Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Andy Yes, its a question of what the court will enforce. the section 98 and 76 terminations are none default terminations. It is unlikely a court would give the creditor a judgement if they did not offer some kind of arrangement in the first instance. They did permit the overdraft.   You are right in saying it is not as cut and dried as in say a running account agreement where there was an agreed repayment schedule on the terminated agreement.    
    • One little thought that may help alleviate that pressure. Remember that, after you've filed your Tax Return, you have 12 months (to 31 Jan 2022) to re-open/amend it, claim any more expenses overlooked - or fix any other errors - and re-submit the corrected Return online. So long as your re-submission does NOT trigger additional tax/N.I. bills then the re-submission itself won't cause any fines or penalties. Get the Return filed as accurately as you can, and pay whatever tax/N.I. is due, by the end of this month THEN, if necessary, reopen the Return to amend/re-submit asap after that. Good luck with it all.
    • This could well be a Letter Before Action.  Please redact your personal details and then upload it.
    • Thank you for your very quick response.    I am asking for (almost) a full refund, in that I am asking for monies paid to him ( I paid over this due to directly paying for certain materials eg steel beams, planning applications, engineering calcs and drawings etc)  however, I anticipate that I won't get the full refund and am realistic about this.  I just did not want to ask for the amount to rectify and then him bring it down so that I am having to pay a lot of that too. Ideally he will cover the cost of rectification, plus consequential losses plus some to cover inconvenience.   I have had 3 independent quotes for the rectification of the works, coming in at £22-26, 000 including VAT.   The main issue is the roof in the loft, the windows and patio door replacement and the ensuite shower room needing taken out and replaced due to lack of water tight-ness and drainage issues.   I anticipate that the whole roof will need replacing and possibly some of the wooden structure of the dormer due to water ingress. all the decorating will need redoing which isn't included in the costs and I will also likely need temporary accommodation.      I have not got the kind of money to fix this, all the money I had was spent on this works. I am not covered by my insurance as they say this is a consumer issue, they also aren't permitting me to use my legal cover, which I am pursuing with the financial  Ombudsman service.     I don't believe a loan to be an option for me as I will be seeking one for IVF.   From speaking to him whilst he was doing the job, he does have money- kids in private school, nice house, flats they rent out, decent cars etc but whether the assets are in his name I do not know, how would I find this out?   Do you know what the type of inspection would be or who I would approach to do such an inspection?    
    • Hi DK, i put in my defence that I wish to show a video entering the car park and pictures to show the T & C.  They are there but it would be dangerous to stop the car and read these as they are at the entrance to the car park you cannot safely walk down to them to read    There are no signs where the driver parked. And no T & C at the pay stations.  I believe no contract can be enforced because you cant read the T & C .  
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Silly Question?


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3406 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

This may sound silly, but I've been reading quite alot of the posts, faq's, etc, and noticed that these bank charges are unlawful, rather than illegal. Could someone possibly explain the difference, as I always thought they were the same thing? As I said, it probably sounds silly to most, but I'd really appreciate it.

 

Thanks

Advice & opinions given by pjdudley69 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional. Also visit legal seagulls for more friendly help and advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a layperson a judge would not expect most people to know the difference as they both effectively mean "against the law, or not allowed by law"

 

However, a judge will decide whether the charges are lawful or not, and as the banks don't want to go there (court) then it becomes an academic issue.

 

If you follow the wording in the library templates, you will get your money...

 

Good luck.

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Unlawful:

1 : not lawful : not authorized or justified by law

2 : acting contrary to or in defiance of the law

 

Illegal:

Prohibited by law.

 

In real terms, these are pretty much synonyms, but in perception, the difference is an assumed willfulness.

 

It could be argued that the banks allegedly are not aware that they're going against the law by imposing penalty charges (not an acceptable defence in court, by the way!), and that they are therefore guilty of ignorance rather than intent. It doesn't deter from their guilt, it just might make it a bit morally more acceptable to some.

 

Hope this helps

Status:

 

Halifax - DPA sent 03/03/06.

Prelim Letter - Sent 27/03/06 ignored.

LBA sent 10/04/06 - Ignored

Moneyclaim filed - 26.04.06

Acknowledgement received 3rd May. Halifax state they intend to defend.

Halifax Settled in Full - 17 May 2006

 

If you've found this post helpful, I would be grateful if you could click on the 'Scales of Justice' button in the top right corner of this post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

search on "unlawful" and "illegal"

 

this queston has come up many times. The only reason that it is a silly question is that it has been answered already so often

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 years later...
search on "unlawful" and "illegal"

 

this queston has come up many times. The only reason that it is a silly question is that it has been answered already so often

Well, aren't you just one happy banker?

 

The difference is all down to statutes and acts and the legality thereof.

The legal definition of a statute is "the legislative rule of a society" (society being defined as a group, or groups, of people giving consent to be governed).

Policing by consent is a powerful thing. Don't let acquiescence of tacit consent rule your life :)

 

Two questions I love to wind police up with:

1 - Am I under arrest?

2 - Am I free to go?

 

If no is answered to both of the above questions, you're a slave according to any laws you subscribe to (UCC, statutes, common law et al).

Link to post
Share on other sites

John-Jcs,

 

It is good to see you on the thread 'Re Silly Question?' as you have posted many.

 

In other threads you have admitted that your 5 years 'studying law' amounts to simply reading legal books. To study law requires a structured course at University, College or by Correspondence, set by those who know more than you. The point is that reading on your own fails to put the content into context and consequently miss rebuttals of argument. It can be likened to shotgun vs rifle.

 

Two questions I love to wind police up with:1 - Am I under arrest? 2 - Am I free to go? It would not wind up the Police as they would know their powers and would not be taken in by such a puerile attempt.

Had you read adequately, you would know that legislation permits an officer to detain someone for various reasons and purposes (PACE - drug search is one) whereas arrest also permits the officer to remove a person to another location. It also permits physical restraint which is not available when being detained for any of the purposes noted.

 

Policing by consent is a powerful thing. Don't let acquiescence of tacit consent rule your life Perhaps you meant acquiescence to tacit consent.

 

I too know the difference between the words illegal and unlawful, which again out of context, is a matter of semantics, but then I have had some formal training.

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/07/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Advice & opinions given by pjdudley69 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional. Also visit legal seagulls for more friendly help and advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3406 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...