Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.View the full article
    • The King is the second monarch to appear on Bank of England notes which will be fed gradually into the system.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

toothfairy payday loan unfair treatment and threats


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4371 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

OFT "behind the scenes".If it takes you 7 years to suspend a licence and then you only do something because the BBC are going to embarass you 24 hours later.Then all the stuff about legislation which never gets done because Government dont want to help poor people because you would have removed some of the legal obstacles so no Im not impressed with the OFT.

 

Don’t just blame the OFT. Here on CAG we encourage people to complain. The problem is that once CAG has helped them, most of them don’t bother – their job is done, they just slip away, never to be heard from again. Sod anyone else.

 

The OFT has a lot of faults, but it’s people who don’t bother to complain who are the real problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 169
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Donkey B is right when individuals have been pointed

in the right direction for solving their individual problems

too many do not follw through with actions that may help

others in the future, there are the elements of self help,

being helped and helping others by experience and following

up with complaints.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a response from NDR, referring to the fact the F.S.A had contacted them on my behalf, I am going to reply to see if it is their 'final response', once all the things they say have been digested. The portion I have read says that they carry out their business in an entirely legal way. Just because something is is writing, and you sign it, does not make it legal. They are missing (or rather avoiding) the point. They may carry out certain aspects of their business in an entirely legal way but the manner, wording and claims they make are certainly up for challenging. Send the O.F.T; F.O.S; F.S.A and any other regulatory bodies your complaint. The momentum is there, the publicity is there, we have to keep up the pressure - no level of apathy will achieve this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Done Grin 74, to be honest people defending OFt I have pointed out to these bodies all the laws they have broken and still people turn a blind eye.One person on another thread took them to court and got a Judgement THEN, there should have been a review of their licence but no nothing..

Link to post
Share on other sites

good luck with your action I know toothfairly has gone too far not soliving ur needs and be a rude people. more complaints more action (i like action)

 

sorry no PM to me because i turn it off.

Iaintw is a registered customer services official/profit Protection staff/supermarket worker and who deals with customers

Buying laptops with advice etc

ISP Moderator and chat room helper for chats

Aviationist and train advice

Credit references and bank helper advice

Loss Protection (civil recovery)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just re-reading page 1 of this thread someone posted Oft guidelines about False repesentation..It is taken from the fraud act 2006!.Shame oft Dont act on it.You have inspired me Grin 2012 I will also contact Fsa as a private person and via my radio station.Turning the heat up.Found my statement from OFT they only deal with Consumer groups that have the power to put forward a super injunction they said they will not help an individual.Once i edit personal details i will post their reply on here for you to read.Thought it was time to put my documentary onto I-tunes I will post the link in 4 weeks time.Time to pay a visit to toothfairy with my camera crew unlike them..If I say I am coming..HAPPY NEW YEAR..It will not be for certain organisations.Im tired of this crap.Time to end this noise...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Not posted in a while.Back up to at least 2 calls a day. May wait til they call me after a few beers and really let rip.No..No..must be professional at all times. Have read an article recently where the OFT literally praise these type of lenders for offering the service they do - so f*ck all chance with them. The F.O.S haven't taken any further action. Lots of media exposure recently and nothing has changed (or likely ever will). Not one of them has ever addressed the real issue namely the threatening, untrue and practically illegal way these companies behave should you fall on hard times unexpectedly. Total cliche but they are, and always will be, legalised loan sharks - very happy to lend when you repay at their extortionate interest rates, extremely threatening of you don't or rather can't.:-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know what article you have read where the OFT praise these companies, they are doing an in-depth investigation on them at the moment, so a complaint is well received.

 

Can you post a link to said article, as I have not come across an official OFT praise of this type of lending.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been a number of 'debates' about Payday loans and high interest rate loans and I seem to remember that one conclusion was that they should stay because they were a protection against vulnerable people getting involved with illegal 'loan sharks' (i.e. replacing these with legal loan sharks presumably)

 

The following article is useful - read the last paragraph were they claim ' only 20 complaints were received'. THIS IS WHY EVERYONE NEEDS TO COMPLAINT TO OFT

 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6022a824-20f3-11e1-8a43-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1jJtZwsB2

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was another carefully edited article about how CCCS have almost NO customers with payday loans, which we know is BULL, as the PDL companies refuse to co-operate with CCCS, Payplan etc.

 

The article is still incorrect in the assumption that PDL companies protect people from illegal loan sharks - in fact they probably add fuel to the illegal loan shark fire when customers fail to repay.

 

The borrow today pay whenever society is partially to blame, I have lots of things I would like but I am not borrowing any money just to get them, clothes included!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another useful link to OFT consultation on Debt Collection and INPUT is NEEDED - so respond to this

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/consultations/OFT1399con.pdf

 

One key paragraph is

 

We are also taking this opportunity to consult on the

specific practice of debiting monies from an account in

the absence of having the express authority to do so

(including under circumstances in which the lender may

have the authority, under a continuous payment authority

or otherwise, to recover monies from another

account(s))

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although it does state a 'balanced view' it is the last 4 paragraphs that I was on about.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16520889

"The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) is clear that lending money to people who will clearly struggle to repay it, or where that product is clearly unsuitable for that individual is irresponsible," a spokesman said.

The government believes that official student loans to eligible English students should cover their tuition costs, and contribute towards their living costs while at university.

