Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • dx100uk
      Erudio/SLC

      By dx100uk · Posted

      click the link. dx  
    • FTMDave
      Backdoor VCS CCJ - issued for parking in my own space. ( correspondence sent to the wrong address)

      By FTMDave · Posted

      There are two things to immediately clarify. Firstly, why did court papers go to the wrong address?  In 99% of backdoor CCJ cases here the person moves and doesn't update the vehicle log book address.  Or they move and they don't inform the parties who they are in legal dispute with of the new address.  Does either of these apply to you? Secondly, given this has been going on for over three years without presumably any ill effects on you, how important is it for you to have a clean credit file?  I ask as, if you do absolutely nothing, the CCJ will disappear in April 2027.
    • dave024
      Erudio/SLC

      By dave024 · Posted

      Sorry to ask, but I know I had SB template on PC, but can't find it. Also any search for template\SB letter takes me back here.  Any help to get to SB letter would be appreciated. I know I used it on a car HP co that wouldn't honor my FCS refund and after 6 years came threatening ( or rather their DCA). Worked a treat. Thanks in advance
    • Thanks121
      Lowell letters received for £7k pers loan debt - Scotland

      By Thanks121 · Posted

      Received this letter today after all this time !! Doesn’t sound like just a threat any advice please  Thanks  Photo.pdf
    • CowboyG
      Bailiff fees added - old address

      By CowboyG · Posted

      Good evening. Hoping to keep this short and concise. Any help really appreciated! Sent originated from council tax in 2019.  I moved address for a new career 240miles away in December 2019 and have lived here ever since.  A distant friend resides at previous address.  A CCJ was filed regarding this debt in January 2020 but no correspondence was received my end or at the old address.  Move forward to this year; early April I learn of a letter received from Bailiff - Notice of Enforcement dated 13/03. Stated I had ten days to settle a payment/payment plan or £75 will be added after ten days from 13/03 and bailiff instructed to visit.  Obviously I was unaware of this letter till well after the time period passed. Attempted to contact Dukes via email but zero response. Asked for breathing space in order to check the original debt with the respective council (I wasn’t awarded a week of Housing despite being on UC for a short period due to a contract date given by the old employer).  29/04 a note was left at the old address stating a bailiff had visited. New balance £310 more than original outstanding.  I’ve since contacted both the council and the bailiff agent to state I’m more than happy to settle the original debt over a payment plan but at this stage they will not remove the fees despite all correspondence not being sent to me and obviously me only seeing them much later than one would have expected.  Tried live chat today with the company and firstly was told the fees will remain because I spoke to the enforcement agent - I have never spoken to him/her.  secondly told the fees would remain because “I tried to use their web chat service to complete an income form” - I have zero recollection of doing this and I also wonder if it’s another tactic? any help on where I stand with the fees added would be incredible. Thank you

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.
Latest activity

Cap1 & CCA return

tamadus

By tamadus
in Capital One

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4986 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

Sparkie1723

Sparkie1723

Posted
Posted
hi, i have a quick question. I have a card that i took out about oct 07 and transfered a large balance to it. am i still able to try and make a claim under the CCA or does this card come under a newer CCA which means i have no case. thank you

HI paulrob2808

ALL credit agreements proviede they are still in force are regulated by the New ConsumerCredit Act ammendments, the old Act is still in full force, except the amendments make it stronger....you still have a claim.

 

sparkie

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

car2403

car2403

Posted
Posted
I can see another great debate on the following subject.

 

Many Credit Card credit agreement say for credit limit:

This will be determined from time to time etc.

 

1983 CCA regulations say:

 

Credit Limit

 

 

A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or there is no credit limit.

 

Writing time to time is not a manner to be determined if you know were I am coming from.

 

If they put for the prescribed term for interest rate “interested will be determined from time to time" it would make the agreement unenforceable.

 

Any comments

 

HAK

 

Usually, though, the T&C's do state how it will be determined and how they will notify you of it.

 

For example, "your account will be reviewed regularly and we will determine your credit limit based on that and notify you of it on your monthly statements", blah, blah, blah...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
MAGDA

MAGDA

Posted
Posted
I can see another great debate on the following subject.

 

Many Credit Card credit agreement say for credit limit:

This will be determined from time to time etc.

 

1983 CCA regulations say:

 

Credit Limit

 

 

A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or there is no credit limit.

 

Writing time to time is not a manner to be determined if you know were I am coming from.

 

If they put for the prescribed term for interest rate “interested will be determined from time to time" it would make the agreement unenforceable.

