Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • be very wary upon what you see being recently posted on here 😎 regarding KIH.... all is not what it seems...  
    • 1st - all my posts on CAG are made not only in reply to the specific issue the topic starter makes but also in a general matter to advise any future readers upon the related subject - here it is kings interhigh online school. KIH lets take this topic apart shall we so readers know the real situation and the real truth...and underline the correct way to deal with KIH. https://tinyurl.com/ycxb4fk7 Kings Interhigh Online School issues - Training and Apprenticeships - Consumer Action Group - but did not ever reply to the last post.  but the user then went around every existing topic here on CAG about KIH pointing to the above topic and the 'want' to make some form of group  promoting some  'class action' against KIH . then on the 2nd march this very topic this msg is in was created. all remarkably similar eh? all appear to be or state..they are in spain... ....as well as the earlier post flaunting their linkedin ID, (same profile picture) that might have slipped through via email before our admin killed it.., trying to give some kind of legitimacy to their 'credentials' of being 'an honest poster'....oh and some kind of 'zen' website using a .co.uk  address (when in spain- bit like the Chinese ebay sallers) they run ... and now we get the father of the bride ...no sorry...father of a child at the uk-based international school in question posting ...pretending to be not the 'other alf... do you really think people are that stupid..... ................... nope you never owed that in the 1st place... wake up you got had and grabbed the phone - oh no they are taking me to court under UK jurisdiction...and fell for every trick in the book that they would never ever put in writing that could be placed in front of a court operating under their stated uk jurisdiction wherever you live. T&C's are always challengeable under UK law this very site would not exist if it were not for the +£Bn's bank charges reclaiming from 2006> and latterly the +£Bn's of PPI reclaiming both directly stated in the banks' T&C's were they claimed they were legally enforceable ...not!! they lost big time... why? a waste of more money if you've not got a court claim....... why not use them for a good outcome...go reclaim that £1000 refundable deposit you got scammed out of . people please research very carefully ...you never know who any of these people are that are posting about kings interhigh and their 'stories' they could even be one of their online tutors or a shill . don't get taken in. dx      
    • @KingsParent thank you for sharing your experience.  I also tried contacting the CEO but didn’t get very far. Do you mind sharing his contact details?  kind regards   
    • Thank you Rocky for the clarifications though they did cause a problem at first since an original windsccreen ticket was  of a different breach some time before. The current windscreen ticket only states that you were parked there for 6 minutes which is just one minute over the minimum time allowed as the Consideration period. There is no further proof that you parked there for any longer than that is there? More photographs for example? Moving on to the Notice to Keeper-it does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. First there is no parking period mentioned on it. there is the time 20.25 stated which coincides with the W/S ticket but a parking period must have a starting and finishing time-just one time is insufficient to qualify as a parking  period as required in Section 9 [2] [a] . Are there any different photos shown on the NTK comapared to the w/s PCN? Not that that would make a difference as far as PoFA goes since the times required by PoFA should be on the NTK but at the moment Met only appear to show that you stayed there for 6 minutes. Another failure to comply with PoFA is at S9([2][e] where their wording should be "the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; ". You can see on your NTK that they misssed off the words in brackets. Met cannot therefore transfer the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable. Then their is the discrepancy with the post code on the NTK  HA4 0EY which differs from the post code on the contract and the Post Office Postcode Finder which both list it as HA4 0FY. As you were not parked in HA4 0EY the breach did not occur. In the same way as if you were caught speeding in the Mall in London, yet you were charged with speeding in Pall mall London [a street nearby] you would be found not guilty since though you were speeding you were not speeding in Pall Mall. I bow to Eric's brother on his reasoning on post 12 re the electric bay abuse  That wording is not listed on their signs nor is there any mention on the contract of any electric charging points at all let alone who can park there or use them. He is quite right too that the entrance sign is merely an invitaion to treat it cannot form a contrct with motorists. Also the contract looks extremely  short no doubt there will be more when we see the full Witness statement. As it stands there is no confirmation from Standard Life [or Lift !] on the contract that Savills are able to act on their behalf. Also most contracts are signed at the end of the contract to prevent either side adding extra points. So their percentage  chance of winning their case would be somewhere between 0.01 and 0.02.    
    • Owners of older vehicles tell the BBC of their anger that their cars' apps will stop working.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
      • 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

Joe and the RBS


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 419 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

I am making financial arrangements with the RBS and they want to discuss my Incomings and Outgoings over the 'phone.

 

I have previously done this but I feel a bit uncomfortable not having a record of my conversation;

I do not have the means to record my end.

 

I know I am within my rights to resort to postal communication only but is there a specific rule/law that I can refer to?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No law that I know of but there is the lending code

http://www.lendingstandardsboard.org.uk/docs/lendingcode.pdf

 

Section 9 para 188

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

The RBS are after some arrears that I built up when income was slashed and I'm trying to come to an arrangement with them. Just a couple of quick questions to assist me.

