Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see the poops are still trying to deflect from their own criminality and and abuses by whinging on about raynors buying her council house - now about election registration - anyone who owns a flat or house understands that you dont give up your and your childrens home just because of a new relationship and while we are on about that ..   lets start with When is jenrick being revisited for both lockdown abuses and self admitted (claims estate is his main home - not the property in his electorate or his london property) 'possible (lol) electoral registration abuses as he claimed he was at his estate 'main home' away from both London and his electoral 'home'  - much of which paid for by the taxpayer     Cabinet Minister Robert Jenrick 'breaks lockdown rules twice' by going to 'second home' - Mirror Online WWW.MIRROR.CO.UK Key Cabinet Minister Robert Jenrick drove 150 miles to his 'second home' after urging the nation to remain in their homes in a bid to...   ... perhaps follow with more self admitted lobbying while in a potion where they shouldn't “A few of us in parliament have lobbied the government – and with the help of the Treasury select committee, the chancellor has listened,” John Baron wrote.   Tory MP faces lobbying questions over Treasury committee role | Investing | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Co-owner of investment management firm called for ‘urgent’ post-Brexit changes to City rules at committee meetings     About time labour got in the game and started pressing for these self admitted/bragged Tory abuses were properly investigates.
    • No I didn't I got the dates mixed up.   
    • Sorry about that, TJ. The person who posted it specifically said it was free access. Here's another version of the FT article. https://archive.is/KYrPa
    • Isnt there some indication in there of at least intent to inform arbuthnot? IF he wasn't then it would seem to be Vennells decision to keep him 'uninformed .. Although seems to me if arbuthnot was unaware - he was either incompetent or should have very detailed records of denials. Seems vennells is constantly at the core of all the lying about all these issues though.
    • Paywalled/subscribe HB I'm unaware of the details on this HB but why is it a potential taxpayer burden? Hasn't a judge already ruled port has rights of access - so shouldn't costs be on the private company (South Tees Development Corporation) trying to change established access?     LIVE: High Court updates as CEO gives evidence in access rights row between STDC and PD Ports - Teesside Live WWW.GAZETTELIVE.CO.UK The face-off between the Teesport operator and Mayor Ben Houchen's South Tees Development Corporation continues in the High Court  
  • 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
      • 160 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

Vanquis - What a nightmare outfit - Refused affordable payment - Issued undated Default - Passed to 1st Credit


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4662 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

Wondered if someone could clarify a couple of points for me

 

After a Default Notice has been issued by the OC (Vanquis in this case)

Is the OC still allowed to send statements every month adding further interest and penanty charges (Over Limit & Late payment) even though a token payment is being made?

 

I await a your comments

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

At this time this guys account is still with the OC and being chased by their in house numpies Impact,

who up to now have made no Inpact whatsoever, he just refuses to speak the the idiots.

The OC has being investigatng his complaint about this practice for a month, but no response thus far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would tend to err on the side that yes they can, although will be very glad to be shown I'm wrong!

The account is still with the OC albeit in house muppets, therefore whatever agreement this relates to will have/should have in the T&C's something stating the charges and fees added in the event of, I believe it is only after an account has been terminated, OR it is in dispute, that no further charges can be added..

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Right, as you know I having been helping the guy up the road with this bunch of incompetant clowns.

 

He received a reply to his complaint (NOV 2010) about them not helping him to reduce the debt by banging charges and interest on. They are looking into it, they class it as 'an enquiry' presumably so they can says it does not come under their complants procedure, but he has still not received an outcome from them. They also say they enclosed a leaflet "Our commitment to you" but they didn't. see attatched

VanquisCompReply.jpg

 

He told them he can afford £5 a month and has been paying this every month since September 2010. I told he to keep up the token payment, regardless of wether they accept it or not, but the guy is to say the least getting a bit pi**ed off watching the balance uncrease by a hundred quid each month.

