Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This time you do need to reply to them with a snotty letter to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did try court. We will help this evening.  
    • Hi, I just wanted to update the post and ask some further advice  I sent the CCA and CPR request on the 14th May, to date I have had no reply to the CCA but I received a load of paperwork from the CPR request a few days ago. I need to file the defence today and from the information I have read the following seems to be what is required.  I would be grateful if some one could confirm suitability   Claim The claim is for the sum of £255.69 due by the Defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a PayPal account with an account reference of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)  The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 15-09-21, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £0.00. The Claimant claims the sum of £255.69   Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had financial dealings with PayPal  in the past but cannot recollect the account number referred to by the Claimant. 2. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor the Claimant refers to within its particulars of claim.  3. Paragraph 3 is noted. On the 14/5/2024 I requested information related to this claim by way of a Section 77 request, which was received and signed for by the claimant on 20/5/2024. As of today, the Claimant has failed to respond to this request, and therefore remains in default of the section 77 request and therefore unable to enforce any alleged agreement until its compliance. 4. Therefore it is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and: (b) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice Pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 5. Paypal (Europe) S.A.R.L is out of the juristriction of English Courts. 6. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed, or any relief.
    • Thanks @dx100ukI followed the advice given on here... then it went very quiet!  The company was creditfix I think then transferred to Knightsbridge (or the other way around) The scammer independent advisor was Roger Wallis-having checked his LinkedIn profile just this morning, it does look like he's still scamming vulnerable people... I know I was stupid for taking his advice, but i do wonder how many others he has done this to over a longer period of time (it came as a  massive shock to him when our IVA suddenly failed). Lowell have our current address (and phone numbers if the rejected calls over the past couple of days is anything to go by!) No point trying the SB because of the correspondence in 2019? Thanks
    • I have received the following letter from BW Legal today.  Also includes form if I admit the debt and wanting my income details.  Do I reply to this LETTER OF CLAIM please?  Looks like they are ready for court now??  Thank You BW Legal - Letter of Claim.pdf
    • According to Wikipedia - yeah, I know - the site is owned by Croydon Council. It's at least worth a try to contact the council and ask for a contact in The Colonnades. You could then lay it on thick about being a genuine customer and ask them to call their dogs off. It's got to be worth a try  https://www.croydon.gov.uk/contact-us/contact-us  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Advent Computer Training (Barclays Partner Finance)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3149 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

Well, Barclays have decided to challenge me in court now (their trading name is Clydesdale Financial Services Ltd t/a Barclays Partner Finance for anyone still planning on putting in a claim against them).

 

Let battle commence...:argue:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Well, Barclays have decided to challenge me in court now (their trading name is Clydesdale Financial Services Ltd t/a Barclays Partner Finance for anyone still planning on putting in a claim against them).

 

Let battle commence...:argue:

 

yes I am planning on doing the same

I expected they would challange you.. they have to.. its like the little dyke boy keeping a finger in the dam.. once they let you win they know even if they stuck their a r se in the hole it will not help to stop the flood.

 

Good luck to you.. to us all

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes I am planning on doing the same

I expected they would challange you.. they have to.. its like the little dyke boy keeping a finger in the dam.. once they let you win they know even if they stuck their a r se in the hole it will not help to stop the flood.

 

Good luck to you.. to us all

 

:)

 

Just think of it as a hole surrounded by ass :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just think of it as a hole surrounded by ass :)

 

Ha ha - like that analogy 10pack! :wink:

 

They've set one of their in-house trainee solicitors on the case (judging by the signature on the reply to Bristol Court which was copied to me yesterday by 1st class post).

I guessed they wouldn't send a top dog £500 an hour dude from Hogan Lovells (who were defending Barclays against Hausfeld in the group action) so they probably see me as a small fry test case.

 

It's a bit daunting but I'm prepared to face it out on a matter of principle.I could probably write off £5,000 over the rest of my lifetime but WHY THE FECK SHOULD I? THIS IS WRONG!

 

I'll be posting on my website 'how I did it' and all the legal arguments after the Hearing. I won't do so until then as I'm not an expert and don't want to mislead anyone. Oh and there are spies that read here, I'm sure.

 

:spy::spy:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha - like that analogy 10pack! :wink:

 

They've set one of their in-house trainee solicitors on the case (judging by the signature on the reply to Bristol Court which was copied to me yesterday by 1st class post).

I guessed they wouldn't send a top dog £500 an hour dude from Hogan Lovells (who were defending Barclays against Hausfeld in the group action) so they probably see me as a small fry test case.