 

The RBS want to negotiate over the 'phone but I say I want everything done by letter, can they insist on 'phone negotiation?

 

Secondly, as is usual, they want details of all my incomings and outgoings. I'm sure I read somewhere on the site that I did not have to give the RBS these details and it would only be compulsory to give them if instructed by a court to do so, am I right in my thinking?

 

Joe

Link to post
Share on other sites

you are correct

 

WRITING ONLY

and they have no legal right to see any of your pers fin dets

 

tell us about the debt.

 

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

Thanks dx.

 

Been a long term customer of RBS and of course, when everything is going swimmingly, they want to be your best friend.

 

When things go wrong, it's "we don't like you and we want our money".

Income was fine until the wife suffered an accident at work culminating a visit to the Employment Tribunal which we won.

Did set up a thread on here regarding this.

 

In short,

had a couple of accounts with overdrafts and as income was reduced from £1359 per month to £630

we ended up exceeding the OD limits and charges were incurred.

 

I've managed to get most of them withdrawn but there's still bits and bobs.

In addition, we have a loan which again, we could not repay in full each month.

 

We are trying to come to an agreement but we've been messed around a bit. J

 

ust want to get rid of the debt but wanted to know where I stood for definite on communications and disclosure.

 

Income has picked up a bit now and if we didn't have credit card bills to pay (not in arrears, they were used to keep us going after our savings ran out), we could probably pay the full monthly loan payment.

 

I've got no qualms about repaying just want to do it under my rules; if that's the right term.

 

Joe

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Moorcroft have recently taken over my outstanding debt from another DCA.

 

However, while the original notifications were sent to my house, just recently, they have been sent to a neighbours house (with his/her number of the street) and have been opened, presumably read

 

. I am of course, going to throw the book at Moorcroft but I was wondering if anyone has been down this road before (with any organisation) and has a copy letter/link I could use.

 

Many thanks.

 

Joe

Link to post
Share on other sites

This happens lots of times and you should complain. But don't imagine for a moment that anybody cares. You should complain to the Information Commissioner to get it on the record, but they will do nothing. Believe me that no one is bothered.

If you can show that you have suffered some loss or distress then you should attack Moorcroft and try to get compensation - but it won't be very much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I have a couple of credit cards with the RBS that I have fallen behind with.

 

They have now been passed to the DCA.

 

One has been passed to Moorcroft and an agreement has been set up for £5 per month; no questions asked.

 

The other account has been passed to Triton and they are being heavy handed regarding a personal financial statement.

 

The relevant paragraph is shown below.

A personal financial statement is exactly that, any suggestions for my next move please?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/asset.php?fid=38224&uid=84811&d=1374821933

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are in charge of your finances an must decided what you can reasonably afford to pay without causing hardship, who else you owe money to is none of the banks business.

Triton being in house recoveries for the bank always pressurise for chapter and verse of personal finances.

 

Are Moorcroft acting on behalf of the bank or have they now bought the account?

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

I think I would refer them to the 'most reasonable ' conduct of their appointed agent in regard to the other account held with the bank, and tell them you expect the same consideration from the bank in regard to this account.

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

Hello there,

 

How many creditors do you have in total? How much is owing altogether?

 

It's perfectly reasonable for a financial statement to be requested - it's standard practice in the credit industry.

 

What is the original debt for, when was it taken out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you sent these muppets a cca request

 

I wouldn't be paying a DCA if the debt is still owned by the original creditor.

 

do these debts show on your CRA file too

see below

 

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 Me moorcroft & Data Protection Act
  • 3 years later...

of course

 

any debt can as long as its

not a gov't debt.

or has been litigated against at some point (some certain cases)
 

 

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

I have an outstanding loan that Moorcroft is trying to collect but according to my records it is statute barred and I am in the process of telling them that

 

. I also have a statute barred overdraft that Moorcroft is trying to collect.

 

I have received a letter from Moorcroft today advising me that my outstanding loan has increased by X amount

 

. It transpires that the RBS, or Moorcroft have added the outstanding overdraft amount to the outstanding loan amount.

 

Ignoring the fact that these are statute

barred, is the the creditor/collector allowed to do that, surely they must be treated as two separate accounts as they were originally notified as separate account numbers!

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 threads merged for full history.

 

Who are moorcrofts stated client

 

If its rbs then they still own the debt and its not been sold on.

 

As i expect is stated already here, moorcroft dont buy debts so can be ignored.

 

Untul/unless the debts are sold on quite honestly id just ignore them.

 

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

  • 2 months later...

True to form I guess, RBS Retail have now engaged Wescot as Moorcroft was dropped.

 

As far as I can make out, they have not purchased the debt, stating that they're a "specialist debt collection agency", their words, not mine.

 

They're obviously looking for a repayment plan but as the debt is statute barred, it isn't happening anytime soon.

 

I'm just wondering whether or not to send the Statute Barred letter to get rid of them or just let it ride for now.

 

Any advice gratefully accepted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad to worse...ignore only engage with RBS

  • Like 1

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...