Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Unsettling the applecart?,  I'm going to be direct here, I know how this works , I've been in far worse situation than your relative, and I can assure you , now that there i likely a default in her name, it makes absolutely ZERO difference if she pays or not. Denzel Washington in the Equalizer , 'My only regret is that I can't kill you twice'... It's the same with a default, they can only do it once and it stays on your credit file for 6 years if she pays or not, and as it stands right now she's flushing £180 of her hard earned money down the toilet  so that the chaps at Lowell can afford a Christmas party. As for the SAR this is everybody's legal right, originally under the Data Protection act 1998 and now under GDPR, it's her right to find out everything that the original Creditor has on her file, and by not doing it the only person she is doing a massive disservice to is her self. As the father of 2 young adults myself, they need to learn at some point.. right?
    • Thank you for your pointers - much appreciated. dx100uk - Apologies, my request wasn't for super urgent advice and I have limited online access due to my long working hours and caring obligations - the delay in my response doesn't arise in any way from disrespect or ingratitude. I will speak to her at the weekend and see if she will open up a bit more about this, and allow me to submit the subject access request you advise - the original creditor is 118 118 loans and from the letter I saw (which prompted the conversation and the information) the debt collection agency had bought the debt from 118 and were threatening enforcement which is when she has made a payment arrangement with them for an amount of £180 per month. It looks as if she queried matters at the time (so I wonder if I might with the FIO request get access to their investigation file?) - the letter they wrote said "The information that you provided has been carefully considered and reviewed. After all relevant enquiries were made it has been confirmed that there is not enough evidence present to conclusively prove that this application was fraudulent.  However, we have removed the interest as a gesture of goodwill. As a result of the findings, you will be held liable for the capital amount on the loan on the basis of the information found during the investigation and you will be pursued for repayment of the loan agreement executed on 2.11.2022 in accordance with Consumer Credit Act 1974"  The amount at that time was over £3600 in arrears, as no payments had been made on it since inception and I think she only found out about it when a default notice came in paper form. I'm a little reluctant to advise her to just stop paying, and would like to be able to form a view in relation to her position and options before unsetting the applecart - do you think this is reasonable? She is young and inexperienced with these things and getting into this situation has brought about a lot of shame regarding inability to sort things out/stand up for herself, which is one of the reasons I have only found out about this considerably later Thank you once again for your advice - it is very much appreciated.    
    • That's fine - I'm quite happy to attend court if necessary. The question was phrased in such a way that had I declined the 'consideration on the papers' option, I would have had to explain why I didn't think such consideration was appropriate, and since P2G appear to be relying on a single (arguably flawed) issue, I thought it might result in a speedier determination.
    • it was ordered in the retailers store  but your theory isnt relevant anyway, even if it fitted the case... the furniture is unfit for purpose within 30 days so consumer rights act overwrites any need to use 14 days contract law you refer too. dx  
    • Summary of the day from the Times. I wasn't watching for a couple of interesting bits like catching herself out with her own email. Post Office inquiry: Paula Vennells caught out by her own email — watch live ARCHIVE.PH archived 23 May 2024 11:57:02 UTC  
  • 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

Virgin/MBNA passed to Optima - claim forms received - help! ***ICO dismissed****


gem77
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4021 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

  • Replies 310
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well its truthful and to the point,you have done everything recommended and advised by the media when one struggles with ones debts.We hope that its accepted by a compassionate DJ

who also believes same.

On the point were you state unsecured changed to a secured you need to reference the article i referred to and Dotty posted.So mark See Exhibit (1) after this statement and attach a copy of the report.

 

The stark reality is however, if you are not making normal payments to an account be it P/loan or C/Card, at some point in time, a Court claim will be filed. These Companies as everyone knows, play rough, so why anyone would assume that they will be allowed to continue making nominal payments forever and a day, with the Bank's blessing, when and if they know you own a property (as in your case) is beyond me. More and more people are getting into difficulties with loans and credit cards, so the worse the situation gets, the more aggressive the banks and credit card Companies will become in enforcing debts.