 

It's a bit daunting but I'm prepared to face it out on a matter of principle.I could probably write off £5,000 over the rest of my lifetime but WHY THE FECK SHOULD I? THIS IS WRONG!

 

I'll be posting on my website 'how I did it' and all the legal arguments after the Hearing. I won't do so until then as I'm not an expert and don't want to mislead anyone. Oh and there are spies that read here, I'm sure.

 

:spy::spy:

 

spies? of that I am sure they have, they would be stupid not to have.

 

its the same with facebook and the other sites.. who in their right mind puts so much information about themselves for all to see?, many people are getting caught by their bosses and even DHS.. I am on neither, its best way to be.. been betrayed too many times now its not just companies that s hit on you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Luck Fuzz - when is the court date set?

 

Thanks Savarok.Not sure yet but will be within the next month I believe. Barclays has to submit their defence within the next 2 weeks and I have to copy them and the court all my evidence papers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Savarok.Not sure yet but will be within the next month I believe. Barclays has to submit their defence within the next 2 weeks and I have to copy them and the court all my evidence papers.

 

 

Good luck with that Fuzzbutt.

 

I am still waiting for my fos outcome...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

I've been thinking over this for a while now and I'm a bit stuck in what to do now that Haufield aren't taking up our case.

I've been reading the forums over and over trying to find someone with circumstances the same as mine.

For starters I'm here in the UK on a spouse visa, at the time of when I was proposed the Advent course I was on a 2 year working visa (where I could only work for 1 year out of the 2). I dont know if that is of any relevance or not.

Now I joined Advent on the basis that I would study for a year without paying, then start paying monthly fees with an apr of 36% or something. I haven't paid anything to Barclays but I keep getting letters saying I owe them 12K. I would understand that I would have to pay the money back to them if I had received 12k worth of goods or the cash from them but all I have is a ****ty book. I have chosen to take my career down a different path now as a year and a half of wasted study kinda made me dislike the course.

I dont want compensation for any of the stress they put me through, all I want is out of this contract!

Can someone please give me a bit of advice on where to go to from here? Much appreciated.

 

P.s Sorry for rambling on for so long

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Barclays have decided to challenge me in court now (their trading name is Clydesdale Financial Services Ltd t/a Barclays Partner Finance for anyone still planning on putting in a claim against them).

 

Let battle commence...:argue:

 

Good Luck Fuzzbutt :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any body seen this?

 

Seperate issue but the whole thing with PPI at the moment - Barclays to refund ALL complaints made before April PLUS 8% no quibble.

 

w w w . consumeractiongroup.co.uk /forum /showthread.php?309106-Barclays-announce-they-will-pay-all-PPI-claims-no-quibble%282-Viewing%29-nbsp

 

Why wont they be this resonable with us?

 

(Again under 20 posts so cant post full link you will have to delete the spaces.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any body seen this?

 

Seperate issue but the whole thing with PPI at the moment - Barclays to refund ALL complaints made before April PLUS 8% no quibble.

 

w w w . consumeractiongroup.co.uk /forum /showthread.php?309106-Barclays-announce-they-will-pay-all-PPI-claims-no-quibble%282-Viewing%29-nbsp

 

Why wont they be this resonable with us?

 

(Again under 20 posts so cant post full link you will have to delete the spaces.)

 

Barclays are not being reasonable.. they are being made to do this.. so through gritted teeth they make it look like they are their customers best friend while they keep their knife hidden.

Barlays do not do anything unless its in their interests they make out they have share holders to pay etc.. I am a barclays sharholder and I got sod all.. the chairman got £62m why he got that I have no idea except maybe because they give each other bonuses.. who knows but they do not earn it ..

no one is worth that sort of money I dont care who they are or what they do, its obscene.. and my view is nothing to do with what is going on here, its my point of view that all this money has to come from somewhere to pay for all of their jumped up payments, how did they get the money to pay their wages and bonus.. from us the customers. and in a world that is going to hell.. fuel prices rising etc.. to think that anyone is worth such money.. only they can think this while they stick their fingers up at us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will have to let us know Fuzz, maybe we could organise a gathering outside the courthouse and some media?

 

Thanks Mustard for that support. It's much appreciated.

 

The Smalll Claim will be heard at Bristol County Court but I understand it's usually an informal Hearing, so will just be me, the Judge and Defendant (Barclays solicitor), although it's open to the public if they want to attend. I'll keep everyone up to date. I have no Court date yet. I'll be defending myself.

 

:thumb:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey all. Things seem to have gone a little quiet on the debt collector front. I havent heard from them for months however two bailiffs turned up at my home address today completely out of the blue. I wasnt here but they got nasty with my partner whos due a baby in bout 6 weeks. When she asked the two bailiffs who they worked for they kept skipping around the question, they didnt have any ID and they said they wanted their money or they gonna come in house and start taking stuff. Its not even my property just wondered if anyone else has had the same situation.

