Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So I just found a couple abandoned traffic cones locally by some bins.   A bit squished but free!  So have placed them on the land.  Will wait to see if the cones get moved and signs ignored again this week before I consider rocks/ boulders.
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later the your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. So if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place and park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and then unload the children followed by reloading the children getting seat belts on etc before driving to the exit stopping for cars, pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, 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; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
    • Hi  no nothing yet. Hope it stays that way 😬
  • 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

End Legalised Loan Sharks.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2745 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

  • Replies 757
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Very important vote on Monday,help make it happen.Latest news

Thursday night, MPs were going to vote on an amendment to the Finance Bill, which will limit how much short-term lenders can charge. However, they got into a fierce argument about other aspects of the bill which kept them in the House of Commons until 2am. Even tea and toast couldn’t keep them awake and the vote has been postponed until Monday.

Now we’ve got 2 more days to send our MPs a flood of emails telling them to put a stop to legal loan sharking, which the government has already admitted is a problem. Your MP might not turn up to vote, or not vote the right way. We can persuade our MPs that this is something we care about and doing nothing is not an option. Could you get in touch with your MP and tell them to stop opportunistic lenders ruining people’s lives? Get started here.

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

Last few hours. Email now.Links below.You could make a difference to be proud of..Kick off about 4-30pm

 

skkw_debtpicture.jpg Nearly half of all households are now struggling to make ends meet, and 10% of these say its because of the repayments they have to make on high cost credit products like payday loans, doorstep credit or hire purchase agreements. TODAY parliament has the opportunity to vote for action to be taken now to regulate this market- as it is in most other countries- and cap the costs of credit.

 

Yet whilst there is support for this measure across parliament, there could be a delay in action on this issue purely for party political purposes. Without pressure from campaigners, there is a fear that in order to create headlines at Liberal Democrat conference in the autumn Government MPs will vote against taking action now. You can read an article giving the background to this here and the views of grassroots Liberal Democrat activists who are angry that vulnerable consumers could take second place to choreographing coalition dividing lines. Every month more and more people are getting into debt with these firms, making any such delay potentially costly for thousands of families already experiencing financial hardship.

The debate and vote on New Clause 11 to the Finance Bill will be on Monday 4 July (having been delayed from Tuesday 28 June) and will start around 4.30pm. Its therefore not too late to ask your local MP to do the right thing and vote yes to encourage the Government to come clean and say what they intend to do now. The people struggling to repay these loans now deserve nothing less.

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

The yes's 228 vs no's 273- when they publish plans on this later in year make sure you ask govt mp's why they left people hanging so long!.Stella Creasy comment shortly after losing vote.A few other comments.

Debate about to close govt voting no but hinting at deal that has been done. So if you are a borrower wait til lib Dem conf for respite!

 

Thank you for your efforts. As someone who has got into trouble through Payday Loans, I appreciate it. Please dont give up

Also a comment from a CAB worker saying how sad.And many more to folow as the news comes in.

 

And if this article is right maybe theres hope yet . But why delay.http://www.labourlist.org/eaten-by-the-sharks

 

Surely not. http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/parliament/2011/07/nick-clegg---youre-so-vain-you.html

Its not over yet.Tawnyowl

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Bit of news.

http://www.cfa-uk.co.uk/news.asp

 

 

Consumer Finance Association code of practice for payday lenders utter rubbish. more 'non action' . on legal loan sharks.

 

 

 

Hilarious - cfa admits only 8 members of group and they don't actually have an enforcement process worked out for it... Stella Creasy comment

Both consumer focus & cab don't want anything to do with payday lender voluntary code of practice as BOTH THINK think useless .

Payday lenders have failed to clean up their act:

Government must now intervene

http://www.responsible-credit.org.uk/uimages/File/cfrc%20payday%20code%20statement.pdf

 

Cfa claiming if you regulate uk Market there will be overseas lending to uk consumers like online gambling ....more novel excuses!

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely all a credit cap is going to do is shift the high risk customers to actual loan sharks at much higher rates of interest?

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This will play intyo the hands of the banks who can charge whatever they want on overdrafts, because they dont have to quote an APR.

 

By trying to stop one high cost lender people will be pushed back into the arms of another who charges even more (and is responable for many of the problems we all now face).

 

Payday loans should not be used to top up peoples income and anyone with more than one payday loan needs their to take a look at their finances and stop before it all becomes to much. more regulation is desperatley needed in a sector that does whatever it feels like but for the people who use them correctly they are an alternative to even more expensive bank charges (or worse)

Link to post
Share on other sites

skkw_wfw_33.jpg

End Legal Loan Sharking Campaign Wins Government U Turn !

Lobby Your MP to Demand Independent Research

 

skkw_debtpicture.jpg Hello!

This week our campaign to end legal loan sharking won a significant victory- the Government has announced it is to go back to the drawing board and commission new research as part of its Consumer Credit Review. This is great news as it means they are now reversing their earlier opposition and taking seriously the calls for caps on the total cost of credit which could make a real difference in protecting British consumers who use high cost credit products.You can read the ministerial statement on this here.

I'm asking for your help now to make sure that this research is impartial and independent - In the past there have been real problems with the way research has been done in this area, and we have to make sure these problems don’t re-occur.

Please write to your MP asking them to lobby the Minister responsible Ed Davey to ensure that we can all be confident in the outcomes of the research this department commissions. Below is some suggested text to send to your MP and click here for a shortcut to contact your MP.

 

It’s vital that this research is done fairly, you can help make sure this happens.

 

 

skkw_stellasignatureshort_3.jpg

 

 

Stella Creasy

Labour and Co-operative MP for Walthamstow

 

 

 

 

Suggested Text for your MP

 

Dear XXXX

 

I understand that the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills is commissioning research looking into the effects of introducing a range of caps on the total cost of credit within the high-cost credit sector.

 

While I welcome this news as a positive first step towards introducing tighter regulation of high-cost credit, I want to be sure that this research will carried out by an independent body that has no previous connection to this area of policy. This is prompted by well-documented concerns about previous research on introducing interest rate caps in this market. The European Commission recently published an in-depth study which reviewed all such research, and concluded that UK research on this issue was based on “controversial” and “weak” evidence (“Study on Interest Rate Restrictions in the EU”, January 2011, pp269-270).

 

It is important that these weaknesses are not replicated in the forthcoming research on introducing caps on the total cost of credit. Please write to Ed Davey, the minister for consumer credit, asking him to ensure that the new research is impartial and independent from previous studies so that we can all have confidence in its outcomes.

 

Yours sincerely,

XXXX

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely all a credit cap is going to do is shift the high risk customers to actual loan sharks at much higher rates of interest?

Back in this thread there are a few links discussing this reasoning.I am sure everything will become clear soon.I hope so as i am getting a bit of a sweat on.

Won’t a cap push borrowers into the services of illegal loan sharks?

A cap must be set high enough to ensure lenders can operate at a level which is financially viable. We also need to ensure that alternative affordable sources of credit are readily available through the Post Office network, local credit unions, CDFIs, co-operatives and mutuals

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK but (and yes I appreciate that this is a common thought on these forums) arent you assuming that the relevant companies are therefore behaving in a way that is over and above economic viability? In fact, you are going one further and implying that there is some form of cartel (official or unofficial) setting interest rates higher than is economically viable for this type of loan. I would dispute that this is the case, and would state that if the interest rates are genuinely set at an "economically viable" level, then the change to the current situation will be zero. Ultimately, there is a lot of competition in that market, and it is an open market, which by definition will drive interest rates down to an economical viable level in any event.

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...