Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The date the bailiff came into my house was 12th Oct 2020 at 13:11pm
    • Thanks for replying, i informed the seller in December 20, they initially sent me the email below.   ""With reference to your valued order and our recent inspection of your images. We have now investigated your concerns and can confirm that there are no manufacturing defects present and your carpet is reacting normally. The change of appearance of your carpet is due to the way in which the pile has settled unevenly with use and can show in some areas more than others. This is caused by the heavy traffic concentrated onto a small area coupled with the twisting of feet as you turn. All carpets have places where it is walked on more than others. This is a normal characteristic of any carpet and pile reversal and pile compression is not considered a manufacturing defect and is a natural occurrence in any carpet with some showing the effect more than others In way of a more detailed explanation it is the sides of the tufts of your carpet that appear a lighter, more silvery shade than when the tufts are viewed end-on. As the pile settles, lighter and darker patches develop depending on the angle of the pile. It is quite common for pile to settle in different directions to the normal pile lay as foot traffic bends the pile different ways and this will dull the appearance and will distort very slightly the appearance as you must appreciate. The angle of the pile has no effect on the durability of the carpet and we are confident it will continue to give you many years of satisfactory service. This effect can be rejuvenated to a degree by regular use of a vacuum cleaner with a rotating brush mechanism on the head In conclusion, we would confirm there are no manufacturing defects present with your carpet and we hope our explanation will further clarify your understanding of the carpet’s characteristics.""     i objected to their explanation and they have agreed to send one of their surveyors when restrictions are lifted, my stance if they say there is no fault then surely the carpet does not posses reasonable durability based on the purchase price.   Thanks
    • Marsdens did not even acknowledge any of the letters. I think they ignore them so people get bored. I am just thankful that it was not me who owed the money. I do not know what I would have done. Do they usually collect debts from at least 8 years ago? I am just getting the date from my son he has the cctv record. I really wanted to know if they were allowed to go into an address that had nothing to do with the debt. Mostly because I am afraid anyone can just walk into my home. My daughter moved into the property 6 years ago . The man Richard whos name was on the paperwork moved out of that property approx 8 ytars ago. He never lived at my address.
    • Ok thanks. Understand, i thought it added to the time, so if held up in court you added that to your time. Assuming its discontinued
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

CPUTR 2008 questions and advice....


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3419 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi all

 

I have a problem with lloyds and Barclays

 

I CCa'd them both last year as they have placed a 2nd default on the accounts in question They need to remove this... you can pull them up using the Data Protection Act; an account cannot be defaulted twice.

 

Barclays sent me a copy of up to date (varied ) t &c and a supposidly copy of original but they are so small i cannot make them out,

would it be worth me asking under CPURT if the original exists cc account opened 1999 Most definitely, yes. It sounds like they've sent you something from fiche records but it needs to be legible, whatever it is.

 

Loyyds account opened 1982,{ CCA sent as it took them 9 months to reply to a letter agreeing changing the reduced payments on the account}. they replyed with " as the account was taken out in 1982 they are under no obligation to send me copy of my CCA. but that one would have been signed and my account is enforcable" yes, they are obliged.... it's a legal request. They enc a copy of the varied t & c but nothing with my name and address from the time the account was opened.

sent a DN so checked on Eqifax they have been marking as AP since the default recorded in 2002 came off

Wrote to complain as they closed the account in 2002 when they sent the original DN

so thought i would use the CPUTR to ask them to comfirm in writing if the original CCA exists or not. reply

 

we will send you a copy when we find it

 

I am still none the wiser

 

witts

 

You have two issues here. The first one is the absence of any enforceable docs. pertaining to yourself and the second one is the registering of a 2nd default.

I have a letter somewhere for the DPA issue, which you could send separately from the CPUTR query or alternatively, raise both issues in one single letter as part of a formal complaint (by rec. delivery)

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 354
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi p1

 

I have complained to both companys thread is 'OH lloyds tsb visa card'

 

and 'csl pain in the butt'

 

both are stating that the defaults are legal attachments are on both threads

 

just sent a letter back to lloyds, as they said that although i was sent a letter saying the account was closed in 2002, it was'nt as it was only charged of in 2010 when passed to the recoverys department, so where have i been sending all my letters to for the past 9 years ??

