Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We only suggest writing if and when you get a Letter Before Claim/Action that's headed as such.   Before that you're likely to get letters from debt collectors and possibly lawyers, but LBC is the thing to watch for. If you're not sure, come back here and we'll confirm whether you need to do something or not.   It might be a good idea to read some other parking threads for a refresher on how it all works.   HB
    • The client wants workers under 48 hours.   The client pays the wages.   End of story.
    • Thank you all for your comments....   What do I do now? do I just ignore them? or is there a letter I can send?
    • Guys/gals,   There's been a misunderstanding and for that I apologise. I didn't answer the initial questions because my appeal was just a couple of days away and didn't want to get bogged down with extraneous things that were not factors. I also - perhaps erroneously - got the impression that the questions were stabs in the dark hence my "if you don't know just say" response. Plus I thought my OP answered the questions however upon re-reading it I can see it may not to non-employees. Finally,  didn't want to make myself identifiable if my employer is reading (hence my redacted OP). I wasn't intending to seem difficult.   Short version: My employee has limitless OT to spare - it just wants to restrict people to WTR limits because that's what the client wants. They're happy for me to work OT once I'm under the 17 week WTR average. My appeal has been delayed from to this week so any help is appreciated.  I am one of the protected characteristics as stated in post #14.   Longer version (including answers to questions/points raised)   Why do you think other employees are able to work paid overtime hours without prior approval from the employers? Because they're not at risk of >48 hours. I am and that's why I've been told that I must have my OT pre-authorised so that I don't >48 hours. They were happy for me to work 60+ hours a week until I did so for 3 months in a row and hit the WTR limit. That's when it came to light that the client we work for states that employees must stick to WTR and my employer appears to not want to upset the client.    Ironically, when I checked their relevant HR page everything was factual in relation to WTR, it just assumed everyone would stay in WTR and didn't mention the right to opt-out. Also, when my employer took up the fight for me with the client and explained that I'd opted out, the client reportedly said they were unaware that employees can opt out.     Have you picked arguments with the company managers previously about any issues?  Are you in a more senior position and thus more expensive?  No to both. It's simply because they don't want me to exceed WTR limitations on working hours. We work on a contract for another company who stipulate their own employees must abide by WTR and therefore we must too. My employer was initially happy for me to log as many hours as I want and only changed their mind when the client pushed back.   They're happy for me to work OT just as long as I stay under the WTR limit of no more than an average of 48 hours across 17 weeks.     The company may be doing it for your welfare - do they think you are stressed, taking too much on? They may not think your output justifies doing so many hours so can refuse. They may want to free up some OT hours so others can do a few. None of these reasons apply and there is limitless OT on offer so it's not a case of wanting to share it around. About 10% of employees do OT and the company would be delighted if it was 100%. They just don't want any one person working >48 hours. Anyone can work any hours they wish outside of their normal schedule as long as they don't breach WTR. So last week we had the situation of my employer desperately begging people to work OT as they had a massive shortfall on hours and were not going to meet their commitments to the client and everyone was eligible except me. As much as they wanted to include me, as much as they would have gleefully accepted my 20 hours of OT, they felt that they couldn't and it was lose-lose for both of us.     In summary I felt it was discriminatory because:   1) The site is open 120+ hours a week and has an open-door policy on OT - the more the better and the company constantly begs for it and falls short of client requirements for number of logged hours.   2) They're initially happy for agents to work as much OT as they want and for months on end. Until you hit the WTR limit - even if opted-out   3) They insist on forcing employees to stay within WTR limitations despite employees opting out and OT being available - in which case employees are being denied not for valid issues (eg: welfare, performance issues, limited OT hours available) but because they just don't want that particular employee working the OT that a) is available and b) ends up being unfulfilled   4) So to me, it's discrimination to admit they need the hours working, they'd be happy for me (an opted-out employee) to work them if I hadn't hit the 17 week WTR average, and are only enforcing WTR because the client wants it 5) As it stands, they'd accept requests from every employee except me to work 4pm to 11pm on Friday. Likewise, they're canvassing every employee (except me).   6) They say my opting-out of WTR doesn't give me a legal right to work >48 hours but that is exactly what it does. If you have not opted out then it is illegal for you to work >48 hours therefore opting-out absolutely gives the legal right to work >48 hours. That doesn't mean a company is obliged to offer OT when it normally wouldn't or to extend it's opening hours to accommodate an employees demands for OT but it does, by default, give the legal right to work >48 hours if they OT is available. And the OT is available at my work.   7) As far as I know I am the only person of my protected characteristic and I am also the only one prevented from working >48 hours. Maybe there's a link, maybe there isn't.    
    • Jamie [email protected]   So @MarcusRashford had to shame the government in to feeding hungry children while Boris was trying to build £150,000 treehouse for a six month old child?        and That actually should say So @MarcusRashfordhad to shame the government in to feeding hungry children while Boris was trying (to get someone else) to pay to build £150,000 treehouse for his six month old child? 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Bryan Carter and Payday loan


fairclaire
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4292 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

