Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello I've got a parking ticket, see here... https://ibb.co/DfHqg9F https://ibb.co/QvqH52m https://ibb.co/pbPPdDg https://ibb.co/X2F1X25 I've been parking at a particular corner in a small Tesco car park for years. Recently they put two electric charging plugs, one where that spot is and one at the bay next door, so I stopped using them out of courtesy in case they need to be used (I use that Tesco every day and drive past every day but have yet to see anyone use them). Recently I went back to Tesco when it was reasonably dark. All the bays were full, including the three blue badge bays. I have one but none of the cars parked in the bays did, I noticed as I walked past them (nobody ever gets pulled for that because Tesco have never policed this small car park before). Since there was two free electric bay spaces, and since I wasn't going to be long (just one product), I parked into my former 'regular' spot. There was a notice on the wall but if I'm honest I didn't read it because (a) I'm thick, and (b) I honestly thought it was just telling people how to use the device (like I said, I'm thick) rather than this being a parking fine. I went back during daylight and the sign is very obvious (as you can see from the picture), although not so obvious at night, although probably still obvious enough for you to tell me "tough luck, pal". Now they want £100 or £60 if I pay quickly. Am I doomed?
    • Hi All   After a bit of advice to see where I stand. Bought a car in Sept 2022 on pcp. Been told it had a big inspection and was good to go. Had many issues with it throughout the year including trims coming off the car and sunroof not closing.   While getting the sunroof repaired at month 12, in Sept 2023, the bodyshop guy said your cars been in a bad accident. Garage said it hasn't but offered to take the car back at half of what I paid for it as long as I buy a replacement from them before inspecting it (probably damage control) (car was £78k, said they'd offer £40k "trade in value" as if doing me a favour).   Ended up getting a forensic inspection done for £2400 in Dec 2023, confirmed car was in a bad smash (write off level but unrecorded on hpi) and potentially unsafe to drive - front end is slightly bent towards 1 side, what looks like a hairline crack on the chasis, overspray, bonner with patches of filler all over it, damaged rubbers etc   Raised complaint to finance company and few weeks ago to FOS... just wondering what people's experiences have been like going through the FOS, main thing that concerns me is that it was 12-13 months after I bought the car that I realised what caused these issues and raised the issue to the garage/ finance co but the damage/ misaligned panels are actually visible in the advert photos which I saved thankfully.    Dealership has had my car for 4 weeks to let a few bodyshops look at it (without giving me a courtesy car!!!) Not giving me any updates either because I went to the FOS about it and didnt want to speak to them over the phone anymore as opposed to emails. Note: hanging trim was reported within 3 months but due to part delays it didn't come until like July 2023, within 2 months the piece came off again, claimed under repairers warranty for another replacement 6 weeks ago and within 2 weeks this time the trim is coming off AGAIN (assuming it won't stay on due to the car being actually bent out of shape slightly)   Any idea if I have a good case or if there's anything else I can do?   Thanks
    • After the dealer failed to refund the money I checked the sort code and account number to reveal which bank received the money. It turned out to be HSBC BUSINESS DIRECT ONLINE. I called them and they confirmed the account name wasn’t Langley Cars though obviously didn’t tell me the correct account name. My bank contacted HSBC after I reported this to be fraud and they did in fact do a charge back but reversed the decision when the dealer sent a copy of the receipt he gave me for the deposit where it said it was non-refundable. I said that doesn’t mean anything when the car should never have been put on the forecourt when it was a death trap, and not fit for purpose.   The MOT revealed only a few of the faults which he agreed to correct in a week as I needed the car to travel out of London for work. He didn’t meet that deadline either because there were other more serious problems as identified by my independent car check. The same mechanic informed the dealer of these faults. The car wasn’t fixed by the agreed date due to the extensive repairs needed. So he was in breach of our contract on many levels.    I requested the bank find out the correct name of the account and they said the only information they had was like you said was the account number and sort code. I challenged the bank stating that whenever I create a new payee if the name doesn’t match the registered account name, it declines the creation of the proposed payee. So what happened in this instance?    I checked company’s house using the address from where the dealership is located and there was neither the two names, one was aa advertised in AUTOTRADER and the other on the courtyards entrance. I thought as I had made payment to the dealers ‘Trading as’ name that it would more than likely be enforceable than any other. Indeed the Bailiff was the one to call me and say that a variation of the warrant of control needed to be done before he could go and enforce the order. I cross-checked the address on Companies House website and got 3 different business names. Only one appears to be car related.  I am unsure as to what I can do within the variation of the warrant which the bailiff felt was appropriate. I will speak to him again Monday. 
    • Their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. iit was not posted until 13 days after the event for one thing meaning it would be deemed to arrive on the 15th day instead of the 14th day. Now though we cannot expect that your PCN also missed the deadline there were still two other things wrong with the wording of the PCN that if your PCN has the same wording as your friends means that your PCN would not be compliant either. Their PCN does not specify the period of parking as required n the Act. It does show the ANPR arrival and departure dates but as those times include driving from the entrance to finding a parking place then later driving from the parking place to the exit cannot be described as a parking period. I suspect that the " Important Note" on your form will also not comply though I cannot be sure until we see your actual PCN.The reason I can't confirm that is because they sent out the PCN too late they have said that they are pursuing your friend on the assumption that they were the driver as well as the keeper-something that Courts do not accept. But it does look as if your PCN is not compliant which means that the keeper cannot be held liable to pay the charge. Only the driver can be made to pay it. If you have not appealed and revealed who was driving, there is no way that  Excel know who was driving.  So just to be sure please send them an SAR . On another topic do you have any proof that you did not stay there for so long just to really spoil Excel's day.
    • As your first PCN was a Notice to Driver which would have been followed by a Notice to keeper over a month later [even though it may only state Parking Charge notice] it is even more necessary to send PE an SAR. If either document fails to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act  2012 Schedule 4 then both you and your father are in the clear. So you do not need to worry about is any paperwork from unregulated debt collectors and fifth rate solicitors. The only thing to look out for is a Letter of Claim and all you have to do is respond with a snotty letter back to them .  
  • 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