 

and barks have yet to reply to the responce i sent to their 'final response letter in april'

in it they state that they have no record of registering a default before 2010, but that they did issue me with a default in 2002,but they can record it any time

 

any help with the above is most welcome

 

witts

Link to post
Share on other sites

the "default letter" is below. It's not one of mine but I used it with HFC some time ago when they tried to issue a 2nd DN.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?131232-Credit-Reference-Agencies-Multiple-defaults-for-same-debt.&highlight=

 

Hope fully the link will work...

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 yrs is well over the Statute Barred requirement in Limitation Act 1980...but you keep resetting that time liumit with token payments

 

Thank you, Means2amend...

 

Token payments now stopped since said account in dispute.

 

Can I send the letter PriorityOne used in post #44 on this link: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?300494-HFC-CCA-request/page3

 

I'm also confused about who I write to, the dca or the OC.

 

I would rather challenge a dca/OC, that they are entitled to collect and on the right amount, rather than send token payments out of fear.

 

Thank you again for your invaluable assistance.

 

H.xx

Edited by Hwyl56

That the birds of worry and care fly above your head, this you cannot change. But that they build nests in your hair, this you can prevent. --- Chinese proverb

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont stop making token payments if that is the best option for you...However you should put the account into dispute only once you are satisfied that it is a genuine disputed account...that means testing the legalities using the Regs mentioned above in addition with paras 108 and 234 of Carey v Hsbc per HHJ Waksman...where he explicitly states that copies of originally signed executed agreements must come DIRECTLY from the ORIGINAL FORMAT (PAPER)..not microfiche or any other form of storage...but this in the context of unilateral powers of variations and you can bet your boots that statistically up until 6/4/2007 there was hardly any that were not unilaterally varied....and I bet that most were also varied without the requisite notice (30) days in most cases and in writing)..I say this before 6/4/2007 because agreements before this time have the protection of s127(3) CCA 1974.The Court has no power or discretion to take into account prejudice done to either parties whereas Consumer Credit Act 2006 can.....sorry for hammering on about paras 108 and 234 but they cannot be overstated!!!

 

m2ae

Edited by means2anend
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought your powers to request copies were still under the CCA. I cannot see how CPUTR 2008 lets you request copes of agreements.

 

CPUTR 2008 only come sinto play if they are misleading you. Therefore it will rely more on the statements they make as opposed to the paperwork they provide (unless the paperwork is false).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

CPUTR 2008 only come sinto play if they are misleading you. Therefore it will rely more on the statements they make as opposed to the paperwork they provide (unless the paperwork is false).

 

That is correct... :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you, Means2amend...

 

Token payments now stopped since said account in dispute.

 

Can I send the letter PriorityOne used in post #44 on this link: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?300494-HFC-CCA-request/page3

 

I'm also confused about who I write to, the dca or the OC.

 

I would rather challenge a dca/OC, that they are entitled to collect and on the right amount, rather than send token payments out of fear.

 

Thank you again for your invaluable assistance.

 

H.xx

 

My own expereince has been to write to the DCA's first...if it is they who have been the latest to contact you.My own expereience and others on cag will tell you that they will in all probability write to you stating that they will put account on hold in order to confirm the matter with their client...your original creditor if the alleged debt has not been purchased by themselves........You will also in all probability due to the lenght of time get a response of something to the effect of...'Our client cannot currently locate your agreement and therefore we shall suspend all collection activities until it has been...or as in my case 'our client can no longer locate a copy of your agreement and we now consider the matter closed..we have closed your account'. (I am assuming these requests to be made under CCA 1974....s78/77

 

In order to go farther and elicit a statement that the Original Creditor has possession of the Originally signed executed agreement in PAPER format would be suitable under CPUTR 2008.....This is where the Regulations 'kick in' and their replies/ommissions/silence...will give you the insight as to your own legal position..

 

IF you only received what appears to be an application form THEN the post that you are referring to is tailored for those circumstances and it should be sufficient for you to use without it seeming like you have taken it 'off the shelf'.

 

Also note the distinction between an account and an agreement...at common Law the agreement still exists...however the Common Law cannot overide an express explicit Act of Parliamen or Regultions made under thereof wherein it states that the agreement is LEGALLY unenforceable...they can still chase you for payments as per Mgcuffick V RBS but will not due to take you to Court..cos Court has no power to enforce under s127(3).