Despite the negative publicity surrounding payday loan firms, the OFT has said that payday loans and other high-cost credit businesses - such as pawn brokers or home-credit lenders - should not have their interest charges restricted.

It concluded that they provided a useful service for some people who would not otherwise be able to borrow legitimately and who might thus be forced to borrow from illegal loan sharks.

Yet again, missing the point. The student slant is not relevant to everyone but this is clearly not a particularly negative conclusion. Perhaps if someone at the OFT was getting all the harassment and threats.........

Edited by Grin74
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - that is quite an old statement. 2010 I think.

 

More recently there has been increased pressure to look again at these companies that is why all complaints and more complaints are needed!!

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Grin Had a statement from OFt 2011.It is the reason I have made a documentary for radio nothing will change we just have to make people aware not to go near these scumbags.My Chief Constable wants to help but I pointed out to him I contacted him TWICE, they only want to know I can bypass them and air this on my own media platforms now.Only Labour Mp stella creasy is campaigning with no help from her party.No-one cares about poor people,i have a file with all the criminal offences they have committed so I am just going to put the programme on air it will embarass them but they will get over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Gone very quiet again, on all fronts. Question: If I have told MHB, NDR etc verbally, and in writing, that I want the matter to go to court to decide what is appropriate and that is my final response, can they still keep harassing me twice a day by phone and periodically via email? I was wondering if there is any basis in law to challenge them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Grin dont visit here much.My legal action commences week beginning February 20th.I work 50 Hour weeks so dont come on Forum.Harrassment act 1997.Time to contact the police.My local police force want to get involved because I have turned this my trials and tribulations into a Documentary.It will be available via Itunes soon and YouTube.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've owed toothfairyfinance since December. My £300 loan has more than doubled. Recieve texts, phone calls, emails every day. I tried to sort it out with the NDR thy passed it on to, was told I would need to send in proof I had been receiving income support, which I agreed to. Before I could even send the letter in they passed it on to Marshall hoares. NDR threatened me with a CCJ, claiming bailiffs would get a warrant to seize goods of up to 9 times the value etc.

Don't know how they get away with it.

Anyway, I'd rather be taken to court, that way I can pay £5 a month like I've been offering all along, and the bastards can pay the court fees, also the courts tend to go against payday lender as they hav such outrageous interest charges an most of the time will just ask you to pay back what you owe minus the ridiculous interest.

I contacted the OFT thinking they would be able to help but no such luck I'm afraid. I sent them all the emails I had received and explained and got this reply...

 

 

 

Thank you for your complaint about Toothfairy and their associates received on 23 January 2012.

If you require further advice, please contact Consumer Direct (on 08454 04 05 06). Consumer Direct is an advisory service managed by the OFT which offers practical advice on all consumer issues.

*

Unfortunately, because of restrictions imposed upon us by Part 9 of the Enterprise Act 2002, we are unable to give information about any action that may be taken in response to your complaint. The OFT has no authority to become involved in disputes between consumers and traders and so we cannot offer you any direct help with your complaint or advise you directly in this matter.

*

Thank you again for writing to us and bringing this matter to our attention.

*

Yours sincerely

*

David Annis

Enquiries and Reporting Centre

Office of Fair Trading

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have done the right thing by complaining to OFT. They do not deal with individual cases but will investigate these lowlifes if they get enough complaints but are very slow, so keep the complaints going.

 

It is worth a complaint to Consumer Direct and insist that they refer the harassment to Trading Standards who can take action on your behalf.

 

Never speak to Toothfairy or their threat monkeys on the phone - keep everything in writing only. Change your phone number if you can. Send them a formal request for the credit agreement, telling them that you are disputing the amount they are claiming that you owe them. I think that contractually they cannot charge ongoing interest on this and are breaking OFT guidelines if they continue to harass you when you are disputing this. Keep copies of everything and inform them that you have made a reasonable offer of repayment, will pay the original balance plus one months interest only and if they take legal action - you understand that the court will support your efforts to repay. Some template letters below but adapt to your own circumstances.

 

 

CCA Request

 

CCA letter to send with a £1 postal order by recorded delivery, do not sign. They have 12 plus 2 working days to reply. If nothing valid is received you can send a letter to put the account in dispute and this should stop them contacting you.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?414-CCA-request-letter

 

Harassment Letter

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?493-Harassment-by-telephone-response-letter

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Katiekay.NDR/Marshall Hoares it is all CMS technologies.Toothfairy.Some days I have spoke to the same person pretending to be Ndr one call and marshall Hoares the next.These days they hang up on me!!.I should post my trading standards letter.But Keep me posted.Half-term next week.From Feb 20th lets hope I can make enough noise,because NO-ONE wants to help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading Standards sent me a statement saying they qwere not going to help.The reason I am doing it myself.

 

I would still keep the complaints going TS and OFT can help if they are minded too. Appreciate everything that you are trying to do Hanley and suggest that everyone affected by these stand up to them

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I stated in december on this thread the OFT guidelines are based on the Fraud act 2006 which Toothfairy constantly break.As I pointed out to their solicitor.The ironic thing is Toothfairy HANG UP THE PHONE ON ME..They dont phone anymore thats why from now on I will be going straight for the jugular.As I said in December the university should refund my University fees, this company has committed fraud through their activities and Im tired of OFt and trading standards because they are a waste of skin.Talking to the courts Next week I want action talk is done..

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...