Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • and it legally informs them of your correct and current address as you must do with all old debts last paid/used in say 7 yrs you dont want backdoor CCJ's. what were the names of these IVA scammers, the one you took it out with, and the one that scammed you to let them take over please? your story is slightly worrying. dx  
    • Incidentally, congratulations on not buying the warranty. That is another Big Motoring World rip-off. See what we have to say about extended warranties and the Big Motoring World attitude to them is particularly unhelpful
    • well that google is from 2019, but the photos are certainly of someone driving on the public highway in/out by an ANP system, though the site of where the camera actually is, is not showing there are anpr cameras up by the low yellow barriers but they wont get from facing shots from there. interesting, needs to be checked if the road IS a public highway but on private land, cause as you say, if the whole area is max 4hrs , how does the hotel work< ?? must have a reg entry system.  now as for taking pictures of cars on a public highway then guessing the are parking ...erm.... i dont thnk thats right nor allowed under GDPR. dx  
    • Under the consumer rights act 2015, if a defect manifests itself within 30 days and you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund. If any defect manifests itself within the first six months of ownership then you have a right to return the vehicle for a full refund subject to the retailers right to carry out a repair. If the retailer declines to repair or if the repair fails then you have the right to return. The problem here is that you have to assert their right. It's a bit ridiculous – but you have to do let them know preferably in writing that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act either the 30 day right or the six month right. I suppose that you haven't done this – which would be quite understandable because most people don't know that these rights exist and that they are subject to these conditions – the condition that the right must be inserted. It is frankly ridiculous. The dealers know it and we have lots of instances of this company delaying appointments et cetera and our strong suspicion is that they are simply trying to run their customers out of time. On the basis that you haven't asserted your rights, we now have to look to ordinary contract law. You are entitled to purchase a vehicle which is of satisfactory condition and which remains that way for a reasonable period of time. Clearly it is in satisfactory. They are blaming you. Has your independent inspection identified the reason for the defect? This will be important because as you have seen BMW are already saying it is down to your driving and you are going to have to produce evidence that it wasn't down to your driving and the you drove it absolutely reasonably and it was simply the condition of the car. Have you been without the car for any period of time. Is it driveable now? If the car was off the road for a substantial amount of time and was still off the road then you would be able to argue that this is a fundamental breach of contract and that you have been deprived of substantially the whole benefit of the contract and therefore you will be entitled to treat the contract as breached by Big Motoring World and insist on cancelling the contract. It may be that you will eventually be obliged to keep the car but have the repairs paid for. Have you had any quotations for the work that needs doing? I asked you questions about the MOT – but you haven't responded.
    • A 'violent left wing mob', comprised of a chap in a red hoody with a damp polystyrene coffee cup and a bit of wet cement, gets nowhere near cowering frightened farage some distance away on top of his double decker bus .. as farages security and support seem to film the incident grinning     Farage bravely flinches, grimaces and seems to almost burst into tears as the 'objects managed to travel a part of the way toward his position on top of his bus. His reactions honed by having a bit of milk splash him at a prior incident allow him to swiftly fall into a protective cower and grimace .. .. Sometime after, once the mob of 1 had been safely bundled away, farage apparently wipes his eyes of tears, and rising from his cowed and frightened pose, bravely shouts “I will not be bullied or cowed by a violent left-wing mob who hate our country.” .. however few they may comprise of.   https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/nigel-farage-cement-barnsley-reform-uk-b2560501.html  
  • 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

GE Capital / Santandar to Howard Cohen. Court papers issued


Herb
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4872 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

I took out a BHS store card in 2002 and due to unemployment and other issues have been unable to make payments lately.(store card maximum was £250)

At some point Santandar have taken over from GE Capital and I received a notice from Northampton in December stating that something had been filed by Howard Cohen for £420.00

I sent an “embarrassed defence” in January and Howard have replied last week with a GE contract and four statements maximum dated 2009 and 2010.

I do not know what my next step should be and i was thinking that good people here would be able to help.

Many Thanks,

Herb

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alfwithair,

 

I don’t have the POC to hand but will post the details here later.

 

hi alfwithhair,

Yes the store card was for £250.00,although in years i have been charged late payments and not making payments.

 

I wrote to them and other creditors in September 2010 with a budget breakdown and my income with me requesting to pay £1.00 which was rejected.

 

I have not been able to make payments at all and now they want me to pay £400+

 

Since entering my defence i have not heard from the courts although i have received a letter and GE credit agreement from Howard and friends!

