Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Nemo secured loan


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3526 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

Hello to anyone that might be abel to help.

 

I am in arrears of around £597 with Nemo Personal Finance (balance on the loan is currently £9000).

They were very hot on calling the minute anything went late and i started to feel like i was on the phone to them everyday confirming my name, date of birth, post code everytime and was driving me insane

 

i asked them to put everything in writing and told them i no longer had a mobile!

They ignored me and carried on calling

 

i wrote to them recorded delivery and asked them to write only.

The calls then stopped

 

instead they wrote to me and said they HAD to speak to me and that it could not be dealt with by letter I had to call them again.

They are wanting to discus arrears

I have given them income/expenditre and monthy arranegement offer etc

posted off to them 1st class last week!

I have not been ignoring them by any means.

 

Today i have another letter from them saying

'according to our record we have made numerous attempts to contact you by telephone and letter - with messages being left for your requesting that you contact us. However at the time of writing you have not contacted us et ect...'

 

THEN -

'As such i would advise that we will instruct our agents to make contact with you and arrange a visit to you which may cost up to £90'

Call us on 0800 0214 441 withint the next 72 hours to discuss your circumstances.

Having this conversation will allow us to cancel the proposed home visit and not charge the visit fee.'

 

They are stating that they have tied to call me by phone and left messgaes, they haven't..

even if they had they shouldnt have done

- and also saying they have written alot and ive not replied

- I have replied withint 1-2 days to every letter they have sent me.

 

I wondered if anyone might be able to just check the agreement I have with them

- here is the link

- and also should i send a harrasment letter

or am i in risk of making them get meaner with me with regards to the arrears

- maybe if i send a harrasment letter they wont accept an arrangement amount

and go for my house (the loan is secured)

 

THANK YOU FOR ANY HELP!

 

agreement.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Ok, lots of help will be forthcoming I'm sure, in the meantime...don't panic.

 

You are quite right not to call them and not to speak to them if they call you. Is that the correct interest figure...94%????? I feel they would be pretty nervous about taking the legal action route with that sort of loansharkesque interest.

 

As far as 'getting meaner' with the arrears is concerned, I think you should pay them what you can afford and not a penny more, they won't like it but...tough. This is a very low priority debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you chattanooga - the scan seems to have not shown up the dot between the 9 and the 4! it is 9.4%.

This loan is secured on my little teeny weeny house - as it secured i thought that meant it was a priority debt?

 

Also I sent them an official harrasment letter and they came back to me and said - long letter with lots of legal quotes and at the end "I would advise that we have followed all procedures correctly and not breached any acts. I am therefore unable to uphold your complaint" - i thought that if i had written and requested them to contact me in writing only and then they continue to call then thats not following the rules is it?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, my mistake...

 

Harrassment depends on how it's perceived by the victim, not the perpetrator.

 

As for the secured loan, I would say you're right does make it more of a priority. Can't really help I'm afraid but hold tight...lots of help will be on it's way, guaranteed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afraid the agreement looks sound, however I cant see any reference to allowing fees to be added for home visits etc.

 

My best advice is to try and come to some arrangement, usually if you show willing then they maybe accomodating, I mean what have you to lose

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks PGH - appreciate your advice,

I already sent them the letters as you suggested and did by recorded delivery but they continued to call.

 

They have said in the letter they wont call again

 

I guess i leave it at that

- what annoyed me was that they said in the recent letter they had not broke any rules by calling again after i had sent the 'write only don't call letter'.

 

thanks so much for checking over the agreement

 

just wanted to make sure there wasnt any hidden ppi or anything in there

 

- I will go ahead and make an arrangement with them!

 

Cheers.v. much for your help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

I DO NOT HAVE WORDS TO SAY ABOUT NEMO . MISLEADING . DAYLIGHT ROBBERS .CONNED BANK IN LAW

 

JUST THROW THEY PAPER WORK IN THE BIN

 

THEY ARE RIPPED OFF (after discount period of fixed term) 13%

 

THEY ARE JUST AWFUL

 

I WOUND N'T RECOMMEND ANYONE TO GO TO NEMO

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Ive got a secured loan with Nemo, Ive read quite a few stories of nemo making unlawful charges and so just wanted to check they havent done the same with me. Im looking at an old statement going back to 2005 when the loan started and it shows payments and interest as below;

 

17th May 2005 Advance £20,000.00 Balance £20,000.00

16th June 2005 Diret Debit -£293.63 Balance £19706.37

16th June 2005 Interest £153.82 Balance £19860.19

16th July 2005 Direct Debit -£293.63 Balance £19566.56

16th July 2005 Interest £147.82 Balance £19714.38

16th August 2005 Direct Debit -£293.63 Balance £19566.56

16th August 2005 Interest £151.63 Balance £19572.38

 

These payments continue in this pattern for around 6 years, is the interest for the loan not included in the monthly repayment? There are also lots of smaller charges for 'simple interest'.

 

On the CCA it says that the repayments will be £293.63 for 96 months at an APR of 9.4 and with a monthly interest rate of 0.755.

 

I dont understand how they can include interest in the monthly payment and then charge it as a seperate item as well - is this right?

 

Very gratefyl for any help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks fine to me.

 

Your monthly repayment is part capital and part interest.

 

The statement simply shows how much interest is being charged each month, what the repayments you have made and the balance reducing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Had a letter from nemo saying they failed to send notice of sums of arrears letters and therefore reimbursing interest for a set period.

 

 

They have not played fairly and so I'm keen to find out if they are reimbursing correct amount like they say,

can anyone help me out with checking?

Thank you CAG:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You shouldn't cancel your DD - that will be the quickest way to receive a default !!

 

They should provide you with a breakdown of the figures when they make the refund.