 

They have now issued a Notice of Default and a Default Notice. The Notice of Default is dated 22 December 2010 but the Default Notice has no date of issue on it. It give a remedy date of 10 Jan 2011. They were both sent in the same envelope which has no postmark (TNT post with '1' wrote in pen on it, it arrived on 31 Dec 2010. see attatched

Noticeofdefault.jpg

DefaultNotice.jpg

 

As you can see from the attched pics the amount of arrears is different on each £309 on the DN £425 on the NOD.

 

The latest statement shows they are still increasing the debt with interest and charges.

Decstatement.jpg

Decstatement2.jpg

 

Is this Default Notice fully compliant?

 

I am looking for an angle here to make a further complaints to get some kind of reply from them. They are just not interested in helping this guy whatsoever.

 

As he says whats the point in paying a fiver for them to bump the debt by 100 quid each month, if it went to court they would be lucky to get a pound, poor guy is on income support. He did say that all the calls, texts and emails from Vanquis and their in house muppets Impact have now stopped for some odd reason, not had none since 20 Dec 2010.

 

I have dealt with some real A ole creditors is the past with my own problems, but this outfit takes the biscuit, they are so ignorant and appear to be deliberately inflating the debt prior to selling it on to some parasite DCA to get a few more pence in the pound for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a very quick observation here, but if it has taken them longer than 8 weeks to resolve the original complaint, then he can escalate it to the FOS to investigate, and I believe that when he does this they are unable to continue adding interest and late payment fees? But I could still be in the Christmas spirit with that one?

 

It is clear that they cannot resolve the complaint themselves so a third party needs to intervene and cast a fresh pair of eyes on it. the DN and NOD are misleading, how is he supposed to know what amount he requires to pay when the DN is £100 odd quid less than what they quote in the NOD??

Classic example of a dire organisation not knowing what the hell they are supposed to do!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the complaint was sent 11 Nov 2010 BB, so the 8 weeks are not quite up yet, but near enough.

The FOS is one fire to put the iron in shortly then.

 

As you so rightly say the DN & NOD are misleading

 

I agree totally SH, what is the point of making any form of payment to the likes of these incompetent clowns

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they are just getting themselves confused and the left hand doesn't know what the right one is doing! FOS will have a field day...

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi pal, when did you originally (hypothetically) get the credit card? and was it applied for online or in writing? I only ask as these munters have left me alone for a while now and I may be able to point in the right direction. PM

IQOR (the OH) - No CCA, gone away.:madgrin:

Simply Be (the OH) - No valid CCA, gone away.:madgrin:

HSBC Loan - No CCA, not gone away but who cares, they have nothing.:madgrin:

HSBC Overdraft - No CCA, not gone away but who cares, they have nothing.:madgrin:

LTSB Loan and Overdraft (the OH) - AID, awaiting result on PPI and Bank Charges complaint.

Vanquis - No CCA, gone away.:madgrin:

MBNA CC - No CCA, awaiting DSAR outcome.

MBNA Loan - awaiting DSAR outcome.

Capital One (the OH) - No CCA, gone away.:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi pal, when did you originally (hypothetically) get the credit card? and was it applied for online or in writing? I only ask as these munters have left me alone for a while now and I may be able to point in the right direction. PM

 

He applied for the card June 2009 and it was an online application. (Silver Surfer)

 

He got £250 limit originally but they kept uping it every couple of months without him asking until it was £2K+, so like a plonker he used it to buy new things for the house and now can't afford to pay it back.

 

They obiously checked nothing when they gave it him as he hasn't worked in over 15 years and only gets IB & IS.

 

But he is in his 60's and never had nothing new for years and saw the opportunity for a new bed, cooker, carpets and a few other bits.

 

Can't blame him I suppose, temptation got the better of him

 

If you can give any further advice that would be great

Link to post
Share on other sites

why are you not reclaiming the unlawful fees????