 

Unfortunately due to recent climate and the credit crunch the latest trend of turning non secured into secured loans via a charging order on ones property,

As far as I'm concerned, if you know how to deal with these situations to achieve the best possible outcome from day one, you stand a much better chance of getting rid of or stabilizing debts to an affordable amount and moving on with your life. This has to be preferable to finding yourself living with the constant uncertainty regarding what the creditor might do next, and unable to plan for any sort of future for you and your family.

 

As I have stated before, Litigation involves mind games and serves no purpose in giving your opponents the heads up.Fighting back takes courage, but it's a lot easier than you might think. If some people have opted to write to creditors and challenge what they're doing, this shows a determination to fight. A Court claim is no different, When ever you are questioning/challenging someone else's point of view, you are making an argument, so there's nothing to stop you doing this in front of a Judge, if you have to. Securing the best outcome and stopping them from gaining Summery Judgment, which lets face it is what they are out to achieve, to get their first foot on the ladder to gaining said Charging Order. If you had not intended to defend you would have allowed the above to be much more easily attainable.

 

Good luck with your case and keep your chin up.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks bilious. Keep your fingers crossed for me. I am sleeping even less than ever now the day is looming. To say I am terrified is an understatement.

 

Will let you know how it goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to say we're all behind you gem, wishing you the VERY best of luck with your DJ, and will be hoping for a positive outcome for you. Like Andy says, at least we're not taking it lying down. MBNA are the worst of the worst and should be challenged. Will be waiting for you posting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well had my court case today. didnt go as well as i had hoped. The judge was very nice and good with me and understood my argument but said at the end of the day he didnt think I would win the case and it would be better to get the judgement as if I didnt win the case it could cost me upto £15000 in court costs.

He said it all boiled down to a single letter that I wrote. When they accepted my payment plan I wrote to them thanking them for their understanding and pointing out their mistake of putting in the wrong amount. Apparently if I had also asked in the letter for assurance no further action would be taken I would have had a stronger case. How stupid did I feel really kicked myself for that.

I think the judge didnt really agree with people throwing the consumer credit act around just to try and get out of the paying their debts. He did make them drop their costs though so instead of nearly £2000 added it was only £500.

The solicitor also tried to throw in at the end that I had been using consumer forums and MBNA wish to place a ruling that I was unable to do this. Needless to say the judge just said good bye MR X.

 

Thankfully for me (I think) The solicitor was half an hour late as he was in another hearing and this really annoyed the judge. he seemed to be coming down quite hard on the solicitor all the way through but was thoughtful and understanding with me but perhaps that was because he noticed how petrified was as I was trembling from head to foot the whole way through. god knows how I kept it together.

 

As for the charging order he said they could apply for one but that would not mean that they would get it and advised against it. But weather they will listen to that we will just have to wait and see what drops through the door. Although I didnt think they could apply for one unless I had breached my judgement. dont know if someone can clarify this?

 

So there you have it. I am soooo glad its over and just hope I dont have to go to any more.

Thank you all for your help and kind words of encouragement. Will keep you posted if anything else transpires.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry it didnt go your way Gem, what are the terms of the judgment, installments?

Good to see the DJ advised against them attempting application for a Charging Order

and love the response to their complaint of :-The solicitor also tried to throw in at the end that I had been using consumer forums and MBNAlink3.gif wish to place a ruling that I was unable to do this. Needless to say the judge just said good bye MR X.

 

Regards

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy. Terms of the judgement were just what MBNA had originally agreed with me just keep paying what I had been paying but of course the only reason they went for summery judgement was to obtain a charging order. Now they have that they can apply for a charging order. so watch this space as I doubt they will take notice of the DJ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isnt there talk that for debts less than £25,000 Charging Orders should not be allowed? though this isnt yet law....

My Posts exist exclusively to assist me in preparing litigation against another party.

As such, it is almost certainly protected by litigation privilege.

 

The legal requirements for claiming litigation privilege are well established and are not in dispute.

Communication between a solicitor, or the client, or a third party will be protected by litigation privilege where the communications are for the dominent purpose of obtaining legal advice in connection with, or conducting litigation in prospect: Re: "Highgate Traders Limited (1984)"BCLC 151.