Last week i recieved a letter from bryan carter solicitors chasing an outstanding payday loan. The letter basically gave me 10 days to pay up before court action is taken. I know from the numerous posts on here about bryan carter that they are one DCA who actually are likely to go down the court route.

I sent them a CCA and £1 postal order. Today I have recieved a reply (with my postal order back) stating that my payday loan was in fact an exchange between their client and me and not a supply of credit and is not covered under the CCA 1974.

 

Is this correct? If it is then what else can I do to avoid this going to court?

 

Any help much appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

They cannot get away with that fob off, you need now to go to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority, the Office of Fair Trading, Trading Standards and the Ministry of Justice. Report both the payday loan company and Bryan Carters for trying to force this issue to court... if they do issue court papers they need to have the documentation available, ie the original loan agreement, full history of the account, the events which lead to the default and the notice of assignment.

 

If Bryan Carter claim that it was an 'exchange' between their clients then they are trying to confuse you and mislead you with their powers to collect.

 

Which payday loan company is involved here - that could have an impact on how to deal with court paperwork if it arrives....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The payday loan company is The Money Shop. I tried for a long time to arrange a payment plan with them but they wouldn't agree. I gave up trying and hoped it would be passed to a DCA who would accept a realistic repayment plan.

 

Bryan Carter's letter does say they have requested supporting docs from their client which will be reverted to me in due course.

 

And if they're trying to confuse me....it worked!! I thought a loan was a loan?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The payday loan company is The Money Shop. I tried for a long time to arrange a payment plan with them but they wouldn't agree. I gave up trying and hoped it would be passed to a DCA who would accept a realistic repayment plan.

 

Bryan Carter's letter does say they have requested supporting docs from their client which will be reverted to me in due course.

 

And if they're trying to confuse me....it worked!! I thought a loan was a loan?

 

Their loans ARE regulated by the CCA and they do have credit agreements (I can actually post one here!). Unfortunately I believe they are enforceable but then, I have requested a copy for almost a year now directly to the Money Shop, none have turned up! It seems that the Money Shop all of a sudden send a truck load of their outstanding accounts to these clowns! I received a Letter Before Action from Poor Freddie and I am smacking them with a CPR and I will get my CCA request off to the Money Shop and see what they come up with!

 

Maybe you send your request directly to the Money Shop and should they return with the same story, it will be Account in Dispute!

 

Carter's problem is that he is not in possession of the documents, he should be before starting any action. It seems that he is trying to fob you off and hope you will fall for it. I would suggest you send them the CPR as well, they will probable respond with his famous template letter that he thinks your request is not entirely reasonable, maybe inform him beforehand that you think it is reasonable!

 

 

[Your Address]

 

[Their Address]

[Date]

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

****NOTICE UNDER Civil Procedure RULES***

 

Re:− Account/Reference Number: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

This is in acknowledgement of your letter dated ................and also of .............The contents of which have been duly noted.

 

Further to you stressing that county court proceedings will be actioned by yourselves should I fail to make contact/stressing that proceedings are about to be commenced in regard to alleged sums outstanding and alleged owed by me on the above account, I remind you of Civil Procedure rules protocols. Nevertheless in my response to your letter please be advised of the following.

 

I put forward that you now have a requirement to provide me with;

1) A true copy of the executed credit agreement and any terms and conditions that applied to the account at the time of default and at the time the account was opened. Please note that a "true copy" as defined by the Consumer Credit Act will not be acceptable in this case, and a copy of the actual executed agreement, including signature, is required.

