Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • [URL=https://meettomy.site]Pretty Girls in your town[/URL]
    • I recently bought some trainers from Sports Direct and was unhappy with them and their extortionate delivery and return postage charges. I tweeted about being unhappy, and received a reply from someone claiming to be from Sports Direct asking me to send my order number and email address by pm, so a claim could be raised. Which I (stupidly) did. The account used Sports Direct's name and branding, and a blue tick.  The following day I received a call from "Sports Direct Customer Service", and with a Kenyan number. They asked for details of the issue, and then sent me an email with a request to install an app called Remitly. They provided me with a password to access the app then I saw that it had been setup for me to transfer £100, and I was asked to enter my credit card number so they could "refund" me. I told them I was uncomfortable with this (to say the least), and was just told to ring them back when I did feel comfortable doing it. Ain't never gonna happen.  I just checked my X account, and the account that sent the message asking for my details is gone. I feel like a complete idiot falling for what was a clear scam. But at least I realised before any real damage was done. if you make a complaint about a company on social media, and you get a reply from someone claiming to be from that company and asking for personal details, tread very carefully.   
    • The good news is that their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012  Schedule 4.. First under Section 9 (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; (b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; The PCN does not specify the parking period. AS you rightly say the ANPR times do not include driving to the parking space and then from there back to the exit. And once you include getting children in and out of cars especially if seat belts are involved the time spent parked can be a fair bit less than the ANPR times but still probably nowhere near the time you spent. But that doesn't matter -it's the fact that they failed to comply. Also they failed to ask the keeper to pay the charge.  Their failure means that they cannot now transfer the charge from the diver to the keeper . Only the driver is now liable. As long as UKPA do not know who was driving it will be difficult for them to win in Court as the Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. Particularly as anyone can drive any car if they have the correct insurance. It might be able to get more reasons to contest the PCN if you could get some photos of the signs. both at the entrance and inside the car park. the photos need to be legible and if there are signs that say different things from others that would also be a help.
    • Farage rails and whines about not being allowed on the BBC ... ... but pulls out at the last minute of a BBC Panorama interview special. It was denied it was anything to do with his candidates being outed as misogynists and Putin apologists, or that farage was afraid Nick Robinson might throw some difficult questions at him ... despite farages recent practice at quickly cowering in fear.   It was claimed 'it wasn't in Nigels diary'     Nigel Farage pulls out of BBC interview at last minute amid Hitler row WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK ‘Panorama’ special postponed as Reform UK party faces row over candidate who claimed UK would have been ‘better off’ if it had...   Waaahhhh
    • i'd say put lowells to strict proof of where the payment came from. cant hurt to send SB letter, even if proved not. at least they get your correct address. they'd have to link the old IVA times scale to a payment  these IVA F&F pots (if thats where it came from) most mugs dont even know they are not only taking most of your payments on fees but also creaming money off to supposedly offer F&F's.  funny when the IVA fails or is complete these sums of money in F&F pots never get given back or even mentions... these IVA firm directors esp with regard to knightsbridge and creditfix were fined and struck off more times than Paul Burdell of Link Fame and still managed to continue to scam people.
  • 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 
        • Like
      • 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

Cap1 & CCA return


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4980 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

Hi Shane

 

The form requirements of SI 1553 are pretty clear in what the schedule one information which is the main bulk of the T an c's and include the prescribed terms, should be within the agreement.There is no mention within the agreement regulations(1553) of the term "Terms and conditions".

These are a sepperate document intended for issuance as copy one or two docs in order to comply with sections 63-64 etc.

The statement "only sign if you agree to" is meaningless it does not conform to the required format of the agreement.

 

Best regards

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The statement "only sign if you agree to" is meaningless it does not conform to the required format of the agreement.

 

Best regards

Peter

 

Hi Peter,

 

the quote above is what I was trying to get at. I shouldn't of said T&C's either what i meant was simply any other document not being the signature document but being referred to in it; though I find in a lot of cases the prescribed terms are in the t&c's with credit card applications/alleged agreements.

 

So the fact that it may say on the signature doc 'only sign here if you agree....' carries no weight with regards to prescribed terms being on the other document you are effectively agreeing to be bound to because prescribed terms MUST be on signatue document itself.

 

kind regards,

shane

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 108 posts (well, 107 now!) to go to 10,000 posts!

 

World Record?

 

;)

 

Who are you talking about:confused:

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Peter,

 

the quote above is what I was trying to get at. I shouldn't of said T&C's either what i meant was simply any other document not being the signature document but being referred to in it; though I find in a lot of cases the prescribed terms are in the t&c's with credit card applications/alleged agreements.

 

So the fact that it may say on the signature doc 'only sign here if you agree....' carries no weight with regards to prescribed terms being on the other document you are effectively agreeing to be bound to because prescribed terms MUST be on signatue document itself.

 

kind regards,

shane

 

Hi Shane

 

Yes and of course not only the prescribed terms but all the required terms stated within the agreement regulations should be within the signature document.

