Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • there is NO exposure if you simple remove your name address/ref numbers etc from docs, over 10'000 pdf uploads are here. which then harvests IP addresses off of the people that then do so..which is why we do not allow hosting sites. read our rules and upload carefully thats exactly why we say capture as JPG, redact, then convert/merge to one mass PDF. then online sites to achieve that we list do not leave watermarks.  every once in a while we have a user like you that thinks they know better...we've been doing it since 2006 with not one security issue. thank you.
    • was at the time you ticked it  but now they've still not complied . if you read up, here , you'll see thats what everyone does,  
    • no they never allow the age related get out, erudio are masters at faking supposed 'arrears' fees which were levied before said date and thus null its write off. 1000's of threads here on them!! scammers untied that lot. i can almost guarantee they'll state it's not SB'd too re above, but just ignore them once sent. dx    
    • DX, worth mentioning? I take it that you refer to after ,65 loan is written off clause. I thought that after the problems I had at deferment (/no proof of income satisfied them, and I could not afford an accountant) after they stopped pestering that they had decided that the age related clause  had kicked in. As I said, its time to hit back with SB letter.
  • 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

Harsh Letter received from Kensington *Claim struck out in court*


jamorgan
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6002 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

ditto Hulse Morgy - if you have paypal a/c pm me if you prefer.

 

Hugs

 

lel

2006 RatNest - Personal a/c:

JulyLBA, Aug Filed Claim, Oct Settled in full £7,000

 

2006 RatNest - Ltd Co a/c

JulyLBA, Aug Filed Claim, Oct Settled in full £8,000

 

2006 RatNest - Hub's a/c

JulyLBA, Aug Filed Claim,Sept Settled in full £1,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 371
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 2 weeks later...

Having read all the comments on the kensington letter it seems to me that the structure of the charge merits comment.In my case the charge was expressed as 6% of the redemption sum in the the first three years of the mortgage and nothing thereafter.Purely arbitrary and very difficult to present as a rational estimate of the loss they might suffer. Also even at a discounted interest rate for the first three years,their rates were still above the regular market.Their letters are intimidating but mostly bluff.It must be called

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the grounds that:

 

1. there was no breach of contract because Jamorgan was exercising a right contained in the contract to terminate early.

2. The term was not subject to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations because it related to the adequacy of the remuneration or price.

3. Kensington were entitled to their legal costs under the indemnity clause contained in the mortgage.

 

The issue of whether the charge amounted to a penalty did not arise because there was no breach of contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Thankyou, thankyou,

so much for all the support you guys

and good luck

x

 

 

Jamorgan..

you are one brave,courageous and ballsy individual..go and give them hell ..we are right behind you all the way as there are hundreds more claims on the way and believe me they shall not be able to defend them all however big their litigation department is!

 

good luck!

r.d.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am also happy to make a donation.

REFUNDED

Hubbys - HSBC £4,165 paid 18/8 after MCOL issued :)

HSBC - £651 paid 18/8 after MCOL issued :)

HSBC - £147 Prel 7/8, LBA 21/8, MCOL 6/9 £241

Hubby Halifax - Prel 29/7 £215, LBA 21/8, Offer rec. £110 22/8, MCOL 6/9 £298

Abbey - £2758 - Prel 26/6, LBA 10/7 - MCOL 26/7 £3,391, offer 25/8 £1,755.94, paid £3567.32 after Case manag hearing

Barclays - £675 Prel7/8, LBA 21/8, offer received £300 MCOL 6/9 £998 - Paid £1,012 before going to Court

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watchin an waitin Morgy...........

 

hugs

2006 RatNest - Personal a/c:

JulyLBA, Aug Filed Claim, Oct Settled in full £7,000

 

2006 RatNest - Ltd Co a/c

JulyLBA, Aug Filed Claim, Oct Settled in full £8,000

 

2006 RatNest - Hub's a/c

JulyLBA, Aug Filed Claim,Sept Settled in full £1,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi i dont know if this is any use in claiming back these nasty erc's, but Tom Brennan the barrister whose taking natwest to court, is using a different approach to claim his bank charges maybe this could be used for erc's

 

 

If anyone is interested, here is Tom Brennan's website.

 

www.tombrennan.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi i dont know if this is any use in claiming back these nasty erc's, but Tom Brennan the barrister whose taking natwest to court, is using a different approach to claim his bank charges maybe this could be used for erc's

 

 

If anyone is interested, here is Tom Brennan's website.

 

www.tombrennan.co.uk

 

No, it has no bearing on ERC's whatsoever.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jamorgan

 

Still watching with bated breath. We had to sell our house, as I told you before, to avoid repossession, but if we hadn't had to pay the ERC we might have had something to put down on something else, Good luck

 

Blidge

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope we can get some justice for you too Blidge.

 

Just recieved a letter from Drydens solicitors

 

Please note that unless we recieve your satisfactory proposals to repay the judgement debt by 4pm on the 26th April 2007, our client will have no alternative but to enforce the judgement debt through the court.

 

A couple of days ago I recieved a letter from Drydens (for the secound time) requesting, could they have a copy of the transcript

There having a laugh!

 

Not sure what to do now with this

any thoughts

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts are if you are appealing the the jdgement is in dispute anyway, and could be overturned, but this is costs awarded on their indemnity so even if you win the appeal you could still be liable for their costs?

Dunno how best to advise you here - hopefully zoot will. No doubt she will be along later.

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope we can get some justice for you too Blidge.

 

Just recieved a letter from Drydens solicitors

 

Please note that unless we recieve your satisfactory proposals to repay the judgement debt by 4pm on the 26th April 2007, our client will have no alternative but to enforce the judgement debt through the court.

 

A couple of days ago I recieved a letter from Drydens (for the secound time) requesting, could they have a copy of the transcript

There having a laugh!

 

Not sure what to do now with this

any thoughts

 

Jamorgan..

how about creating a "fighting fund" for everybody concerned when they are taking kensington to Court???

this fund can be used to help people to continue their cases even if there was a risk of costs being awarded against them.. in most cases,the judge would not order these costs as long as the refunds are below £5000.- as we all know,therefore the risk is minimal...

 

what does everybody say??

 

consider this ; if everybody who had been hard doe by kensington paid only £10.--each for this fund,we shall have more than enough to represent everybody and believe me this will put the scares up the Big Boy! and many similiarly featured other companies too!

what do you reckon..worth a shot???

my £10.- ready when you are!

 

keep the faith.

R.D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indemnity for costs was never intended to protect mortgage lenders from the consequences of unlawful or unfair practice. It was introduced to protect the funds of ordinary society members before they became banks.

 

My view is that you should link unlawful penalty charges together with the ERC as one claim. If you establish that the charges are unlawful then you argue that your contract/agreement has been breached by the lender. Therefore the indemnity clause no longer applies

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info Zoots, were getting a little bit of movement now,

sending all the documants he requires today to the barrister at the given address.

Fingers crossed everyone

Morgy x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fingers Crossed.

Yep as someone said. Money waiting for you. Just give me the details in a private message.

Good luck.

Subject Access Request for Kensington sent:23/11/06

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) for Clysdale sent on 24/01/07 which they lost, sent again on 04/04/07

 

AA Payed in full £85:00 15/07/06 woo hoo!!

King's Lyn Gym, £550 settled. Woo hoo my first win!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...