Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
    • I cannot locate anything in my paper work that states 2 payments were made? Perhaps you could point this out? In reply from IAS it states "The ticketing data has been attached" nothing was sent to me. I made a response to the IAS all this was done online
    • Thanks again for your responses. The concern I have here, is that freeholder of the land (a company, who presumably would have been the ones to have initially instructed PPM to manage the parking here), will have proof of exactly how long the vehicle was on site for, as the driver was meeting operatives from that company on a separate matter. On this basis, if the matter was to get to court, I feel all the other technicalities about signage, size of signage/font, lack of start/finish times, will not be enough to have any case dropped? This PCN was brought up to the freeholder but they have advised that PPM will not waive this charge. 
  • 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

Swift Advances. Secured Loan Charges reclaim 2


caro
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4369 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 311
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

maybe people should actually be printing htis off and sending in to the courts that are holding suspended possesiosn orders and those currently in the position of being repossed byu Swift.......

 

perhaps if the Judges see the unfair practices they have been using, they might cancel all suspended orders.........

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now, isn't that interesting?

 

 

Interesting to say the least but a long time coming.........thank the lord swift are feeling the tremors they so long ago deserved............lets see how many other similar lenders are on the OFT's hitlist

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dougal,

 

I PM`D you a while back.....did you receive it??

 

LL:|

 

I have finally given up and sold my house to avoid more swift "penalties". Although I won a time order they still crippled me with about 4K charges. Can you or anyone tell me if there is any milage in chasing them after I am away from them. I sent them a good letter requesting a number of things but they have ignored it.

I can't remeber how to open a new " thread" so apologise for this intrusion

Kind Regards

JOES MY LANDLORD

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have finally given up and sold my house to avoid more swift "penalties". Although I won a time order they still crippled me with about 4K charges. Can you or anyone tell me if there is any milage in chasing them after I am away from them. I sent them a good letter requesting a number of things but they have ignored it.

I can't remeber how to open a new " thread" so apologise for this intrusion

Kind Regards

JOES MY LANDLORD

 

I would suggest you write to them with a copy of the following and tell them that you now expect them to behave in an honest and businesslike manner

So would they please respond or you will report them to the OFT

G

http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2011/73-11

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is really important right now for everyone with any problems with Swift to keep the OFT up to date with how they are behaving. If they are trying to repossess your home, apply charges, not respond to letters, not follow the pre-action protocol, not consider your offers of payment, if they didn't check your ability to repay your loan properly, anything that doesn't follow the rules - email the secured lending team: David Blocksidge heads it up. We must do everything we can to help eachother right now! Sj x

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have finally given up and sold my house to avoid more swift "penalties". Although I won a time order they still crippled me with about 4K charges. Can you or anyone tell me if there is any milage in chasing them after I am away from them. I sent them a good letter requesting a number of things but they have ignored it.

I can't remeber how to open a new " thread" so apologise for this intrusion

Kind Regards

JOES MY LANDLORD

 

Hi Joe I am so sorry about what has happened. Send a complaint to the OFT as soon as poss. The more people complain the more trouble Swift will be in especially after the OFT announcement, they now have to comply or loose their licence and can get fined 50K.

 

LL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they get fined £50,000 for each complaint made?:jaw: so if they dont supply info you request and you complain to the OFT each time, does that mean it will cost them £50,000 a pop!!!:whoo:

Please God let that be the case:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they get fined £50,000 for each complaint made?:jaw: so if they dont supply info you request and you complain to the OFT each time, does that mean it will cost them £50,000 a pop!!!:whoo:

Please God let that be the case:madgrin:

 

I think they have to have 3 separate complaints to get fined, shouldn't take long to collect 3, less than 24 hours with them.

 

LL:violin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have emailled her this very morning. and I am goingto ask some of the questions again I ahve asked Swift whihc they have faile dot answer and as soon as they do not......... a letter will be going to the OFT :):):)

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Evening all,

 

I have today sent two complaints to John Fingleton and Debbie Kitcher at the OFT.

 

Text as:

 

One of the other major issues I have with Swift Advances plc is the use of the trading name of Swift Advances prior to the 6th October 2010, and I took out my loan with (according to the documents supplied by them) 'Swift Advances' in 2006!!

 

Conducting regulated consumer business under this trading name is/was, under section 39 (2) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 deemed an offence and a criminal one at that, as it was not a named trading name on their CCA licence.

 

Furthermore up until November 2009 the trading name of Swift Advances belonged to another completely unrelated limited company.

 

(a) It has been argued by Swift Advances plc that the use of it in conducting unregulated agreements the above was/is “irrelevant” as they do not fall under the remit of the CCA, that maybe so.

 

The two issues here are :

 

1. As the title 'Swift Advances' belonged to another completely separate company,then the above statement at (a) cannot be considered "irrelevant," as it makes one believe that they could be or were dealing with this other company.