 

go ge 'em

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alf was in a bit of a different situation, my debt was passed to 1st Crud but Vanquis kept heaped charges on even under them. Still not paid it, it's also AID and been passed to another DCA who's been chinned off. I applied online, no CCA but an application form. My argument was an application form and not a credit agreement, they've not been back in touch. Hope this may help. PM

IQOR (the OH) - No CCA, gone away.:madgrin:

Simply Be (the OH) - No valid CCA, gone away.:madgrin:

HSBC Loan - No CCA, not gone away but who cares, they have nothing.:madgrin:

HSBC Overdraft - No CCA, not gone away but who cares, they have nothing.:madgrin:

LTSB Loan and Overdraft (the OH) - AID, awaiting result on PPI and Bank Charges complaint.

Vanquis - No CCA, gone away.:madgrin:

MBNA CC - No CCA, awaiting DSAR outcome.

MBNA Loan - awaiting DSAR outcome.

Capital One (the OH) - No CCA, gone away.:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly the default notice must give 14 days from the date of service to remidy the default. If the letter is not dated and no proof of delivery exists then I think it might be defective. Also did the DN come with the current OFT default information sheet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Notice of Default is dated 22 Dec 2010, but the Default Notice has no issue date on it only the remedy date of 10 Jan 2011

The NOD & DN have different arrears amounts.

 

Both came in the same envelope by TNT post no post mark and arrived on 31 Dec 2010. The OFT information sheet was enclosed.

 

If you look at the attached documents you can see what it dated and what is not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He got £250 limit originally but they kept upping it every couple of months without him asking until it was £2K+,

They obviously checked nothing when they gave it him as he hasn't worked in over 15 years and only gets IB & IS.

 

Well more fool them I say, this is exactly the reason why this country is in the position it is now, with the corrupt credit industry stuffing money into peoples pockets hand over fist without even checking if they would be able to repay it!

 

I thoroughly agree with his actions, after all why should he be frugal when they clearly weren't? I am in a very similar position myself, except mine is 15K on a CC, can't count the number of times I told the bank that I didn't want that credit limit and that I was going to be made redundant through disability, but still they ignored me, so in return I have a very expensive Gibson Les Paul guitar in my front room!

 

The most they will ever get off him, as he is on IS & IB is the token £1 a month, in fact I subbed to another thread on here where a DJ ordered an OAP couple to pay 50p a month!!

 

The term 'clutching @ straws' springs to mind, I don't think he has anything to worry about, it is their failure and lack of procedures that is at fault and should be investigated..

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they have been told on numerous occasions that the £5.00 offered and being paid is well in excess of what any court would award, but they just choose to ignore what is simple business practice, but then we are talking Vanquis here. Is only Provident in their suit and tie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then I would offer them £4 a month, & keep reducing it by a pound each time they refuse the offer until you hit the minimum token payment, or they get the jist!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

tnt post is + 5 days to get into royal mail delivery system

then its treated as 2nd class mail , so thats another 4 days.

 

following rainer cae [ithink]

 

i would not rely on any DN or agreement arguements that its un-en.

 

pay them £1 PCM and get reclaiming.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there

I believe that in the case of Bank accounts that INTEREST CAN be added after the account has been terminated.

The only way interest can be stopped stone dead is if a Charging order is made -- then Interest is frozen.

 

I think CCJ's can also carry interest until they are cleared or converted into Charging Orders.

 

I hope I'm wrong but it's quite hard to get Interest payments stopped by using the law. You *might* be able to get the Bank / credit card company / DCA to stop interest payments if you can make a decent case out of the fact that you have very little money and the debt will NEVER be paid off iff interest is continually being added especially if it's at a high rate. This will be at the discretion of who is chasing you for money and we all know how evil and disgusting this whole industry is.

 

Logic might appeal to them however -- 7% of X for example is better than 0% of Y even if Y is many times bigger than X.

 

There's no hard and fast rule on this one --it probably depends on which muppet opens your mail requesting suspension of Interest.

 

Cheers

jimbo

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...