Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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

Barclaycard : Endless BC Saga- Reply help please..


otisan
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4728 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

This is the latest letter I received from BC. It's a new one that I haven't received so far.

However, debt companies have ALL stopped contacting me. After I ask for my CCA request from them, they all stop harassing and pass me on to the next DCA. I don't think there's any left which is why BC have suddenly gotten themselves involved again.

Any ideas what I can reply to this??

 

img340.jpg

 

img341.jpg

 

img342.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter dated 1 Feb as stated in previous letter is:

(There's 2 pages missing, but it's the standard conditions that I've received from them a million times before... Still, nothing with a signature.)

This has been going on for so long now and I have no response to this, any templates left that I might not have used? Or is there a way I can put an end to this a little quicker, because, whilst I was quite confident with what i was doing in the beginning, this has now become such an outdrawn process and I'm am losing confidence/will to carry on with this somewhat..

 

img343.jpg

img344.jpg

img346.jpg

img347.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Otisan,

 

Have a read of the last link in my signature below. It's the OFT Guide on how banks can reply to a CCA request.

 

Recent court decisions mean it is now far harder to dispute a Credit Card debt on the basis of documentation.

 

8-)

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Slick132, My wife received exactly the same letter as Otisan received (T&C and without signature / signature box)after 3 months of requesting the True Copy of CCA. On the first post of this thread showing the 1st page of BC statement which states

 

2) There may be omitted from any such copy -

 

(b) Any signature box, signature or date of signature ...

 

Does it mean if the BC have fullfilled their obligation under 1974 cca? even by sending "reconstituted copy" WITHOUT SIGNATURES ?

 

My wife received the same letter T&C from BC in Oct.10 bearing her name and the address (abroad address, NOT the UK address) and my wife again sent a letter to BC asking to send CCA with her Signature. After that never received a letter from BC and then in Jan.11 we were bombarded with calls on mobile and landline from Mercers. My wife never gave her name or dob to them and kept asking to write a letter instead of calls and then hang up phone. Mercers never wrote any letters. From now around 3 weeks calls stopped from Mercers and today received a call from SRJ management and again my wife did not give any info and passed the phone to me, I told the guy he is not paying the bill for my landline and we never gave him the permission to call our landline and in future write a letter instead of phone calls.

 

Would you please explain and enlighten the BC statement i mentioned above. Can the BC and / or debt recovery (SRJ) can take my wife to court or take out CCJ on my wife even without the signatures on the CCA. How can one (debtor) be sure of the True copy of CCA sent without signatures is the same at the time of opening up the account ? Thanks a lot in advance.

Edited by asteroid
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Asteroid,

 

Read the OFT Guide on how a bank should respond to a CCA request at Link No4 in my signature.

 

If they have responded adequately, the a/c is no longer in dispute and they can continue to seek payment.

 

If they want to take court action to collect, then they should produce the original signed credit agreement. If they cannot do this, it's up to the court to decide if the bank has proved their case and done enough to get a CCJ against you.

 

If you want to discuss this further, please use your own thread and I'll get a note to say you've posted there.

 

8-)

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So would you say they have fulfilled my request?

If so, what would I do next? They have added a lot of interest etc. to the account whilst i thought the account was in dispute but they didn't so it would be a shame to just give up after so long and start paying up, especially with all these added costs.

If legislations have now changed how come every single DCA have abandoned this debt as soon as I send in a letter? The only people left pushing this debt is Barclaycard themselves, after it has been passed several rounds of their DCA's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Otisan,

 

I think they've replied adequately to your CCA Request.

 

I don't see that you can effectively argue about the interest added to the a/c, when it was not in a recognised dispute.

 

A DCA needs paperwork to prove they're entitled to chase the debt. If they don't have the credit agreement, they may choose not to chase again so they can move onto a case that may bring them easier results.

 

:-)

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...