Which was in fact Swift Finance (UK) Ltd. as shown below

CCA Search :: CCA Search Results :: Licence Details

 

 

Application / Licence Details

 

Licence Number:0560151

Licence Status:Lapsed on 03/11/2009

 

Current Applicant / Licensee:

 

Business Name Company Registration Number Swift Finance (UK) Limited5208034

 

Categories:

 

Consumer credit Consumer hire Credit brokerage Credit reference agency Debt adjusting/counselling Debt collecting

 

Right To Canvass Off Trade Premises:Yes

 

 

Trading Name(s) (Current):

 

Swift Advances Swift Finance Swift Homeloans Swift Insurance Services Swift Mortgages Swift Solutions

 

Trading Name(s) (Historic):

 

Swift Insurance

 

 

 

 

2. The second problem is that despite the CCA Act, using this trading name in any

Consumer Credit business (regulated or unregulated) and /or related business prior to 6th October 2010 was a misleading misrepresentation of fact, and a known misrepresentation of fact, contrary to the Misrepresentation Act 1967, that also is deemed criminal offence.

 

 

Finally am I right in assuming that as the above has happened to so many people you will now pass this information to the police for investigation?

 

I have some contacts in the BBC and in the Press and would be pleased to supply their details if you feel they can assist. This is an extremely serious matter and needs urgent attention.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in due course,

 

Kind regards

 

As soon as I know their esponse my fellow CAGGERS will know it!

 

Best to all as always

 

Dougal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi CC

 

Can you post up a copy of your annual statement, I'd love to see what one looks like as I've never seen one in all of the years I've been with Swift?

 

Obviously blanking out key information like your name and account details.

 

ta

 

doc

 

Hi CC Did you ever get around to putting your annual statement up? Doc

Link to post
Share on other sites

does anyone know exactly what the impact of the decision by the OFT last week could be?????? amnot really sure about how allthis stuff works, it does sound alittle serious though...

If you kick a Tiger in the Ass youbetter have a plan to deal with its teeth :madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I am new to this .I also have a loan with Swift advance .I took then loan out three years ago have missed no more than three monthly payment since taking out the loan .

I rang them earlier this week to find out how much i have left outstanding on the loan and i have one year left of my normal payments .But when my loan expires i have a further £1400 in charges plus £800 in interest i could not believe what i was hearing then i stumbled across this forum and it makes for shocking reading the way Swift advances has treated some people .

Any advice for me about handling these excessive charges

Sorry if i rambled on not to sure what im doing ha:oops:Thanks Shimmer213

Link to post
Share on other sites

Evening All,

 

Yes my advice is to contact [email protected] and give her all of your details. The OFT are VERY interested in the operation of this company. I personally have contacted the OFT and provided full details of my involvement with Swift. The OFT responded promptly to say they are investigating.

 

Any help I can give please ask.

 

Note the e-mail address should read :[email protected] (There is NO space between the 'o' and the 'v' in gov., but for some reason I cannot get my pc to recognise this!!!)

 

 

As always best wishes to all

 

Dougal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I am new to this .I also have a loan with Swift advance .I took then loan out three years ago have missed no more than three monthly payment since taking out the loan .

I rang them earlier this week to find out how much i have left outstanding on the loan and i have one year left of my normal payments .But when my loan expires i have a further £1400 in charges plus £800 in interest i could not believe what i was hearing then i stumbled across this forum and it makes for shocking reading the way Swift advances has treated some people .

Any advice for me about handling these excessive charges

Sorry if i rambled on not to sure what im doing ha:oops:Thanks Shimmer213

 

The avaricious money lenders have a saying: never overestimate the intelligence of a borrower. However, they're are now finding out that this is not the case and we are now finding things out that they seem extremely uncomfortable about.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

I posted about Swift back in May and had a little contact by PM with Ell-enn (Thank you) and Maybelline (again thanks) but not sure what happened since then but failed to have any more comments or suggestions at all....as I'm still new to this I probably did something wrong!

 

Anyway, I am another Swift victim of terribly unfair charges, fees etc. with a default dating back to their illegal period from 2004 - Nov. 2010, dated 29/1/09.

My broker fees etc. were also added onto the original £30,000 not deducted like it says on the contract, and so accruing even more interest etc.

 

When I took out this dreadful loan secured on my house, my financial advisor gave me no advice about the dire consequences of such a loan and it was supposed to be a temporary measure to be later put onto my lower interest mortgage, but it never happened.... I was 58 at the time and the term goes up to age 88! I didn't realise the problems I would have once retired and only surviving on £120 per week for everything!