 

Regards,

 

Herb

Link to post
Share on other sites

It not that clear, but even though it an application form it does seem to contain all that is necessary.

One thing that does puzzle me is Cohen's statement of why they can't supply NOA.

I have never heard of Santander using Cohen's. CL Finance/Lewis's are Cowen's bum chums.

They are correct in that Santander own GE Money now, but is very unusual, if fact I have never seen it for the original creditor to take action using this slimy bunch of solicitors and especially not for a few hundred quid.

 

It ponders the question, are they rearly acting on behalf of Santander? I am sceptical on that one.

Now they want you to pull your defence.

I smell a rat.

 

I think you need to get a CPR request off to Cohen's ASAP

 

The POC would be a great help. We can see whats what then.

 

I have seen a few recent threads around the various advice sites regarding Cohen's starting court action on ex store cards, which they claim have turned into credit cards, but no new agreement signed.

 

Did you receive a Default Noice from Santander?

Have you had any notification from Santander regarding this account?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is odd. Santander don't directly instigate proceedings. They pass it to the Lewis Group, which encompasses a few DCA's.

 

Do the CPR 31.14 request.

 

If it hasn't been assigned, then a copy of the instruction from there client.

Have they supplied the Default Notice.

 

I'm afraid the application/agreement looks good. So you need to concentrate on looking at the procedures followed prior to instigating the claim.

 

Go through the statements & deduct all those charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is odd. Santander don't directly instigate proceedings. They pass it to the Lewis Group, which encompasses a few DCA's.

 

.

 

Thats exactly what I thought.

I think their asking for you to pull the defence might be to try for judgement by default.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

The claim form from Northampton states "the claimants claim is for the sum of £420 being monies due from the defendant to the claimant under a regulated credit agreement made in writing under reference XXXXXXXXXX.

 

The defendant has failed to make payment in accordance with the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to section 87(1) of the consumer credit act 1974.

the claimant claims the sum of £420.

 

Speaking of Lewis Group-i have just come across a letter from Howard Cohen that came in the same week as the county court form which says that if i want to discuss the county court claim i should contact LEWIS DEBT RECOVERY.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is something not right here.

Cohen state they are acting for their client SANTANDER, but they then say to contact LEWIS. Therefore the account MUST have been assigned to them.

But Cohen say it hasn't?

 

They again mention a Default Notice in the POC. Have you received a Default Notice ?

 

I am not an expect on the legal side of things, but, as far as I am aware LEWIS cannot initiate court action unless they are the LEGAL owners of the debt. So the account would have to have been sold to them. Having said that, they would be refering to their client as 'LEWIS then. As they are not, it would be assumed they are only acting as agents for SANTANDER. There is also no mention of an assignment in the POC.

 

Yes Cohen can start proceeding for SANTANDER but not without being instructed to do so.

 

A CPR 31.14 request is the way to go here I think.

 

You need some expert advice from one of our legal eagles on the site rearly as to what you need to request.

I am sure we will get to the bottom of this.

 

There might not be much in the way of replies today as its weekend, but sure someone in the know will be available tomorrow

Sit tight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did do a CPR31:14 about 5 weeks ago as soon as i made the defense to northampton and what came with the attached letter above from Cohen was a default notice from Santander dated end april 2010.

 

Its all puzzling.what should my next step be? will the courts write to me in due course?

 

the fact that the default notice received is dated 6 months old could it mean that its actually lewis and not santander?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you post the DN on here (minus personal details) so we can have a gander.

Have you checked your credit file recently to see if this default is recorded on it..

 

You need to look back through all the Letters from both LEWIS and SANTANDER. See if any of them state this account has been either SOLD or LEGALLY ASSIGNED and when

Link to post
Share on other sites

Picked this up from another threat that may be appropriate

 

In order for the original creditor to sell (or assign) the debt to someone else- YOU have to be informed- and the law of property act says that you must be served with the Notice of Assignment- this must be by personal service or by some form of "recorded" delivery (signed for by you).

 

if you are not thus served- then the assignment has not been lawfully completed- so if the claimant in any proceedings against you is not shown as the original creditor- then they have no "cause of action" - in other words they cannot satisfy the court that they are the proper owners of the debt since you were not served properly.

 

thus their claim cannot proceed against you.

 

there may of course be other arguments in defence

 

(OP Diddydick)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response. So if the DN is defective due to Santander stating when all should be remedied by what should i do now?

 

The DN is dated in May 2010, i have removed the date for ID purposes. i.e the DN sender could look up the date and trace my case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...