Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you. Such a good point. They did issue all 3 before I paid though. I only paid one because I didn’t have proof of parking that time, only for two others.    Unfortunately no proof of my appeal as it was just submitted through a form on their website and no copy was sent to me. I only have the reply. I believe I just put something like “we made the honest mistake of using the incorrect parking area on the app” and that’s it. Thanks again for your help. 
    • They are absolute chuckleheads. You paid but because you entered a different car park site also belonging to them they are pursuing you despite them knowing what you had done. It would be very obvious to everyone, including Alliance that your car could not have been in two places at the same time. Thank you for posting the PCN so quickly making it a pity that you appealed since there are so many things wrong with it that you as keeper are not liable to pay the charge. They rarely accept appeals since that would mean they lose money but they have virtually no chance of beating you in Court. Very unlikely that they will take you to Court given the circumstances. Just in case you didn't out yourself as the driver could you please post up your appeal.
    • Jasowter I hope that common sense prevails with Iceland and the whole matter can be successfully ended. I would perhaps not have used a spell checker just to prove the dyslexia 🙂 though it may have made it more difficult to read. I noticed that you haven't uploaded the original PCN .Might not be necessary if the nes from Iceland is good. Otherwise perhaps you could get your son to do it by following the upload instructions so that we can appeal again with the extra ammunition provided by the PCN. Most of them rarely manage to get the wording right which means that you as the keeper are not liable to pay the charge-only the driver is and they do not know the name and address of the driver. So that would put you both in the clear if the PCN is non compliant.
    • Thank you so much. Yes, I wish I had done my research and not paid. It's all for the same car park. Here is one of the original PCNs, they are all the same bar different dates. PCN-22.03.24-1.pdf PCN-22.03.24-2.pdf
    • Hi Clou, Welcome to the Forum and thank you for reading first before you posted. There seems to be many problems with Cornwall and getting a signal to use your a phone which could be why these parking companies don't use alternatives. It is a shame you paid the first one as you would probably have not had to pay that one either.  Was the car park at which you paid the same parking company as the one sending you these PCNs? On the subject of PCNs could you please post them up so we can see if they comply with the Act.
  • 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

Alexandra Slater -v- Egg Banking Plc


QC15
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4995 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

Alexandra Slater -v- Egg Banking Plc - judgment 9 August 2010.

 

Has anyone got any news on this one - apparently it seems that it has gone in Egg's favour, the case is apparently unreported so how does one go about obtaining a copy of the same. Any help appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alexandra Slater -v- Egg Banking Plc - judgment 9 August 2010.

 

Has anyone got any news on this one - apparently it seems that it has gone in Egg's favour, the case is apparently unreported so how does one go about obtaining a copy of the same. Any help appreciated.

 

On another forum it's reported that the client changed their story when on the stand and this was a different story to what they had told their legal team and counsel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what website is that? would like to read it, or can you cut and paste for us?

Advice and comments posted by The Debt Star reflect only my personal opinion and it is up to you alone to decide what action you should take. You should always seek independent legal advice from your own qualified legal advisor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zzzzzzzz

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted this earleir today ...

 

Egg CCards - Approved limit v Credit Limit - Judgement .. not yet published

 

 

Hi all

 

I know that a lot of people are waiting for this, and that PT has said that he won't be putting the Judgement on here following a slight falling out...

 

Apparently
Egg
link3.gif
when now being challenged by a Debtor on the Approved v Credit Limit - have responded with this ...

 

"We note your reiteration of your argument in relation to the use of the term "Approved Limit". You allege that we have failed to comply with section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the CCA) by failing to include all of the terms prescribed by schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit Act (agreement) Regulations") on the basis that the credit limit is described as the "Approved Limit". This allegation is incorrect. The form of agreement used by Egg contains all of the relevant information prescribed both by Schedule 1 and by Schedule 6 of the Agreement Regulations. "Approved Limit" is specifically defined in Condition 1.3 of your agreement as the amount you can borrow from time to time on the account and is therefore clearly understandable. There is no requirement under the CCA to use a particular term or phrase when describing the amount of credit. The description of the credit limit complies with paragraph 8(b) of schedule 1 of the Agreement Regulations.
This has been confirmed by the High Court in Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking plc (9 August 2010, high Court, Mold District Registry, unreported
)
. "

 

Case No: 9CC00161/MC684

 

Sure someone will post up the judgement when published, but thought it worth posting this for those who are waiting on this aspect of their CCA to see if it could be challenged.... I know there will now be a lot of disappointed bods .. (believe there's no appeal to be lodged)

 

(also thanks to the individual who provided me with this info....)