 

When I turned 60 and retired due to lack of supply teaching in my area, I could no longer continue paying £366-17 per month and got Swift to grant me reduced payments of £88ish p.m. but never realising the consequences of arrears building up so fast with daily interest and charges, fees etc! This ended up with many many months of threats and trying to force me to sell up.(Enormous stress!)

 

Finally, I got a solicitor's letter from Rosling King informing me proceedings were about to start for repossession due to arrears of approx.£6000, unless I paid them immediately and resumed full payments.

 

I got legal help from a solicitor to suspend this, pending their investigation for unfair treatment etc and this is where I am at right now.

 

I have no money for legal court fees etc and this initial help is free but very limited.in time/money allowed.I think I would get Legal Aid if Swift do try for repossession anyway, but not sure best way forward in the light of latest brilliant news about OFT etc.(Sounds like some sort of Karma to me!)

 

Some figures: Original loan in 2007 - £30,000

Plus broker fees etc -£32,230

Interest charged to Feb18 2011 - £14,860.23 !!!!!

Fees +Charges - £997

Less payments received - £9,121.52

Outstanding balance at 18 Feb.2011 - £38,965.71!!!!!!!!!

(This will be even worse since this last statement!!!)

Sorry this is so long! Any suggestions? I have lodged my complaint with debbie kitcher @oft.gsi.gov.uk as suggested and really hope they get their just deserts! Thanks all... M

Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be worth contacting this programme.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/announcement.php?f=&a=219

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Evening all,

 

I have today sent two complaints to John Fingleton and Debbie Kitcher at the OFT.

 

Text as:

 

One of the other major issues I have with Swift Advances plc is the use of the trading name of Swift Advances prior to the 6th October 2010, and I took out my loan with (according to the documents supplied by them) 'Swift Advances' in 2006!!

 

Conducting regulated consumer business under this trading name is/was, under section 39 (2) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 deemed an offence and a criminal one at that, as it was not a named trading name on their CCA licence.

 

Furthermore up until November 2009 the trading name of Swift Advances belonged to another completely unrelated limited company.

 

(a) It has been argued by Swift Advances plc that the use of it in conducting unregulated agreements the above was/is “irrelevant” as they do not fall under the remit of the CCA, that maybe so.

 

The two issues here are :

 

1. As the title 'Swift Advances' belonged to another completely separate company,then the above statement at (a) cannot be considered "irrelevant," as it makes one believe that they could be or were dealing with this other company.

Which was in fact Swift Finance (UK) Ltd. as shown below

CCA Search :: CCA Search Results :: Licence Details

 

 

Application / Licence Details

 

Licence Number:0560151

Licence Status:Lapsed on 03/11/2009

 

Current Applicant / Licensee:

 

Business Name Company Registration Number Swift Finance (UK) Limited5208034

 

Categories:

 

Consumer credit Consumer hire Credit brokerage Credit reference agency Debt adjusting/counselling Debt collecting

 

Right To Canvass Off Trade Premises:Yes

 

 

Trading Name(s) (Current):

 

Swift Advances Swift Finance Swift Homeloans Swift Insurance Services Swift Mortgages Swift Solutions

 

Trading Name(s) (Historic):

 

Swift Insurance

 

 

 

 

2. The second problem is that despite the CCA Act, using this trading name in any

Consumer Credit business (regulated or unregulated) and /or related business prior to 6th October 2010 was a misleading misrepresentation of fact, and a known misrepresentation of fact, contrary to the Misrepresentation Act 1967, that also is deemed criminal offence.

 

 

Finally am I right in assuming that as the above has happened to so many people you will now pass this information to the police for investigation?

 

I have some contacts in the BBC and in the Press and would be pleased to supply their details if you feel they can assist. This is an extremely serious matter and needs urgent attention.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in due course,

 

Kind regards

 

As soon as I know their esponse my fellow CAGGERS will know it!

 

Best to all as always

 

Dougal

Hi Dougal,

I posted my story on Swift yesterday (5/7) and having read your letter above, am wondering about implications re. contract, default, repossession threats etc.(both my contract in 2007 and original default in 29/1/09 come under this illegal non-licenced situation).

I have also lodged a complaint with Debbie and John of OFT but heard nothing yet....

Have you?also, any suggestions for my case would be much appreciated!

Thanks for any help....M

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks! I do have some equity in my home so if I can't get legal aid due to being on Pension Credit, wont be able to fight if it goes to court etc.....Have to try not to worry about that yet as all this is making me ill.....so much stress with them for over 2 years! Waiting to hear more about implications of the illegal trading name during 2004-Nov.2010 which certainly affects my case. Thanks for good wishes!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Went cold reading your story. This will be me in 10 years time. Borrowed 20k, paid back 24k to date still got ten years to go then when it should have finised I will be retiring. They are apparentkly going to add 10 years on for who knows what reason and interest. Bless you. good luck, your luck may also be mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...