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

the provision-s86(B)

 

Notice of sums in arrears under fixed-sum credit agreements etc.(1)This section applies where at any time the following conditions are satisfied—

(a)that the debtor or hirer under an applicable agreement is required to have made at least two payments under the agreement before that time;

(b)that the total sum paid under the agreement by him is less than the total sum which he is required to have paid before that time;

©that the amount of the shortfall is no less than the sum of the last two payments which he is required to have made before that time;

(d)that the creditor or owner is not already under a duty to give him notices under this section in relation to the agreement; and

(e)if a judgment has been given in relation to the agreement before that time, that there is no sum still to be paid under the judgment by the debtor or hirer.

(2)The creditor or owner—

(a)shall, within the period of 14 days beginning with the day on which the conditions mentioned in subsection (1) are satisfied, give the debtor or hirer a notice under this section; and

(b)after the giving of that notice, shall give him further notices under this section at intervals of not more than six months.

(3)The duty of the creditor or owner to give the debtor or hirer notices under this section shall cease when either of the conditions mentioned in subsection (4) is satisfied; but if either of those conditions is satisfied before the notice required by subsection (2)(a) is given, the duty shall not cease until that notice is given.

(4)The conditions referred to in subsection (3) are—

(a)that the debtor or hirer ceases to be in arrears;

(b)that a judgment is given in relation to the agreement under which a sum is required to be paid by the debtor or hirer.

(5)For the purposes of subsection (4)(a) the debtor or hirer ceases to be in arrears when—

(a)no [F2payments] , which he has ever failed to [F3make] under the agreement when required, [F4are] still owing;

(b)no default sum, which has ever become payable under the agreement in connection with his failure to pay any sum under the agreement when required, is still owing;

©no sum of interest, which has ever become payable under the agreement in connection with such a default sum, is still owing; and

(d)no other sum of interest, which has ever become payable under the agreement in connection with his failure to pay any sum under the agreement when required, is still owing.

(6)A notice under this section shall include a copy of the current arrears information sheet under section 86A.

(7)The debtor or hirer shall have no liability to pay any sum in connection with the preparation or the giving to him of a notice under this section.

(8)Regulations may make provision about the form and content of notices under this section.

(9)In the case of an applicable agreement under which the debtor or hirer must make all payments he is required to make at intervals of one week or less, this section shall have effect as if in subsection (1)(a) and © for ‘two’ there were substituted ‘four’.

(10)If an agreement mentioned in subsection (9) was made before the beginning of the relevant period, only amounts resulting from failures by the debtor or hirer to make payments he is required to have made during that period shall be taken into account in determining any shortfall for the purposes of subsection (1)©.

(11)In subsection (10) ‘relevant period’ means the period of 20 weeks ending with the day on which the debtor or hirer is required to have made the most recent payment under the agreement.

(12)In this section ‘applicable agreement’ means an agreement which—

(a)is a regulated agreement for fixed-sum credit or a regulated consumer hire agreement; and

(b)is neither a non-commercial agreement nor a small agreement.

[F5(13)In this section—

(a)“payments” in relation to an applicable agreement which is a regulated agreement for fixed-sum credit means payments to be made at predetermined intervals provided for under the terms of the agreement; and

(b)“payments” in relation to an applicable agreement which is a regulated consumer hire agreement means any payments to be made by the hirer in relation to any period in consideration of the bailment or hiring to him of goods under the agreement.]]

 

The provisions for non compliance-

 

86DFailure to give notice of sums in arrears(1)This section applies where the creditor or owner under an agreement is under a duty to give the debtor or hirer notices under section 86B but fails to give him such a notice—

(a)within the period mentioned in subsection (2)(a) of that section; or

(b)within the period of six months beginning with the day after the day on which such a notice was last given to him.

(2)This section also applies where the creditor under an agreement is under a duty to give the debtor a notice under section 86C but fails to do so before the end of the period mentioned in subsection (2) of that section.

(3)The creditor or owner shall not be entitled to enforce the agreement during the period of non-compliance.

(4)The debtor or hirer shall have no liability to pay—

(a)any sum of interest to the extent calculated by reference to the period of non-compliance or to any part of it; or

(b)any default sum which (apart from this paragraph)—

(i)would have become payable during the period of non-compliance; or

(ii)would have become payable after the end of that period in connection with a breach of the agreement which occurs during that period (whether or not the breach continues after the end of that period).

(5)In this section ‘the period of non-compliance’ means, in relation to a failure to give a notice under section 86B or 86C to the debtor or hirer, the period which—

(a)begins immediately after the end of the period mentioned in (as the case may be) subsection (1)(a) or (b) or (2); and

(b)ends at the end of the day mentioned in subsection (6).

(6)That day is—

(a)in the case of a failure to give a notice under section 86B as mentioned in subsection (1)(a) of this section, the day on which the notice is given to the debtor or hirer;

(b)in the case of a failure to give a notice under that section as mentioned in subsection (1)(b) of this section, the earlier of the following—

(i)the day on which the notice is given to the debtor or hirer;

(ii)the day on which the condition mentioned in subsection (4)(a) of that section is satisfied;

©in the case of a failure to give a notice under section 86C, the day on which the notice is given to the debtor.]]

 

So to sum up the consequences,

If the credito fails to provide a notice of sums in arrears when required to do so,

 

then during the period of his failure to provide the notice (i.e. from the date that it was required to be given until the end of the day on which it is eventually provided),

 

he is not entitled to enforce the agreement.

 

In addition,

 

 

The debtor is not liable to pay any interest that relates to the period of the creditors failure to supply

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as CitizenB has said, now that they have complied the agreement is once again enforceable,

 

and it would be extremely unwise to stop your payments

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you all you statements...

 

 

tell us about the loan please

 

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Nemo secured loan
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...