Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

shop direct Very catalogue account No CCA but still hassling.


hitchy1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4495 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

Recently i cca'd Shop Direct regarding a Very catalogue account. i received a letter stating they didn't have the original document but advising that the fact that transactions had taken place was proof of debt. I then sent the account in dispute letter and received a blank copy of an application form with another letter advising possible detriment to my credit rating. I cant post the document at the moment but the key paragraphs are as follows.

 

It is clear that by ordering and purchasing goods from us, you acknowledge that there is an existing relationship in place. In the event that you did not believe there was such a relationship it is unlikely that you would have bought and continued to buy goods from us.

The latest case law in relation to the enforceability of credit agreements has made clear that unenforceability does not mean that the rights of the parties under a credit agreement were never acquired or are extinguished.

 

It goes on to state there is an outstanding debt which incidentally is significantly less than i thought.

 

Any advice on next steps please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are of course right had you not entered into

an agreement you would not have had the goods

GAG cannot advise you on how to avoid a debt.

What was the original reason for the CCA request

which is not a route recommended for avoiding a

debt?

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

Quite simply it is down to a relationship breakdown and i find myself with no spare cash. I posted on here as it seems contradictory to what you are saying. The whole site is full of posts geared to avoiding debt, so what have i missed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone advise on this please. Account dates back to 2000, Shop Direct have indicated no agreement. Surely a blank copy with o details or signatures is not enough to satisfy the courts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Make a written offer to them of what you can afford say £5 per month and send payment along with that letter. No matter what they reply about it not being enough etc, just continue to pay that amount each month, set up a standing order if you want.

 

There is no way that you can just ignore a debt and you will find that just because you can't afford it wont stand up in court as other recent cases have shown.

Courts have agreed that buying and making payments establishes an agreement was in existance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

As has already been said, paperwork errors are no longer a way out.

 

The cases being referred to include Carey v HSBC as wel as Rankines v Virtually the Rest of the World.

 

But don't forget, it is YOUR money and you control it so pay them what you can easily afford after all of your essential expenses. Even if that is only £1 per month. They may not like it but that is how it is. You tell them what they are going to get and not the other way around.

 

Regards

 

ims

Edited by ims21

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Make a written offer to them of what you can afford say £5 per month and send payment along with that letter. No matter what they reply about it not being enough etc, just continue to pay that amount each month, set up a standing order if you want.

 

There is no way that you can just ignore a debt and you will find that just because you can't afford it wont stand up in court as other recent cases have shown.

Courts have agreed that buying and making payments establishes an agreement was in existance.

 

Ok, thanks for that. Is there a suggested letter i can use? i can probably afford £20 per month at most.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi hitchy,

If you are going to make an offer

that you can comfortably afford may

suggest not using a template the DCA's

have seen them all as we have seen

the one they send,a personal letter

setting out you offer will be more readilly

accepted IMHO.

 

Brig.

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 was going to say the same. Don't offer more that you know you can comfortably afford to pay each month without missing.

 

And the letter, also as the Brigadier says, just a simple one telling them that xxx is all you can afford at present and here's the first payment. Include a postal order or cheque with the letter and then make out your standing order or pay on line or the way you usually do, but don't set up a direct debit with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have followed the advice, made a monthly offer which i can afford and sent the first two payments with offer to set up standing order.

I have now received a letter rejecting the offer and the charges they have added have now wiped out the payments.

I might as well go to court and let the judge decide, im not in a position to just wipe out the payments with charges.:-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest now making formal complaint to the

Compliance Manager, setting out clearly and concisely

that your offer of payment is all you can afford and it

may have to be reduced to £1 per month at any time

and state you would be delighted for a judge to decide.

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

Hi Hitchy

 

Do you have any PPI on this account?...... I note you now have charges to recover :-)

 

Seriously though, what's the total balance [no need to be precise] and how much of this is made up of charges and PPI [if any]

 

Sometimes the simplest route is recovering your money first and see what's left to argue over

 

Gez

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Hitchy

 

Do you have any PPI on this account?...... I note you now have charges to recover :-)

 

Seriously though, what's the total balance [no need to be precise] and how much of this is made up of charges and PPI [if any]

 

Sometimes the simplest route is recovering your money first and see what's left to argue over

 

Gez

 

Total is around £3k. No ppi on the account. think i will try the compliance manager route and see how they respond.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
The C.M. route cuts out the''customer service '' parrots.

 

I received a letter from the CM advising that they will investigate fully and contact me again as soon as the investigation is complete.

Four days after their letter i received 2 more letters, one advising more charges for unpaid amounts and the other a default notice and of course both letters advising me to contact them on the advised number.

What now? do i wait for the CM investigation or do i contact them and refer them to my previous correspondence and offer?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have it already refer to the original correspondence

and off in WRITING.

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'd like to comment contrary to many of the posts here.

 

I had a similar issue with SDFC after they stated they had no signed credit agreement. They also argued evidence of transactions proved the debt. True, but that does not afford them a legal route to reclaim that debt.

 

I sued SDFC and won a complete write off.

 

The issue is that whilst the debt does exist there is no legal route for them to enforce a non existent credit agreement. How can they prove contractual interest and the agreed repayment schedule?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to comment contrary to many of the posts here.

 

I had a similar issue with SDFC after they stated they had no signed credit agreement. They also argued evidence of transactions proved the debt. True, but that does not afford them a legal route to reclaim that debt.

 

I sued SDFC and won a complete write off.

 

The issue is that whilst the debt does exist there is no legal route for them to enforce a non existent credit agreement. How can they prove contractual interest and the agreed repayment schedule?

The agreed repayments schedule would be seperate from

the agreement, if we are refering to payments less

than the original or a plan to repay arrears and normal

payments.

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

Sorry guys, just let me get the next steps correct. Are we saying i should refer to the correspondence received from the CM and point out that i am being harassed even before they complete their investigation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The agreed repayments schedule would be seperate from

the agreement, if we are refering to payments less

than the original or a plan to repay arrears and normal

payments.

 

The agreed repayments scheduled I referred to would have been the one included in the original signed credit agreement - of which of course there is not one!

 

There is therefore no agreed original repayment schedule to be in default of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To save me reading all again, did you sign

an agreement, tick a box on an online application??

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...