Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Moorcroft chasing Lloyds loan now sold to 1st credit


intend
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1963 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

Don't be too quick claiming as you are not quite there with SB.

 

You probably have another month or so to go before your son in law is clear.

 

It would be a pity to resurrect the debt for the sake of a month or so.

 

Can you manage till early September to be on the safe side?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 395
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

if LLoyds still own the 'debt'

then regardless to SB date they can still offset and theres nowt you can do about it.

 

statute barring in E&W solely stops the owner of a debt enforcing any resultant judgement if they litigate.

so they don't bother.

 

the debt itself still exists.

 

and as said if it's still owned by the original creditor, any reclaim can be offset against the outstanding balance

the only thing they cant use is the statutory 8% interest redress they have to pay you.

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks for that dx100uk, still tempted for the 8% interest, have claimed successfully from them in past so hopefully can again. Need to get brain in gear over next few weeks and find the motivation in my old age.

 

Package account will be a different kettle of fish - must look at that thread and pick up the pieces.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

post removed

 

 

forget that wrong thread

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

  • 1 month later...

Got round to asking Lloyds for statement of account on CC.

As expected eventually got a reply from Cabot, who now own the debt.

 

Long story

 

CC was cancelled by LTSB and we came to a repayment plan, which at time of sale to Cabot was £5 per month.

 

Looking to reduce it.

Current balance £1400.

As ever they threaten to demand payment in full if agreement not honoured.

 

Lloyds agreed to £5 per month August 2014, subject to periodic review - no detail as to this timescale.

 

I do not wish to stir up a hornets nest, but tempted to reduce it, without informing them and continue to pay cash at local Lloyds branch.

 

Two questions really

- as credit card cancelled,

no agreement other than the £5 with Lloyds,

could Cabot demand full payment if default on the £5 per month.

 

Second, should I write and state due to worsening financial affairs, monthly payment will be reduced.

 

Intend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CCA request

upon failure stop payment totally.

 

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

  • 1 year later...

I think yes, you should claim the PPI.

 

Of course there will be an attempt to set it off against the amount outstanding on the loan but I'm wondering whether it might be possible to take steps to forestall that.

 

Is it correct that the loan is still with Lloyds? Have you written to Lloyds and inform them that the loan is statue barred? Have you looked at CONC 7? I would suggest that you write to Lloyds and inform them that the loan is statue barred and draw their attention specifically to CONC 7 and make it clear to them that any attempt to recover the loan or to demand payment would be unlawful.

 

Have they written to you during the last six years?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice of assignment from Lloyds Nov 2013 to 1st Credit, the August 2015 they advised reassigned to Lloyds. Last payment 2011. Have not written to Lloyds.

 

Will need to check details of correspondence over last years as well as check out my old thread. Have not looked at CONC 7 but will do.

 

Thanks for the response.

 

Intend

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can claim but I am surprised that Bankfodder wants to do it on your behalf? The PPI claimed will probably be used to pay any outstanding balance on the loan.

 

Sorry, that was my dictation software and my poor annunciation plus my lack of attention to the final result which caused me to post an offer to claim the PPI on behalf the OP.

 

I've corrected it now.

 

Apologies for the misunderstanding – and thank you to Surfer01 for pointing it out

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, that was my dictation software and my poor annunciation plus my lack of attention to the final result which caused me to post an offer to claim the PPI on behalf the OP.

 

I've corrected it now.

 

Apologies for the misunderstanding – and thank you to Surfer01 for pointing it out

 

No problem. I suspected as much. LOL! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

is the loan still owed by Lloyds or sold to a DCA?

if they latter they yes reclaim it using our help

if its owned by Lloyds and there is an outstanding balance then it will simply be offset...not worth the aggro.

statute barring only stops court enforcement in E&W, if the original credit still owns it, then they CAN offset legally as the debt still exists on their books.

 

 

 

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

is the loan still owed by Lloyds or sold to a DCA?

if they latter they yes reclaim it using our help

if its owned by Lloyds and there is an outstanding balance then it will simply be offset...not worth the aggro.

statute barring only stops court enforcement in E&W, if the original credit still owns it, then they CAN offset legally as the debt still exists on their books.

 

 

 

dx

 

Notice of assignment from Lloyds Nov 2013 to 1st Credit, the August 2015 they advised reassigned to Lloyds

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

means Lloyds still own it.

 

looking at your other thread..

 

what did you actually have refunded ,,,have you ever had anything refunded with regard to this loan..and what happened to it..off the balance or to your pocket?

 

AFAIK Lloyds haven't sold any debts on since 2015 now,

I know someone that had 4 cards and 2 od current accounts.

they were all sold to various dca's but are now all back under Lloyds and can be viewed on his Lloyds webportal.

all are statute barred.

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

I thought the interest could not be offset - this could be a substantial amount.

 

Not sure if this will work forum wont allow me to attach at the moment.

 

http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=5623

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes it works andy

and that was a very important decision years ago.

 

just incase intend doesn't understand it....

they can only offset the loan PPI against any outstanding balance on that loan only.

it being statute barred...is sadly immaterial in E&W if Lloyds own the loan debt which looks probable.

intend you can double check this by logging into your Lloyds webportal.

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

Lloyds still own the debt, nothing refunded, statute barred as unable to provide an agreement and not paid or acknowledged since 2011. Guess I need to go down the route suggested by Bankfodder before reclaiming. Might try a reclaim as nothing to lose.

 

Focus on packaged account reclaim in near future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Statue barred lloyds loan with unclaimed PPI
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...