Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Law Project are trying to force HMG to release details of how Sunak's hedge fund made large profits from Moderna. Government ordered to disclose Sunak’s hedge fund emails - Good Law Project GOODLAWPROJECT.ORG Good Law Project has won a battle with the Treasury after it tried to suppress emails between Rishi Sunak and the hedge fund he founded.  
    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
  • 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

Unauthorised money "given" to payday loan co's by my bank!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4915 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 everyone

I wonder if you can help me with this nightmare.

Two payday loans – one to Wonga, one to LendingStream.

On the payday loan roundabout – rollover after rollover – nightmare to try and clear with other priority debts at the moment.

Emailed Wonga and LendingStream on 22nd September 2010 instructing them I was revoking their permission to use my card details to collect any form of payment in relation to my account. I advised that by the end of October I would have reviewed my situation, (DMP most likely) and I would contact them then. I of course received nothing back from them.

 

The loans were due on the 28th September so on the 27th September, I spoke to my bank, in a branch and asked what I could do. I was advised the only option to stop a CAT transaction was to cancel my card which I promptly did that evening via telephone banking.

The next day, authorisations were pending on my account to the sum of around £700, which I went nuts about because I couldn’t access any cash for 5 days until these pending transactions dropped off. Once I was back in the black, things I thought were OK.

For some unknown reason, I then received a letter from the Debit Card Fraud Operations department at Barclays, listing the transactions to Wonga and Lending Stream asking me to mark them as genuine or fraudulent. The letter said if I marked them as genuine they would be debited to my account within 14 days or if I didn’t respond, they would also be debited within 14 days so I marked them F for Fraud and sent it back with a letter enclosing copies of the emails I had sent to lending stream and wonga, revoking permission, believing that Wonga and LS had committed fraud by attempting to process my debit card when I had told them not to – surely this is theft?

 

Barclays, in their wisdom have overlooked completely the fact that I had revoked this permission and said that as I had made payments before to these merchants, that the transactions were “within the normal operating parameters of my account” and therefore, they are unable to do anything other than debit the money. The day before I received the letter advising of such, £395 was debited from my account by Barclays and given to Wonga and Lending Stream. I am now £400 overdrawn (with no overdraft facility.)

This beggars belief. I control who has access to my money and when and I am fuming that these cowboys ignored the initial emails from me revoking permission to process the payments but that my bank clearly operates in the favour of the merchant and not the customer by opening a fraud case, when I never requested this and then pushing me into a corner which I now cannot get out of.

How should I pursue this? I am overdrawn at the bank my hundreds of unauthorised pounds thanks to these transaction however this is by their own doing. I was in the process of closing my account with them anyway but this now just compounds the issue.

Any advice appreciated.

 

Thanks

 

J

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bank are wrong here, you clearly revoked authority yet they allowed it due to 'previous activity'. You now need to go to the police and get a crime no for both companies, they will resist but say the bank have requested you get this information as you can claim on an insurance policy against the accidental overdraft.

 

Then report all parties to the following

 

Office of Fair Trading

Trading Standards

Ministry of Justice

Local MP

 

Then get yourself another bank account, Halifax have a good online one, so do the Co-op.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having work with a bank, the bank would view this as you have bought a chargeable service being a loan. rememebr the likely hood is the bank will send with a lender, as the bank itself is a lender!!!

 

Also remember fraud uis when you have not bought or used a service. in this instance you have, and your email openly admits that. The bank had no option at all but to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...