Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • FINAL UPDATE.  I have not posted as the defence were reading the thread.  An agreement was reached on the day of the hearing.   I am unable to go into detail but for those in this position the forum has been priceless support and advice so thank you all in the site team.   for those going through this, follow the process, ignore intimidating tactics and threats and get to the Judge.  They are very supporting of those self representing.   I note her name has gone from the heading of the thread.  Was this them ?  Thanks again.  
    • I'm not sure what the "appeal" system asked but he said he definitely didn't indicate he was the driver so I'm just going to have to take his word for it. Honestly, I don't think the hirer will contact them. I think my brother will tolerate it. I did have a similar experience with another company 6-7 years ago and sought advice on here then to which you guys told me to ignore, I got the exact same DRP letters and then a "Gladstones Solicitor" letter.  After that nothing happened and it died away. Based on my experience with that I assumed the same would happen here but only asked to see if perhaps anything had changed since then.    Hopefully it doesn't get to court but if it did, I feel like we have enough evidence to sway a judge who probably hates dealing with this type of nonsense anyway. Or maybe I'm too optimistic. 
    • Your attachment showing the cinema parking restrictions seems crystal clear. Let's see what the photos turn up.
    • Meter certification periods re given in The Meters (Certification) Regulations 1998, Schedule 4. From there you can check if they are correct about your specific meter .. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/1566/schedule/4 If they're telling porkies then you have e clear grounds to tell them to take  hike. If they're correct or if you haven't been able to confirm then you have  few options. You could just keep fobbing them off. In general Octopus can't keep up with demand for smart meters. It took 9 months to get our. So they may not push too hard. Or ask if you can install your own choice of meter. The Electricity Act 1989 cover this in Schedule 7 (2) and (2A) https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/29/schedule/7 Or fight the them and their enforcement. Or go off supply.
    • We received a copy of the completed Directions Questionnaire (N181) from the solicitors along with a draft copy of their directions. I am on a course today so can upload over the weekend if needed. By 4pm on 16th May both parties must each give standard disclosure of documents by way of list by category. By 4pm on 30th May any request for inspection or copies of docs must be made and compiled 14 days thereafter. I will provide more over the weekend.
  • 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 5014 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...