Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • and it will be also now written off under age related criteria anyway.
    • @dx100ukThanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe consequences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points? @Man in the middleI've been searching the forum and you seem very knowledgeable. Would you mind giving a look at my query please? Thanks in advance!!
    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
    • Been perusing the actual figures on the polls above wondering where the '16% claimed for deform comes from? I understand that there are 'weighted' end results based on secret calculations ...   Probably going to repeat this later, but remember that the ukip/brexit/reform/deform party has ALWAYS had poll speculation FAR better than their actual  performance at elections - by large margins. SO: The labor and Tory votes come largely from simply the people who say they will vote for them - sorted Lab 43% Tory 20%, with maybe another small 1-2% coming from the weightings of the 'not sures' Greens largely get what is declared from 'other' , although with another declared green bit from the 'pressed' question   So as the share of the voting displayed in 'other' granted to reform/deform is around 11%, where does the '16% too often being reported come from? Seems that reform has been granted as beneficiary of effectively ALL the don't knows and wont says, who when pressed didn't actually declare for someone else ... effectively adding 40%+ to their reported polling % - rather strange given their consistent under-performance compared to polling - or perhaps that is the cause of the higher rating eh?   Now I admit the possibility (probability?) of wingers being ashamed of declaring their support for the yuckey lemon end of the spectrum ... but surely  that should affect the 'Torys as well? Maybe the statisticians have simply weighted in that deform wingers are simply more likely to lie?   But - without 'weightings' and assumptions that faragits will get everything that isnt declared as a definite and unequivocal 'not that Piers Morgan' - reform is on around 11% it seems.   Add to that the history of polling a lot less than the hype - and the simple fact that faragit wingers seem to be spread across the country (presumably skulking in their moms spare room despite being 45+) and greens and lib dems seem to be community minded - I think two seats will be an epic result for farage. Hardly the opposition - far more raving wingnut party.   and importantly - Has farage got a home in clacton yet?
    • "as I have no tools available to merge documents, unless you can suggest any free ones that will perform offline merges without watermarking" (which you don't) ... but ok please upload the documents and we'll go from there
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Summary Cause Overdraft Court Summons Please help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4974 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

Hello All

 

Wondering if any one could help me, problem with an impending court summons, attempting to get a decree - I want to fend off against possible bankruptcy at all costs own my house and have (some) equity.

 

Ran into difficulties last year, contacted cab and entered into a prorata payments to all creditors, maintained ever since no probls.

 

One of the creditors is an Overdraft with bank which had for at least 10 years or so, out of the blue, they have got snotty and sent the wolves in.

 

1. I think they do not have Exemption from Section V as they did not send the terms of the interest within 3 months as per OFT exemption - but then I read on the forum that all the bank has to say is that they sent the letter and the sheriff would agree under balance of probability. Does anyone have any thoughts on this being a pointless argument?

 

2. Does the lack of signed agreement carry any weight with an o/d?

 

3. There are loads of Default charges on the account, can I make a counter claim now that the test case has saved the banks bacon?

 

4 They sent a "NOTICE under section 76 and 98" requesting the balance and 28 day intention to file a default...... However, the cover letter for the "NOTICE" says "please find attached default notice".

 

Then they officially terminated - any thoughts that they terminated incorrectly as 76 + 98 for non default situations? And they stated her eis your default notice - should they have used s87, as they are saying it is a default situation?

 

(I see that this is a current live issue)

 

5 I suffer from poor health and am on benefits only, should I use this as defence that they are being heavy handed by not accepting my payments set up by CAB and going for a decree?

ie they contacted CAB a couple of months ago and requested that unless I increased my payments to £50 per month they were going to push ahead with court action. (presently paying £5 a month.

 

Bit of a lengthy post sorry, but any help at all would be appreciated

 

Many Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not really sure about the application of the Consumer Credit Act to bank accounts and overdrafts (and it would depend a good deal on what kind of account/ overdraft - personal or business) so, in order not to mislead I am going to pass on that one and hope someone who does know will happen by.

