months through a 48 month HP agreement with BCT. She has an impeccable payment record with them and she has now requested to VT when the next payment is due as she wants a new car on better APR etc..

 

BCT have promptly sent the relevant documentation back to VT, with the obvious scare mongery about potential repair costs etc if the car ain't in good nick. Now there are a few scratches etc.. that I will try to iron out best I can plus 1 damaged alloy wheel. Again as I say I will ensure getting the car in best repair possible without spending too much.

 

Now the 2 problems/ dilemmas I have is firstly do we pay the £110 for them to collecty the car and hopefully the collection company won't follow procedures and check the car properly and just take it? Or do we drive it down to Leeds to one of their depots and see what happens. We live in North East so it's only roughly an hours drive away so to drive car would save £.

 

Secondly is their statement in us VT'ing that if the car doesn't mean their valuation, then we would be laible for the difference the actually makes at auction. How does this exactly work and are there any loopholes I should know about or scams they may try and play?

 

Any help greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are VTing a car which is shown as a clause within your agreement, which it must be or they wouldn't even be agreeing to it in the first place, then they cannot charge you anything further just because it failed to achieve their valuation at auction.

 

Your VT clause should say something like

 

TERMINATION - YOUR RIGHTS

You have the right to terminate this agreement. To do so you should write to the person you make your payments to. We will then be entitled to the return of the goods and to half the total amount payable under this agreement, that is £x,xxx.xx. If you have already paid at least this amount plus any overdue instalments and have taken reasonable care of the goods, you will not have to pay anything else.

So, the important bits in there as I see it are:

 

1) have you paid more than half the total amount payable?

 

2) would you consider the condition to be "reasonable" for it's age? if so make sure put them to test on proving any damage they claim is unreasonable.

 

3) If you have paid 50% or more of the cost then what they make at auction is no longer your concern and they can't charge you for the shortfall.

 

4) On what basis are they justifying a charge for collection? At the very least I would insist they collect it, at their expense, from a mutually convenient location (e.g. the same place you collected it from when buying it?). I doubt there is anything in the contract stating you have to pay their transport costs.

 

Remember to hold firmly to the stated term in their contract; i.e. "if you have paid at least half the amount due then you will have nothing more to pay." If they are trying to charge you transport costs, then that by default means they want you to pay more, which is contrary to the contract!

Edited by crem
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Grantyblade,

 

I VT'd a car back to BCT in May, sent off my letter by Special Delivery and tracked the same. About a week later I had a phone call from SMA in Leeds saying they had been instructed to pick up the car. They then appointed an Exeter company to pick it up, this took place another week later. I had a letter from BCT in the interim saying that I had a £0 liability. There was NO charge for collection or any other incidentals.

 

The pick up chap was fine, although the car was good as new, albeit high mileage, he signed the V5 transfer on behalf of BCT and took the car on a transporter. I took loads of photos prior to giving up the car. No issues subsequently, other than BCT erroneously stuck a default on my credit file :-(, when informed, they corrected this within 24 hours. They did subsequently send a statement to show how much they ' lost' at auction [Theoretically against what they would have squeezed out of me! I VT'd as the car, a large 4 x 4 was only worth about £6500 and I still owed some £13,000 ish!, I bought it before the VED rates for such were corrupted by Brown and his cohorts.]

 

I have to say, that although BCT ripped me off with their interest rate and some charges, they dealt with the VT quite professionally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crem,

thats great thanks, the wording on the CCA etc.. is as you put it 'in stone' that we shouldn't have to pay anything more if it fails to meet their valuation.

 

We will have paid 50% on 4th April 2010 which will fall roughly when we give car back and they and we are aware that there is only £140 outstanding. They've been very good about it. Just wondering therefore why so nice!? Guess we haven't done owt wrong tho. But thanks for your post.

 

I shall get all the paperwork out again to re-check.

 

Helford,

 

Yeah they seem to be handling the VT very well, no probs. When you sent them the VT and they replied did they give you an option to return car or for them to collect? That's what they've done in my case but to pay £110 for the priviledge of collection. I've just sent back letter stating that we shall take car to them. maybe should have waited to read your post!?? Never mind?

 

Did they go over the car with a fine tooth comb when collecting it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never any mention of paying for collection, not that they can charge, as I understand anyway.

 

The collection chap did a quick walk around only, less than a minute. I have to say, even with 60K ish mileage, the car was immaculate inside and out, so no reasons to doubt anything else. Obviously there was some wear and tear as would be expected.

 

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...