Career Development loans arggh!


Wishihadntbothered
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5592 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'm new to here so hi.

 

I am having a nightmare with this bank. I took out a career development loan 4 years ago and believe i was mis sold this product as weel as the payment protection insurance. It was never explained to me excatly how the loan works and how much it would actually cost me.

 

I borrowed £9500, i got a settlemnt figure in June of £17500!!! When i contacted them they said that interest had been added on each day (£5 p/day) for the 4 year repayment hol - and then charged me £3000 on top for payment protection.

 

I am now unemployed and unable to pay the monthly paymnets - cannot claim on the insurance as not been in perm employment for 6 months prior to the claim - again not explained at the outset.

 

I have had numerous letters from Jamie O'neill at the customer care centre and a tearful converstaion with an Andrew someone who told me he "expected" me to know exactly how much debt i would be in when i took out the loan. Shocking!

 

It is in process with the ombudsman - i hope they take them down!

 

Since wednesday of this week i have had 11 phone calls - ranging from 8 in the am til 9 at night demanding payment - harrassment or what? I have explained EVERY single time that i am trying to deal with the situation and have given details of what has happened.

 

Anyone else ever had one of these loans and been gobsmacked at the cost (hidden)

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 4 months later...
I entered a contract with Britannia-IT in November 2004 to do a Complete Learning Programme, in the following courses.

EDCL

CompTIA A+,

CompTIA Network+,

MCSE

and Cisco CCNA

1. I had to take a careers development loan of £8000. The sum of £7180 was paid into Britannia IT training Academy on the 1st December 2004 and £820 was paid into my own bank account

2. I attended the ECDL CD-Rom course in December 6 2004. I was not happy from that start as I did not need to attend this course firstly because it was very basic. Also, I could have done this on my own PC or could have been completed the course in one day, but was extended to five days (completely wasting my time). I had received more advanced IT training when I was at secondary school.

3. On Friday 10 December 2004, I handed in booking forms for the entire courses as part of the Complete Learning Programme for January-April 2005. However, almost all the bookings I made placed me on standby. For me it was not acceptable to pay thousands of pounds only for the academy not to be able to fully book me on the courses itself. I initially asked for a refund of all course fees in January 2005 through an e-mail I sent to Customer service.

4.They refused to give me a refund of over 7000 pounds because I had attended a CD-ROM based course which has an average retail cost of 10, I even asked to be placed on a shorter and less expensive course and to refund any excess course fees. Again the reason that they gave was because I attend the ECDL CD-Rom course, I would not be able to get any refund or change course.

5.In June 2006 (despite Britannia –IT being fully aware that I had only attended the one course so far,) they still wrote to me demanding I pay them an extra £1,795 within 7 days or would take legal action against me.

6.I then replied in writing explaining my surprise for the request for £1,795 because the career (sales) consultant Matt Craig only stated that the course fees was £7180. I still have the document hand written by Matt Craig stating that £7,180 went to ‘us’ – (Britannia IT), he did a 2 year predictive time line. Absolutely, no indication was given that after a year and half I would be requested to pay an extra £1,795. Britannia IT had made no reply to the letter I sent. So I sent them a cheque for £1,795, to avoid a court judgment affecting my credit rating which they immediately replied to with a thank you letter.

7.I signed the contract with Britannia-IT in 2004 believing that the total cost for the Complete Learning Programme was 7,180. When I had my appointment with Matt Craig, I was given misleading information, through his failures to not fully disclose information regarding the total amount of course fees. If I was given correct information that the cost was £8,975 I would not have entered the contract with this company.

8. In addition I was given false information by the careers consultant Matt Craig to create a good false impression of the company. One of the main reason for joining Britannia Academy was he (Matt Craig) told me that the academy would be opening an additional office in Canary Wharf in 2005. Firstly the canary wharf location has a number of major companies including investment banks, secondly I live five minutes away from canary wharf. The irony is I still remember his blank facial expression when I told him I live very close to Canary Wharf . Now I know it was because he was lying.

