Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I bought a car from an auction in Jan 2019 and the car engine fault like indicated there was a problem with the ABS. It went to an Audi Dealership for a diagnostic scan to identifying exactly the problems with this car.   One of them was a faulty ABS system which had the component, namely the ABS hydraulic pump identified as being faulty. Since then, this has been independently addressed by a non-Audi dealership but now a new fault code  was recorded that hadn’t been formerly discussed.   The code 01130 ‘Operation: Implausible signal’ declared itself and is related to the 45F2 ABS AUDI UK recall over a year ago. If put this to the dealership who did the diagnostic scan that previous campaigns that have now closed are looked at they will find that this is in fact an Audi recall fault and as such needs to be addressed courtesy of AUDI. In fact, the same recall fault was listed as an item of charge. When I asked why the ECU had to be changed as well and told it was ‘because the ‘ECU is one and the same unit as the hydraulic pump and the two are replaced because of the way it is constructed’.   The matter has been raised with AUDI UK who tell me that having originally fixed the fault at the time of the initial recall on this car, the campaign open for 6 months was now closed and they wouldn’t be honouring the recall.   As AUDI pointed out when this fault was first identified, this was a serious safety issue and as such I informed the Trading Standards. They were satisfied that the safety issue had been addressed but had no redress as the campaign was now closed. I was informed the 6 months was not set impartially but at the company’s discretion. They believed the Motor Ombudsman would resolve the issue. This advice and the state of deadlock lead  me onto reporting it to the Motor Ombudsman but they flatly said they didn’t deal with recalls and ask Citizens Advice.    I feel that a safety recall on a fault is an issue indefinitely if it exists as the fault lies in the design and construction which is implied as the manufacturer foots the bill. How is it that after 6 months they are absolved of accountability? Is this negligence on behalf of Audi? I am not sure why the Trading Standards don’t see this as an issue apart from it being a ‘legal matter’.    What advice would you give me on going forward? 
    • Hi TP,   The good news is - You don't have to prove anything !   You've already explained your position to Harlands and need do or say any more.   Just ignore them.
    • Unfortunately I had a nervous breakdown and signed off work. Placed on heavy medication and had to deal with a repossession order and other debts therefore this wasn’t a priority at the time and there’s only so much you can expect others to do on your behalf.    I am not quite sure how to proceed other than point out the points we’ve discussed with the creditor and if they refuse to cooperate instruct a solicitor though I gave to keep that cost to the minimum.    I appreciate your assistance. 
    • Hi    Another point i have noticed on Page 2 of the JK1 exhibit, the marketing box is 'unticked'.  As a rule of thumb if i apply or do anything online i always tick the box for no junk mail! This form is definitely fabricated by them and is not the original.    
  • Our picks

QC15

Alexandra Slater -v- Egg Banking Plc

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3344 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

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.

Share this post


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.

Share this post


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.

Share this post


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

Share this post


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Abby.


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.

Share this post


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has apparently been confirmed by PT on another site Jon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This has apparently been confirmed by PT on another site Jon.

 

Which other site?

Share this post


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

Share this post


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

Share this post


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That thread was eggsecuted


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.

Share this post


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

Share this post


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

Share this post


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?

Share this post


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...