 

Best regards

peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I have received an application form (posted on another thread) with no prescribed terms at all, a printout of t&cs from a different year from when agreement was taken out which span two pages of A4 in their tiny print and could no way on this earth have been on the back of the original application form, and a credit card mailer from 2005 which is the only thing showing the credit limit and interest rate. The response to my original CCA request was the application form - one single sided sheet of A4.

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

wasnt it today mabelline was in court with her CCA?

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter/All,

 

I have another agreement I'd like to you have a look at, if you don't mind.

 

This seems to be a response to a CPR request under my HFC Bank claim and a second agreement has suddenly surfaced;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collectors-debt-collection/110146-car2403-hfc-bank-default-4.html#post1186453

 

Isn't signed by HFC Bank?

 

Your thoughts on it? Have to compose a Defence/Counterclaim this week, (with tomterm8's help, of course!) so I'd appreciate a quick turnaround. (If that isn't too cheeky!)

 

Thanks,

Chris

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ho All

 

Sorry to barge in but got a letter of Crapwest today and they are doing my head in:mad:

 

Can I just confirm the prescribed terms have to be on the signed page NOT in a seperate print out with the T&C

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ho All

 

Sorry to barge in but got a letter of Crapwest today and they are doing my head in:mad:

 

Can I just confirm the prescribed terms have to be on the signed page NOT in a seperate print out with the T&C

 

HAK

 

Correct.

  • Haha 1

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ho All

 

Sorry to barge in but got a letter of Crapwest today and they are doing my head in:mad:

 

Can I just confirm the prescribed terms have to be on the signed page NOT in a seperate print out with the T&C

 

HAK

 

 

 

 

 

Absolutely!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ho All

 

Sorry to barge in but got a letter of Crapwest today and they are doing my head in:mad:

 

Can I just confirm the prescribed terms have to be on the signed page NOT in a seperate print out with the T&C

 

HAK

 

Yes this is true but remember as per the Regs some of the prescribed terms can be stipulated as statements explaining how they will determined , or worked out see

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/103383-agreement-enforceability.html

for more details

 

regards,

shane

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well then hack, by virtue of section 127(3) the court cannot enforce the agreement and I wouuld issue an N1 immediately and contact your Trading Standards!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

After Woodchester v Swaine it appears a defaut notice is inefective if it miss-states the amount needed to remedy the breach. My question is, if the figure quoted in the notice is less than the actual amount required. Would the notice still be inefective even though the borrower has not been put to a disadvantage.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul,

 

In that situation I don't think it would hold up in court. Though the default notice is supposed to be wholly accurate, in Woodchester v Swaine the court did mention an error that can be described as minimal could be overlooked.

'The court commented that a de minimis error may be overlooked.'

 

regards,

shane

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul,

 

In that situation I don't think it would hold up in court. Though the default notice is supposed to be wholly accurate, in Woodchester v Swaine the court did mention an error that can be described as minimal could be overlooked.

'The court commented that a de minimis error may be overlooked.'

 

regards,

shane

 

but;

 

"Accordingly, the assistant recorder had been incorrect to hold that the default notice was not rendered defective by alleging an amount which was in excess of the sum necessary to remedy the breach"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

but;

 

Hi,

 

If the creditor had stated on the default notice you must pay x amount to remedy the breach and x amount was overestimated then yes I would agree default would be rendered defective and void. Debtor would even be open to counterclaim for damages (see Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society) not to mention unlawful recission of contract aruguably precluding a court from making any enforcement order.

 

However, given that the innaccuracy in this case was to underestimate the sum required to remedy the alleged breach, by misrepresenting it the debtor is not really affected or prejudiced Imo, I think it would be hard to convince a judge otherwise.

 

regards,

shane

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Does anyone have copies of

 

Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1993

Consumer Credit (Notice of Variation of Agreements) Regulations 1977

Consumer Credit (Credit Token Agreements) Regulations 1983

Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983

Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983

Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations 1983

Consumer Credit (Quotations) Regulations 1980

Consumer credit(Agreement to enter Prospective agreements)(Exemptions) Regulations 1983

The Consumer Credit (Quotations) Regulations 1989

 

Just my luck, server crashed and lost all data:o . If anyone has any of these in electronic form please let me know!

 

kind regards,

shane

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue here is that TS is accepting this and putting the onus on the consumer to fight it in court. I can not accept that there is ever only one style of agreement at any one time, so it is in my view at best a guess. Next Direcotry have begun to go down this route, and when they took my wife to court and we asked for a copy of the agreement, they tried to fob us off by sending a typed up copy and quoted the CCA regulations.

 

Best Wishes

MoonHawk

I think it would be a good idea.

Mahatma Gandhi when asked what he thought of Western civilization

 

Advice & opinions of MoonHawk are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

Lloyds TSB - Unlawful charges - Settled £8,807.68

Motor Help UK - Misrepesentation Act - Settled £111.25 (Thread Here)

Next Directory court action without a CCA for £605 - Settled & account closed (Thread Here)

CABOT - Can not produce CCA and refusing to accept it - In progress

Aktiv Kapital - Can not produce CCA and also refusing to accept it - In progress

Barclaycard - Can not produce CCA for an account of £2,000. After a long fight used CPR - Settled

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4980 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...