9. It is completely unacceptable that a careers consultant who intentionally lied and gave misleading information concerning courses fees, company future expansion, companies clients, where students had their imagery job placements, in order to get me to sign the companies contract, have £8975 transferred into the company’s account and provide very inadequate training. I’m unsure if the sales consultant gains commission? they probably do.

10. I recently wrote to Barclays Bank plc believing I still could make a claim under section 75 of the Consumer credit act 1974. I received the response that I can not make any claim. Barclays Bank also claimed that there is no ‘debtor-creditor-supplier agreement’, between the bank and the training provider. Despite this I still believe that Barclays Bank should be made equal liable, as Britannia IT gave me one option and that was to use Barclays Bank Careers development loan.

11. In addition I believe that it would be greatly unfair to still charge a person £8000, in addition to my own losses of £1,975.00 when I have not received the service paid for initially financed from Barclays Bank. This I believe creates a significant imbalance between my self as a student, the training provider ( whom may have existing debts written-off after a period) and Barclays bank plc who will only gain more from the this situation.

12. In my opinion Britannia IT Training Limited is a company that should have never existed. I place the blame entirely on the directors of the company, but also on the Learning and skills council for not canceling Britannia IT CDL registration sooner. If the Learning and skills had a much stricter regulation for ‘Training providers’ hundreds of students would not be in this horrible situation.

13. Between 2005-2006 I wrote three letter to Britannia IT stating that the way they conduct themselves is actually illegal.

i) I was told that the price was £7,180 and not £ 8,975, therefore given a false price indication.

ii) “Section 20 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 makes it a criminal offence for a person in the course of his business to give consumers a misleading price indication about goods, services, accommodation or facilities. It applies however you give the price indication—for example, in a TV or press advertisement, on a website, by email or text message, in a catalogue or leaflet, on notices, price tickets or shelf-edge marking in stores, or if you give it orally, for example on the telephone”.

iii) False information given almost about everything. Misrepresentation Act 1967

When you have been told something factual about goods/ services that made you decide to buy them or enter into the contract, but which turns out to be untrue, then they have been misrepresented to you. Whether lies are told intentionally or unintentionally, either way the contract could be set aside and money refunded.

iv) I deem section 4.4 of the terms and condition to be ‘unfair’ under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations because as it solely benefits the company and not the student

v) (“Once a course or a programme of pre-set courses (for example, Cisco Master Track 2) has started it cannot be cancelled and you will forfeit you right to a refunded’)

vi) Contrary to the requirement of good faith Term 4.4 creates a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights under the contract, to the detriment of the student,. Taking in to context that is a training academy which is meant to provide training for students they seemed only to be interested in transferring money into their account. To refuse nearly £9000 for attending a CD-rom course costing £10 is not only unfair but a complete RIP-OFF!!

written off

 

I IN SUCH BAD DEBT BECAUSE OF THIS LOAN.

Hi

I'm in the same situation as you I only attended 3wks of the course and didnt like it. Now that they've been bankrupt I'm having to pay Barclays £8000.

 

Is there any way out of this..please help me! I'm in so much debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm new to here so hi.

 

I am having a nightmare with this bank. I took out a career development loan 4 years ago and believe i was mis sold this product as weel as the payment protection insurance. It was never explained to me excatly how the loan works and how much it would actually cost me.

 

I borrowed £9500, i got a settlemnt figure in June of £17500!!! When i contacted them they said that interest had been added on each day (£5 p/day) for the 4 year repayment hol - and then charged me £3000 on top for payment protection.

 

I am now unemployed and unable to pay the monthly paymnets - cannot claim on the insurance as not been in perm employment for 6 months prior to the claim - again not explained at the outset.

 

I have had numerous letters from Jamie O'neill at the customer care centre and a tearful converstaion with an Andrew someone who told me he "expected" me to know exactly how much debt i would be in when i took out the loan. Shocking!

 

It is in process with the ombudsman - i hope they take them down!

 

Since wednesday of this week i have had 11 phone calls - ranging from 8 in the am til 9 at night demanding payment - harrassment or what? I have explained EVERY single time that i am trying to deal with the situation and have given details of what has happened.

 

Anyone else ever had one of these loans and been gobsmacked at the cost (hidden)

 

Thanks

 

That sounds pretty bad, the fact that it is with the Ombudsman should be sufficient for Lloyds not to be hassling you.

 

11 phone calls in just over a week is excessive.

 

Therefore I would suggest sending the following letter, stating again that the matter is with the ombudsman (alter it to fit your situation):

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/37006-harassment-telephone-response-letter.html

 

Also contact trading standards with reference to the calls that you have received.

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi,

enrolled on a course with Joskos in July 2006; took the first two weeks of the course but couldnt pass the exams. I took each exam twice and failed both times :(

Its now nearly 3 years on and they havent got in touch with me once to see how im doing? Is this normal? Do I have a case for this?

 

Thanks for any reply

 

Edit: as well as this, in terms of the bank asking for the money (Co Op Bank) what does formal recovery proceedings mean?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...