 

Good luck fuzz

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey all. Things seem to have gone a little quiet on the debt collector front. I havent heard from them for months however two bailiffs turned up at my home address today completely out of the blue. I wasnt here but they got nasty with my partner whos due a baby in bout 6 weeks. When she asked the two bailiffs who they worked for they kept skipping around the question, they didnt have any ID and they said they wanted their money or they gonna come in house and start taking stuff. Its not even my property just wondered if anyone else has had the same situation.

 

Good luck fuzz

 

Your partner was correct to ask for ID I bet these bastards were just trying their luck hoping you would not know what to do.

debt collectors are not allowed to step foot on your property without your permission.

In future tell her not to open the door to anyone who does not identify themselves correctly and if they refuse to call the police

 

Only court baliffs can come and enter your house without your permission.. ie smash your door in and take things.. and from what I have heard they are usually escorted by police.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any update on what the court date is fuzz? Im up in Newcastle so wont be able to travel to bristol as much as I would love to come and support you.

 

No date yet, DaveH24. Thanks for the thought with the support - much appreciated. Higan Lovells (BPF solicitors requested a court extension of 28 days in order to get their evidence together (which is allowed). I don't know if it means anything but their paperwork to me is now signed by head honcho Sophie Jarrett and not the previous trainee solicitor in their dept. They may not appear at a hearing but send a written rep instead, which is accepted by the court. Wonder if it will be the same laughable 'justification' document sent to FOS as their defence!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Y

Only court baliffs can come and enter your house without your permission.. ie smash your door in and take things.. and from what I have heard they are usually escorted by police.

 

This is correct, and they must produce the order from the court, all this is after you have been taken to court and fail to comply with what ever the court had ordered you to do.[ not sure about the Police bit, but you may be correct]

It is a different matter regarding anything to do with the Inland Revenue, but must still be carried out within that said law/requirement.

However anyone pretending to be a County Court bailiff with a forged/fake court order is a criminal offence taken very seriously, and if you follow up your concerns this can/will lead to criminal proceedings taken out against the 'Pretender', which can result in a holiday at her majestys pleasure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Fuzz, how long did BPF take to respond to your letter before action? They recieved mine on Monday

 

They replied within 10 days, I recall, Lankus (I gave them 14 days to reply before I initiated court action). Now they have until 4 Aug to get their defence together. I think next step then is both parties submit a questionaire for the judge to decide if the case can be dealt with by a hearing or will be moved to another class.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I have been following this forum, this is my first posting. My case is a guarantor for the student. As a matter of interest, my agreement states ‘This is a Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be legally bound by its terms’, this is also repeated on the top of the Agreement form. According to the Ombudsman’s final decision this cannot apply as the debtor-creditor-supplier relationship has not been created. So why put it on?

 

If I’d have known that it didn’t apply I would not have signed. The consumer credit act is there for our protection. Could this be a question for the Financial Regulator (FSA)? If other guarantors have got this on their agreement, then I’d be interested in your experience.

 

The amount involved is greater than the £5000 cut off limit for the small claims court and must be heard at County Court level. The costs involved would be prohibited for the vast majority of the public that could easily be caught out by this loophole in the law. I understand this limit may be increased in the near future, but too late for us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the amount may be greater than £5000, you can still claim for £5000 if you're willing to write off the extra. That's what I'm doing - better to write off some of it than to give up on the whole lot. I suppose it depends what the total is. If you're one of the people that got screwed for £10,000, it might not be such an appealing option

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the amount may be greater than £5000, you can still claim for £5000 if you're willing to write off the extra. That's what I'm doing - better to write off some of it than to give up on the whole lot. I suppose it depends what the total is. If you're one of the people that got screwed for £10,000, it might not be such an appealing option

 

Thank you, I was unaware of that. The amount involved was for a loan just short of £6000 so is definitely worth considering. If as I believe the agreement is invalid then no contract exists between us and therefore no money needs paying. I cancelled the contract following advent’s demise and before the Direct Debit commenced.

 

I have another issue with the salesman mis selling. However, this is verbal and would require evidence from my witness the student and Barclays witness the salesman. Their defence would be that Advent’s salesman was being mischievous.

 

I’m glad to read that you are going down that route and wish you the best. I intend to get an article into one of the newspapers regarding the FOS’s lack of the law and the Banks Code that states ‘All written terms and conditions will be fair …‘ that assumes BPF have signed up to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...