However to take on some of your other questions

 

  1. they dont have a signed agreement - oh dear. Yes I cannot envisage that this wouldnt be a problem for them no matter what type of account/ legislation applies. We do still have rules of evidence (I would hope)
  2. reclaiming default charges - I would have a look at this http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/259614-updated-bank-charge-letter.html, and at this Govan Law Centre: Sheriff puts Bank of Scotland to proof on bank charges. My advice would be to leave it till after the Sharp case is finished, if you can - things should be a bit clearer.
  3. S76 and 98 of what? If the Consumer Credit Act then these sections say that an account cannot be terminated (or earlier repayment required) unless a lawful default notice has been issued (and even then you must have 14 days to remedy the default). If this is covered by the CCA, then they can issue a default if you are in default of a term or condition. The problem is what status your agreement for reduced payments (£5) has? Does it amend the T&Cs or are they accepting this "without prejudice" in effect and thus can go back as they have and claim you are in default as you are not meeting the agreement (£50) to repay the sum? Either way, for sure, they have to send a default notice in advance of termination, and that default notice should give you 14 days to remedy the default - so for instance if you got the notice on Tuesday (1st June) you should get at least till the 15th to remedy the default - if not its unlawful and they are in serious bother as they cannot issue another corrective notice with the right dates. So - did the default notice arrive with the termination notice? If so, hang on to this - could be important for your defence
  4. Lastly, if you are on benefits, and they do take it to court, then the court will look at your ability to pay and set an amount accordingly. No idea what this will be - from what you say, it would seem unlikely to be £50, but its a decision for the court and it will (must) reflect your ability to pay. The courts have taken on board that you cant get blood from a stone.

I hope some of that helps and that someone with more background on bank accounts comes along to help you real soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Mrwheeler!

 

Just to save me typing a load of bumf again, if you could please take a look at this Thread, some of your issues may be answered.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/260084-im4347-hsbc-business-account.html#post2950714

 

I've covered s76 and s98 there in a little detail.

 

Once you've seen that, then if you need more help, please just ask away here.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Cheers,

BRW

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Seriously and BRW

 

Many thanks for your input on this, you have really given me alot to look into and consider - brilliant.

 

I will get a defence together based on what I think is crunchy and see what you think.

 

Cheers for now

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wondering if anyone can have a look at my draft defence, date is quite soon.

 

Apologies, had to delete, had my pleas in law incorrect, will re post :sad:

 

Edited by mrwheeler
Font sizes
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Wondering if anyone could keep me right here.

 

Summoned for a defaulted credit debt. I defended in court and counterclaimed for refund of charges and interest etc.

 

At the hearing, the other side motioned to sist - I agreed.

 

Today they have just written to me saying they propose to dismiss proceedings with no cost due to either party:-)

 

1 My Counterclaim is £1700 more than what they are claiming from me in their summons - are they proposing to just call it a day and scratch the difference?

 

2 Should I request a motion of absolvitor?

 

Any help most appreciated, a bit unsure on procedure this part.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be inclined to seek to negotiate at this stage

 

  1. get an agreed motion of absolvitor to make sure that they dont come back in due course
  2. negotiate with them for as much of the £1700 as you can. See what you can get. One way the bank might look at this is that if this doesnt get to court, the legal fees will be less and they might as well give some of this to you. You would need to see how much you can screw out of them and make a judgement on whether to accept or not at that point. But it does have the advantage that it doesnt need to go to court
  3. if it does go to court, their recent correspondence with you makes pretty clear they dont fancy their chances. This might simply be on the basis that even after you have "paid" what they owe, they still owe you £1700. But is the account enforceable - prescribed terms and all that? If not, then their liability in reality isnt £1700, but ALL your charges. As we dont know if it is enforceable or not, we cant offer advice, but its something else for you to think about.

Best of luck. Yours doesnt look a bad position to be in.

SFU :-)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...