 

Heck!!!...if the worst comes to the worst...I'll take a default anytime than a CCJ

 

m2ae

Edited by means2anend
change 'cannot' to 'will not'
Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have thought your powers to request copies were still under the CCA. I cannot see how CPUTR 2008 lets you request copes of agreements.

 

CPUTR 2008 only come sinto play if they are misleading you. Therefore it will rely more on the statements they make as opposed to the paperwork they provide (unless the paperwork is false).

 

 

CPUTR 2008 statement in writing will also have a softening impact on the Kneale requirements in connection with 'fishing expeditions in accordance with the burden of overcoming CPR 31:16(2) as you will NOW have that evidence to 'trigger' furhter disclosure from the Defendant...and in this situation you can be Claimant

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

M2ae, really appreciate clarifications, thanks again.

That the birds of worry and care fly above your head, this you cannot change. But that they build nests in your hair, this you can prevent. --- Chinese proverb

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hello

 

Can anyone tell me where the link is for the Unfair Trading Regulation Act and the other related act ?

 

Thank you

 

I tried to look for template letters and could not find it

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Thank you again for taking the time to answer my question on this thread. I sent the revised CPUTR letter and have had one back today from the dca saying fulfilling my request is impossible and they are passing account back to OC. Result!

That the birds of worry and care fly above your head, this you cannot change. But that they build nests in your hair, this you can prevent. --- Chinese proverb

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you again for taking the time to answer my question on this thread. I sent the revised CPUTR letter and have had one back today from the dca saying fulfilling my request is impossible and they are passing account back to OC. Result!

 

Result.....!! :whoo:...... Oh yeah!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you again for taking the time to answer my question on this thread. I sent the revised CPUTR letter and have had one back today from the dca saying fulfilling my request is impossible and they are passing account back to OC. Result!

 

Well done Hwyl! Sorry to be a pain but where/what is the revised CPUTR letter? I've probably missed something again...:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well done Hwyl! Sorry to be a pain but where/what is the revised CPUTR letter? I've probably missed something again...:-)

 

You're no way a pain, Skem, I know what it's like when you've been reading and re-reading links on this site, your brain goes a bit dead... the letter I used is on post #44 of this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?300494-HFC-CCA-request/page3

 

The only change I made was to the 2nd paragraph, as what the dca sent us with the app form was slightly different.

 

Priority1 and M2ae, you guys are spot on - knowledge is all when fighting for your rights and a bit of peace of mind.... not to go off-topic, but do you ever feel a bit like Van Helsing?:wink:

  • Confused 1

That the birds of worry and care fly above your head, this you cannot change. But that they build nests in your hair, this you can prevent. --- Chinese proverb

Link to post
Share on other sites

Priority1 and M2ae, you guys are spot on - knowledge is all when fighting for your rights and a bit of peace of mind.... not to go off-topic, but do you ever feel a bit like Van Helsing?:wink:

 

:eyebrows:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the two most useful tools of our trade are the 'prove it' letter and CPUTR.

 

After the first DCA letter asking for payment my reply is always 'prove it'. Often that prompts them to return the account to the OC. If they waffle a bit I just ask them if pursuant to CPUTR they hold a valid CCA bearing my sig.

 

Both approaches have no real value of law, i.e. if push turns to shove into court it will have no sway with a judge, but it makes the DCA think "this one may not be worth the effort"!

 

I think I have been pen pals with a dozen or more DCAs now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your throwing the baby out with the bath water...it is BECAUSE the push does not turn into a shove and that there IS no court appearance that these methods are working and do have value.....the idea is to AVOID court proceedings.....that is where the success lies and that ought to be the objective.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Your throwing the baby out with the bath water...it is BECAUSE the push does not turn into a shove and that there IS no court appearance that these methods are working and do have value.....the idea is to AVOID court proceedings.....that is where the success lies and that ought to be the objective.

 

Sorry, I thought that's what I said ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry Basa!!!:oops:

 

S'Ok

 

I tend to waffle and lose the crux of what I'm trying to say. Often when I read my posts back, I think "what was I trying to say"!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...