Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
  • 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

My partner's Egg CCA looks dodgy!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5026 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

My partner requested a copy of his Credit Agreement from Egg and was sent a letter with some documents that we think look very dodgy. The card was taken out in January 2004.

 

The document which is supposed to the be the agreement (1 of 2 pages) has strange dark lines on page 1 and 2 where it looks as though something has been folded to insert info. In addition to this, he received a 16 page document on plain white paper which is entitled "Credit Card Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1979". This document has our current address on it - we've moved several times since the card was taken out, and the original agreement was signed.

 

In addition to these, there are 30 pages of screengrabs from a Microsoft Explorer window... "Small print. Legal information..."

 

I've uploaded the scans. BCM01.jpg is the letter that was sent with the CCA. BCM04.jpg is page 1 of 16 pages. BCM05.jpg is 1 of 30 pages (screengrabs).

 

Imagefrog - Image Hosting :: BCM01.jpg

Imagefrog - Image Hosting :: BCM02.jpg

Imagefrog - Image Hosting :: BCM03.jpg

Imagefrog - Image Hosting :: BCM04.jpg

Imagefrog - Image Hosting :: BCM05.jpg

 

Could someone have a look and give their opinion? Any help would be gratefully received. I've seen a lot of other postings about this...

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I gather its currently unenforceable because it says "Approved limit" Where it should say "Credit limit". But there is a court case to see if they are enforceable or not.

 

Have a read of these, bit more info on it.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/188093-egg-credit-agreements-what.html

 

Egg Card - CCA Flawed? - MoneySavingExpert.com Forums

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been readin' the 'Egg Credit Agreements-what do i think is wrong with them' thread myself today. Its a lengthy beast. I THINK the agreement in that is the same as the agreement you have. All pre-2005 Egg agreements use "Appoved limit" it seems... which are being challenged, so I gather, on the obtuse wording. Doesn't sound like a terribly strong case to me, but I hope it is 'cos I've sent in a dispute letter to Egg now!! That being the case, I gather the court is going to decide now on written submissions from the barristers.

Mozzone

_______________

Taking on the bloodsuckers

Link to post
Share on other sites

They refer to the 16 page document with the correct heading as merely being the 'terms and conditions',. But it looks like a real CCA (without dates and signatures etc), so then what is the two page signed document? By heading the document they claim is the terms and conditions as they do, they actually implicitly accept the two page signed document is not, on its own, a credit agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974........

 

The 16 page agreement has no provenance, no date, no signatures etc. Apparently in one thread they were unable to produce it last year - have they found an old leaflet and typed it up, or managed to communicate with their old databases? Or perhaps even made it up!

Also, how can they show that this is the document that was sent out with the signed document etc etc...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wazir:

Yes, this is the point that has made me suspicious. The 16-page document (on plain paper - no logo, nothing) they sent obviously does not relate to the 2-page document with the logo on it which says Egg Card Agreement. For one thing, the address on both documents is different. The 2-page one has the address at the time the card was taken out, the 16-page one has our current address on it - we have moved house 3 times in this period. We have not been sent the original credit agreement which is what was requested. Nor were we sent a full statement of the account which was also requested. I presume when you ask for a full statement of the account that you should receive a statement of the account from the time it was taken out. Am I wrong in this assumption? I thought the purpose of requesting this was to see exactly how much has been paid each month, and how they have arrived at their interest charge. Am I right or wrong here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
From what I gather its currently unenforceable because it says "Approved limit" Where it should say "Credit limit". But there is a court case to see if they are enforceable or not.

 

Have a read of these, bit more info on it.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/188093-egg-credit-agreements-what.html

 

Egg Card - CCA Flawed? - MoneySavingExpert.com Forums

 

 

Hi

 

Has there been an outcome on the court case? The reason I ask is that I was talking to a solicitor today and he says it looks like all EGG agreements are enforeceable. Also I notice the thread by Paul (PT.........) where he thinks that all EGG agreemetns are faulty is no longer there??????

 

Regards

 

Interweb

Link to post
Share on other sites

That thread disappeared for reasons other than whether Egg agreements are enforceable or not.

But to more important matters. Your solicitor friend, did he give any reason/ justification/ advance any explanation for this opinion re Egg agreements, as to the best of my knowledge PT's case hasnt had judgement handed down as yet. If so, is there any insight as to why he might have put this opinion to you (other than its his own?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

He was someone I was talking to see if his company could take on some of my cases which were _ucked up by Ratio's demise.

 

No he didnt really say much but I seemed to think he referred to something to do with the term 'credit agreement' not being mentioned as not a valid reason.

 

What is Paul's case to do with and when is it going to court?

 

Thanks

 

Interweb

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...