Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 1. who knows... 2. not the whole A/C vanishes from your file on the DN's 6th b'day ...already carefully explain this. 3.yes 4.already carefully explain this.
    • if i remember rightly, long ago in one of the first drafts of the old proposed gov't overhauls, there was a listing of recommended 'charges' that inc wrong reg = £20. some PPC's implemented such changes in advance. then later as it looked increasing likely the new code was never going to be implemented after it's 1st review and another set of codes was to be debated they all quietly revert back .......... dx
    • Potentially it may not even get sold on? Just the default left for 6 years then gone? but if it is sold on ill get a letter from the DCA which is the notice of assignment? Sorry what is the different between a default notice and a default cal marker? yes, i may try and work arrangements out with the OCs after the breathing space but I'll see my circumstances then thank you again for all your help and patience, I really appreciate it and apologies If i am too fast or repeating myself.
    • receiving a default NOTICE (forget simple default cal markers) does not mean it will get sold on... OC's very very rarely do court themselves.  if it does you would receive a Notice of Assignment from the debt buyer/DCA.  as for reduced payment if it remains with the OC and they issue a DN, no harm in trying but lets get all your ducks inline first. dx  
    • okay thanks do you know how long it will take for it to get to the DCA or could the OC try and issue a CCJ? even though it's unlikely also for example would the OC agree to a reduction and a small payment over a super lengthy period of time if agreed? Rather than go through chasing apologies again for all the questions, just trying to understand all the possible scenarios.  
  • 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

LBL help, debt sold on recliming charges etc? help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4930 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

Hi thre,

we have had dealings with LBL and it is still ongoing, my OH borrowed £500 (i know i know) and signed the agreement (incedentaly this was outside a shop with 1 man, isn't there supposd to be 2?)

anyway, we fell behind with payments and they have taken the car, about 4 mths ago now, have not bothered to contact them as we hadn't heard from them, we put it down to stupidity and got another banger.

anyway a month or so later we received a letter stating that the car had been sold at auction for £917 and we still owe £1900 we have been charged nearly all of this on charges, it has now been sold to a company called OPAS who we still have not paid, my hubby is refusing as he is saying let them take me to court, over 2k for a £500 loan is ridiculous, the did not adv the APR at the time - has anyone had any luck with reclaiming these charges?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thre,

we have had dealings with LBL and it is still ongoing, my OH borrowed £500 (i know i know) and signed the agreement (incedentaly this was outside a shop with 1 man, isn't there supposd to be 2?)

anyway, we fell behind with payments and they have taken the car, about 4 mths ago now, have not bothered to contact them as we hadn't heard from them, we put it down to stupidity and got another banger.

anyway a month or so later we received a letter stating that the car had been sold at auction for £917 and we still owe £1900 we have been charged nearly all of this on charges, it has now been sold to a company called OPAS who we still have not paid, my hubby is refusing as he is saying let them take me to court, over 2k for a £500 loan is ridiculous, the did not adv the APR at the time - has anyone had any luck with reclaiming these charges?

 

Hi Ya

 

If they have taken the car - it is always worth checking your Bill of Sale closely, if you haven't got a copy of it - get one from the High Court of Justice (details of which you will find within the forum) Follow the process to acquire a copy (again, this information is on the forum)

 

Check you Bill of Sale for any discrepancies (a list of likely discrepancies, again, is on the forum)

 

Let me add also - that on viewing the Law of England recently, I noticed that it made reference to the Bill of Sale Act 1882 with regard to the form of a Bill of Sale - this is found at Section 9 of the said act - the Laws of England quoted that....

 

"Section 9 avoids a Bill of Sale in toto, so that the grantee cannot even sue on the covenent for payment - He can only recover the money actually advanced with interest of 5% on an implied agreement (Davies v Rees, 1886, 17 QBD 408)"

 

I'm of the opinion that what this means is that where you can show that the Bill of Sale that you signed does not conform to Section 9 of the Bill of Sale Act 1882....... (there is a copy of what it should look like in the schedule to the Act)(bear in mind that the lender can add extra sections - so long as they do not impose on your consumer right of action) ..... then, should the lender take you to court - you can quote the Laws of England in a defence against them looking to take more money from you than they are entitled to - I have not tried to be specific in this post - just keeping it general so that it provides guidance to assist you get on the right track- Hope that makes sense?

 

Having said that - to put things in a better perspective - if you loaned £500 and they sold the car for £917; they have acheived £392 more than they are due if you can find the BoS to be unenforceable.

 

Hope this helps?

 

Apple : )

[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...