2) All records you hold on me relevant to this case, including but not limited to

 

  1. A transcript of all transactions, including charges, fees, interest, payments and both the amounts of credit and any repayments made to the account.
  2. Transcriptions of all telephone conversations recorded and any notes made in relation to telephone conversations
  3. Where there has been any event in the account history over this period that has required manual intervention by any person, disclosure of any indication or notes that have either caused or resulted in that manual intervention, or other evidence of that manual intervention in relation to the account held by me with........... is required.
  4. True copies of any notice of assignment and/or default notice or enforcement notice that you sent to me, with a copy of any proof of postage that you hold.
  5. Documents relating to any insurance added to the account, including the insurance contract and terms and conditions, date it was added and deleted (if applicable).
  6. Details of any collection charge added to the account; specifically, the date it was levied, the amount of the charge, a detailed financial Breakdown of how the charge was calculated, and what the charge covers.
  7. Specific details of the fees/charges levied by any other agency in respect of this account and a detailed breakdown of said fees/charges and what each charge relates to and on what date said fees/charges were levied.
  8. A genuine copy of any notice of fair use of my data as required by the Data Protection Act 1998.
  9. A list of third party agencies to whom you have disclosed my personal data and a summary of the nature of the information you have disclosed.
  10. Copies of statements for the entire duration of the credit agreement.

 

I make this request to ensure that each party has equal footings which can allow action to proceed speedily fairly and without undue costs or waste of courts time, as defined within Pre-action Practice Directions -Protocols 4.6 of the Civil Procedures Rules.

 

I will give you 14 days to respond with the above, failure to comply will result in a complaint being made to the Court./In addition to the fos for any breaches of OFT and CCA codes. This includes breaches as a result of initiating a County Court claim where failing to provide or produce documents make litigation improper..

 

Specifically this relates to one or any number of the following;

· demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you.

· add any further interest or charges to the account.

· pass/sell the account or outstanding balance to any third party.

· register any information in respect of the account with any of the credit reference agencies.

· issue a default notice related to the account.

 

Furthermore, I reserve my right to make a copy of this letter available for inspection to the Court and Financial/Consumer regulators should you fail to comply with this request.

I await your response, and should you need further clarification on any of the above points, then I suggest that you direct them to your legal department.

 

Yours Faithfully/Sincerely

(not to be signed) Print name

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

money shop

 

says it all

 

cattles

 

Others have posted about the Money Shop recent activity here and I have received demand from Poor Freddie as well, I think this will bear some light on that:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?277031-Credit-Today!....

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much for that lord tiger.

 

Have spent all morning trying to find some of my corre from the money shop. All I can find so far is a letter they sent when the cheque bounced (i did tell them it was going to!). I've realised something VERY strange. Bryan Carter are only demanding half of what is actually owed to the money shop. What is that all about??...why only chase half a debt.

 

Totally confused now

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much for that lord tiger.

 

Have spent all morning trying to find some of my corre from the money shop. All I can find so far is a letter they sent when the cheque bounced (i did tell them it was going to!). I've realised something VERY strange. Bryan Carter are only demanding half of what is actually owed to the money shop. What is that all about??...why only chase half a debt.

 

Totally confused now

 

See this thread:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?276741-Some-solicitors-using-Split-Claims-how-does-one-defend

 

It seems that he is trying a new trick!

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! how slimy is that??? so i'm guessing that whilst I think this demand is for half the debt....in fact the 'other half' is probably much bigger.....with charges etc added on.

 

I think I shall CCA the money shop whilst I'm waiting for Bryan Carter to obtain the supporting docs they mentioned. I'm sure anything produced probably is enforceable as someone said earlier.

 

At least being forewarned about how this is likely to go is something I suppose. I don't like surprises!

 

It's all very confusing....but I suppose that's exactly whats intended here

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know from the numerous posts on here about bryan carter that they are one DCA who actually are likely to go down the court route.

 

Court route is the exact right words!

 

Is this correct? If it is then what else can I do to avoid this going to court?

 

He doesn't like going to court!

 

 

I assume he believes he will not be making the same amount of money during a court visit what he can do by issuing 100's more claims in that time!

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will certainly be watching with interest to see what happens with the others who are experiencing these 'split claims'

 

lol....was thinking about what was in the letter I got today. The money shop 'exchanged' money with me. So payday loans can now be called payday exchanges.....Yes! it does have a nice ring to it:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just to give you info on my case with the Money Shop and Fredrickson. I received a letter from Fredrickson that legal action is imminent and that I have to pay the full amount or it will go to court. Seeing that they threatened legal action I send them the CPR31 request. Received a letter beck in the true Carter style!

 

"We are no longer representing this client and has return the account to them"

 

Did you smacked Carter with CPR, it seems that he will be running then as well!!

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...