 

Abs xx
:Cry:

 

 

 

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would strongly urge everybody to wait until the actual judgement is available, before accepting anything Egg or any DCA say regarding this case. It wouldn't be the first time that Banks and DCA'S have tried to pick the bits out of a judgement that suits them. We need to see the actual details before everybody decides that the approved limit isn't worth pursuing. Also I beleive that this case dealt with some other issues and we all need to know the details of these to see whether theres other avenues to Pursue.

Take Care

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its also on another site where there are quite a few ex-CAGers inc PT and PeterBard.....don't feel it appropriate to mention it on here. Maybe you'll stumble on it like I did if you do a google on credit related issues.

 

Point to note - he hasn't posted the whole case transcript Jon if thats what your searching for ... I thought the main argument of that case was the approved v credit limit statement ... what else was being challenged? I'd be interested to know as I have an Egg card myself.

 

Abs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its also on another site where there are quite a few ex-CAGers inc PT and PeterBard.....don't feel it appropriate to mention it on here. Maybe you'll stumble on it like I did if you do a google on credit related issues.

 

Point to note - he hasn't posted the whole case transcript Jon if thats what your searching for ... I thought the main argument of that case was the approved v credit limit statement ... what else was being challenged? I'd be interested to know as I have an Egg card myself.

 

Abs

 

Hi Abby, yep i've found that site, looks like the approved limit issue is lost. I could be wrong but I thought various other Egg issues were also part of this case. Might be better if they weren't as that will leave another route open,

I'll PM you later with the other issues when i've checked them out again.

Take care

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great you found it ...

 

I know what a bummer on the approved limit ... but as you say there may be more than meets the eye on it ..

 

I haven;t requested a copy of my agreement yet .. is in a reduced payment agreement with Cabot who bought the debt... but I've trawled through my DN from Egg and can't spot any flaws .... yet .. !!

 

Think I'll request the CCA from Cabot and see what comes up ..

 

Abs x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Excuse my ignorance but it seems everybody knows about this 'other forum' but me ... Is it MSE by any chance? I really dislike that site, rubbish layout and full of self-appointed moral high ground occupants ... If someone could PM me a link to the relevant thread I'd be most grateful.

 

Also, why is there not more discussion on here regarding the Egg issue? The 'Egg Banking Plc.' thread has disappeared, and I can't find any other threads discussing the future of 'Approved Limit' Egg victims. Have people given up? What is going on??

 

Regards

 

ph

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Without sounding too thick!!....how does this change the position re Prescribed Terms on Egg agreements?

 

I was waiting for a reply to my Account In Dispute letter which i sent to Egg 6 weeks ago. Received a reply yesterday with ref to Slater v Egg and also Waksman.

 

Can post the letter is it is of interest.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't know why all discussion seems to have died, following this ruling. There must be hundreds if not thousands of Caggers out there with 'Approved Limit' Egg agreements, who would like to know where they stand now. The old (long removed) Egg thread had other knowledgeable people posting on it, not just pt and PB - where are they??

 

I'm beginning to think that some sort of censorship has been put in place - this silence is very worrying indeed.

 

ph

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't know why all discussion seems to have died, following this ruling. There must be hundreds if not thousands of Caggers out there with 'Approved Limit' Egg agreements, who would like to know where they stand now. The old (long removed) Egg thread had other knowledgeable people posting on it, not just pt and PB - where are they??

 

I'm beginning to think that some sort of censorship has been put in place - this silence is very worrying indeed.

 

ph

 

Older threads often lose their ability to attract new postings.

 

Why not start a new thread complete with eye catching title to rekindle the debate?

Link to post
Share on other sites

probably because we all know that going to court is pointless because the system just grinds debtors down regardless.

Advice and comments posted by The Debt Star reflect only my personal opinion and it is up to you alone to decide what action you should take. You should always seek independent legal advice from your own qualified legal advisor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...