 

Copyright Information: All information contained in this website , Associated websites, and Forum posts are Copyright "Reclaim The Right Ltd". If you wish to use the information on this site for publication elsewhere then please email the administrator for permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy. Terms of the judgment were just what MBNA had originally agreed with me just keep paying what I had been paying but of course the only reason they went for summery judgment was to obtain a charging order.Only reason they issued the summons in the first place Now they have that they can apply for a charging order.No they cant as long as you never miss a payment so watch this space as I doubt they will take notice of the DJ.

 

So in effect they have achieved nothing except a drain on the Justice resources hence the DJ,s comments.

Check the details thoroughly Gem when you receive the order.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

So in effect they have achieved nothing except a drain on the Justice resources hence the DJ,s comments.

 

Check the details thoroughly Gem when you receive the order.

 

 

 

Thanks for clarifying that Andy thats what I thought they couldnt unless i miss a payment under the judgement. Its just the judge said that he grants them permission to apply for a charging order but that does not mean they will get one and advises it would not be benificial to them.

 

yep got no more money out of me as the judge agreed i couldnt afford anymore. except a black mark against my credit report but then with the defaults it cant get much blacker.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of changes in the CO process at the moment Gem.They can get a restriction if its only your debt on a joint owned property

but thats not the same as a full charging order by any means or form.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats why I say check the Order carefully having dealt with a couple of threads recently on the rights and wrongs when a claimant

makes a ICO after different types of order ie Forthwith/installments.

 

Hopefully on your order the term ( The claimant be allowed to apply for a CO ) will not be entered, judging by your comments.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is. its my debt but the house is owned by both me and my husband so they can only get a restriction then? what does that mean as opposed to a full charging order?

 

Have a read http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=1839539

 

 

OK thanks Andy. So I take it The order will come from the court. How long does that take to come through usually?

 

You should get it through within 7 days.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

hhmmm thanks for that Andy. it made interesting reading. Puts my mind at ease a little.

I am off to bed now as the last week or so of sleepless nights is catching up with me :oops:

Hopefully i will sleep better tonight knowing it is over with for now.

 

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well finally got the order through from the court. It states as follows:

 

It is ordered that:

 

1. There be summery judgement for the claimant in the some of £5***.** + £575.00 Costs and fees payable at £18.00 per month, 1st Payment on 1st March 2011.

 

2. Permission to claimant to apply for a charging order notwithstanding payment of instalments under the judgement.

 

So does that mean that they can only apply for a charging order if I do not keep up the repayments?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It means Gem In spite of your installments they have permission if they think fit. Ludicrous!!!!!!!

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

only just had a quick look but isnt this case relevant....

 

 

Mercantile Credit Co Ltd v Ellis

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?44739-Charging-Order-Court-Advice-please

My Posts exist exclusively to assist me in preparing litigation against another party.

As such, it is almost certainly protected by litigation privilege.

 

The legal requirements for claiming litigation privilege are well established and are not in dispute.

Communication between a solicitor, or the client, or a third party will be protected by litigation privilege where the communications are for the dominent purpose of obtaining legal advice in connection with, or conducting litigation in prospect: Re: "Highgate Traders Limited (1984)"BCLC 151.

 

Copyright Information: All information contained in this website , Associated websites, and Forum posts are Copyright "Reclaim The Right Ltd". If you wish to use the information on this site for publication elsewhere then please email the administrator for permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Posts exist exclusively to assist me in preparing litigation against another party.

As such, it is almost certainly protected by litigation privilege.

 

The legal requirements for claiming litigation privilege are well established and are not in dispute.

Communication between a solicitor, or the client, or a third party will be protected by litigation privilege where the communications are for the dominent purpose of obtaining legal advice in connection with, or conducting litigation in prospect: Re: "Highgate Traders Limited (1984)"BCLC 151.

 

Copyright Information: All information contained in this website , Associated websites, and Forum posts are Copyright "Reclaim The Right Ltd". If you wish to use the information on this site for publication elsewhere then please email the administrator for permission.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...