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. 
  • 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

pb v barclaycard


paulpb123
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6294 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 Folks,

This flipping microfiche argument is a load of old rubbish and we all know it. Yesterday I received the 'puzzled' letter from Carol Jones. I just haven't got the patience to keep arguing so here is my letter which is a revised and extended version of the one I was going to send. Feel free to use it.

 

Request for repayment of charges

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

Account Number: xxxxxxxxxxx

 

I wrote to Deborah Woodcock at Barclays Data Protection on xxxxx regarding the bank’s failure to comply with my request under the Data Protection Act 1998. Unfortunately, I received only a standard template letter (not an email as stated in the letter) from Carol Jones which seems to be sent to anyone requesting details of charges levied against their accounts.

 

I am sorry that you have decided to deny me my legal entitlement to this information and flout the law by refusing to comply with my request; please note that I am making an official complaint to the Information Commissioner. I would have thought that if you are able to supply copy statements at £3 each, then they should be retrievable from your accounting systems and easy enough to produce in accordance with the DPA.

 

In an effort to resolve this matter, and in the absence of the information I requested, I have made an estimate of charges and penalties levied against my account based on the information that you did manage to supply. I now understand that the regime of fees which you have been applying to my account in relation to exceeding limit, returned payment charges and so forth are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent consumer regulations. If you say that they are not then will you please demonstrate this by providing me with a full breakdown of the costs you have incurred as a result of my breaches, in order to reassure me that your penalties really do reflect your costs. May I remind you that it has now been confirmed that your particularly high level of penalties are considered to be unfair per se by the Office of Fair Trading who reported on 5th April 2006. These penalties are now considered to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary.

 

I would also draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves in a manner which complies with UK law. I am frankly shocked that you have operated my account in this way and I consider that your repeated representations that your charges are fair and reasonable are deceptive and that they have deceived me into agreeing to pay them. Your concealment of the true nature of your charges has prevented me from asserting my right until now.

 

What I require

 

I enclose a schedule of charges for the period xxxxxxxx to xxxxxxx. Based on the figures for this period (which is actually less than a year), and because you have refused to provide me with the necessary information for the period prior to May 2004, I estimate that you have taken xxxx which I would like you to repay. If you do not agree with this figure could you please provide me with a complete list of transactions and charges relating to my account, as originally requested in my letter of xxxxxx.

 

I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and I am writing this letter to you on the assumption that you will prefer to do this rather than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets.

 

I will now give you 14 days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

 

If you do not respond, or if you do not respond positively within this time period, I will send you a letter before action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments.

 

After that, there will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim at the expiry of the second deadline.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

PB

 

If they wish to challenge my claim they will have to provide the evidence. I reckon we're all getting bogged down in this microfiche argument and its time to move on. Best,

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

i made an overestimate of my charges to barclaycard but they have this morning offerered me £96 saying i have 12 charges on my account. when i checked through the statements they sent (only dating to 2004) i could only see 8, this shows that they are able to go back and check the details unlike what there original letters about the microfiche rubbish says.

 

anyone any ideas as to what to do next:idea: i am obviously going to decline this offer until they can prove to me otherwise, but how do i get them to do this?

 

any help is much appreciated,

 

thanx

david

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dave,

I've sent the letter requesting charges estimated from what they sent. I took a one year period from the statements they sent. I chose the period with the highest amount of charges. Include a schedule of those charges with your letter. You simply multiply that by 6 (or however many yrs you've been with them if its less). After the two week deadline they will get a letter before action, giving a further two weeks, then I'm going to file a claim. Its up to them to prove that my estimate is wrong. They are the ones being deliberately obstructive and I can't imagine that they will want to explain to a county court judge why they have acted unlawfully. I think the microfiche argument is utter rubbish and we should all get on with our claims. I take it that the £96 is 12 x £8 which is the difference between between £20 and £12 because of what the OFT reported. But they did NOT say that £12 is a fair charge. Of course they can go further back than 2004. Hope this helps Dave. Keep in touch.

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I'm going to be filing my claim against B/card very soon but my problem is I'm not sure how to work out the interest since I have estimated the amount based on the info they provided. Anyone have any ideas on this? I can obviously accurately work out the interest for post-2004 but what about prior to then? And how can I estimate the interest? Any help much appreciated.

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I did was work out what would be the average amount of charges per statement, and on the spreadsheet, put the average amount in the relevant box.

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to file a claim against b/card today but I'm not sure that my original calculations were correct. I did an estimate based on 1 year x 6. However, am I right in thinking that b/card only introduced charges in 2001? Should I therefore do the claim based on 1 year x 5? Any thoughts greatly appreciated.

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep unfortunatly

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, filed claim last night for £2346.62 so its time to play the waiting game. I'm counting on them taking this to the 1th hour judging by other people's threads. I guess b/card are going to have to drop the microfiche argument now after the Abbey findings. Good luck to all b/card claimers!

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barclaycard really should get their act together. Two items in the post this morning. An aknowledgement of my claim with intention to defend (so they get to waste more time) and a letter from customer relations stating that they are dealing with my complaint and thanking me for my patience! I'm sure there's a proverb for this...:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck Robert. Received a 'goodwill' offer of £267 based on the difference between their charges and the £12 which they seem to think is a fair charge. If you're reading this Mr Barclaycard, the answer is no and I look forward to receiving your defence.

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there - I also sent a letter copied off the forum for estimated figures had nothing to go by as account was paid up before 2004 so what they sent me wasnt worth the paper it written on. Im now at MCOL stage and have hesitated abit but after reading again thought dam it go for it.

 

My question is did you change the wording for MCOL from the normal ones we use because of the esitmation of charges and them not supplying a true DSAR.?

 

Thanks and good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi folks,

Checked MCOL today...their last day to submit a defence...and they've done it, right at the last moment. Thought I might get to click the judgement button...in my dreams, of course. I guess they always play it this way because they get to keep our money for longer. Oh well, let's see what their defence says.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the paperwork through today. Their defence is not impressive, just a load of stuff about T & Cs. Opens by saying I didn't supply details for the charges I'm claiming but I did, of course, twice! They also say that charges prior to 18 Oct 2000 are unclaimable under the Limitation Act...but I'm not claiming prior to this date! Do they have a template defence or something because very little of the defence seems specific to my case? Oh well, onwards and upwards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the paperwork through today. Their defence is not impressive, just a load of stuff about T & Cs. Opens by saying I didn't supply details for the charges I'm claiming but I did, of course, twice! They also say that charges prior to 18 Oct 2000 are unclaimable under the Limitation Act...but I'm not claiming prior to this date! Do they have a template defence or something because very little of the defence seems specific to my case? Oh well, onwards and upwards.

 

Just delaying tactics thats all, your case has just risen to the top of the to do list that's all.

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes!!!!!

 

In that box put you require the defendant to issue you with copy statements dating from 2001 until 2004, previously requested under the DPA 1998 but information declined.

 

Good Luck

Abbey - owed £3260 - Paid up.

 

Barclays owed £2500 - Paid up.

 

Halifax, Mint & Egg - next on the hit list

 

Dont click on the scales - I'm quite proud of my little red dot! - As the little red dot has gone - click away!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...