 

Any comments

 

HAK

 

Hi Hak, unfortuantely that doesn't make the agreement unenforceable. I have an Egg agreement which doesn't have a specific credit limit stated, just that it will be determined..... and apparently this is acceptable as per the following which was discussed on another thread:

 

Quote: "Unfortunately I don't think you will have any joy, have been looking at the OFT statement on this and 8.5 says:

 

"8.5 What is meant by ‘credit limit’?

Sch 6 para 3 applies to running-account credit agreements. In such cases the agreement must include a term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined, or that there is no credit limit. This is also required by Sch 1 para 8 – see Q3.10.

The credit limit may, by virtue of Sch 1 para 8, be expressed as a sum of money, or a statement that the credit limit will be determined by the creditor from time to time and notified to the debtor, or a sum of money together with a statement that the creditor may vary the credit limit from time to time and notify the debtor. "

 

So, unfortunately, it seems that the creditor can actually do this. Magda

Link to post
Share on other sites
pt2537

pt2537

Posted
Posted
Hi Hak, unfortuantely that doesn't make the agreement unenforceable. I have an Egg agreement which doesn't have a specific credit limit stated, just that it will be determine..... and apparently this is acceptable as per the following:

 

Unfortunately I don't think you will have any joy, have been looking at the OFT statement on this and 8.5 says:

 

 

"8.5 What is meant by ‘credit limit’?

Sch 6 para 3 applies to running-account credit agreements. In such cases the agreement must include a term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined, or that there is no credit limit. This is also required by Sch 1 para 8 – see Q3.10.

The credit limit may, by virtue of Sch 1 para 8, be expressed as a sum of money, or a statement that the credit limit will be determined by the creditor from time to time and notified to the debtor, or a sum of money together with a statement that the creditor may vary the credit limit from time to time and notify the debtor. "

 

So, unfortunately, it seems that the creditor can actually do this. Magda

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/169828-egg-card-cca.html#post1832419

 

the words Credit limit MUST be used, no other word is permissible, this is t he opinion which i have been given by three leading barristers including one Qc

Link to post
Share on other sites
MAGDA

MAGDA

Posted
Posted
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/169828-egg-card-cca.html#post1832419

 

the words Credit limit MUST be used, no other word is permissible, this is t he opinion which i have been given by three leading barristers including one Qc

 

Very interesting pt. My Egg agreement, like those discussed by you, states only that they will tell me from time to time the approved limit. It doesn't mention credit limit at all as you say. I am currently disputing the validity of my Egg agreement, so that is certainly very helpful.

 

Magda

Link to post
Share on other sites
MAGDA

MAGDA

Posted
Posted
you will be getting a donation from me, without sites like this, people like me would not stand a chance. thanks

 

as for my egg card, i do have a credit limit stated

 

Your agreement is probably a more recent one then, is it? The older ones, like mine, all tend to be quite vague.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Number6

Number6

Posted
Posted

Hi all

 

I need an authoritative answer concerning what exact wording is allowable within the confines of the signature area of an agreement regulated by CCA 1974.

 

I'm sure this info is here somewhere but I'm really short of time.

 

Could someone please tell me the permitted wording?

 

Thanks very much.

 

Pete

I will not make any deals with you. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. Number 6

Link to post
Share on other sites
pt2537

pt2537

Posted
Posted
Hi all

 

I need an authoritative answer concerning what exact wording is allowable within the confines of the signature area of an agreement regulated by CCA 1974.

 

I'm sure this info is here somewhere but I'm really short of time.

 

Could someone please tell me the permitted wording?

 

Thanks very much.

 

Pete

Pete, what type of agreement is it your looking at?

Link to post
Share on other sites
fergal71

fergal71

Posted
Posted

hi pt I have read many of your threads and you do sterling work... I have read today about challenging agreements on unfair relationship provision within the act.... Is this something you use????

Only direct action by the masses will work....

 

Look at all successes they have never come from negotiation!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Number6

Number6

Posted
Posted

Sorry pt, it's a credit card application form being touted as an agreement. I intend to shoot it down in flames. The final touch is the signature box area which is headed "Please sign and return your application by xx/xx/xxxx" followed by the "This is a credit agreement....etc" bit.

 

Pete

I will not make any deals with you. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. Number 6

Link to post
Share on other sites
pt2537

pt2537

Posted
Posted
Sorry pt, it's a credit card application form being touted as an agreement. I intend to shoot it down in flames. The final touch is the signature box area which is headed "Please sign and return your application by xx/xx/xxxx" followed by the "This is a credit agreement....etc" bit.

 

Pete

 

here you go

 

This is a Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer

Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be legally

bound by its terms.

 

Signature(s)

of Debtor(s)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Number6

Number6

Posted
Posted

Thanks pt.

 

On the app form I have here the first line within the signature box is "Please sign and return your application by (date)" in large bold type.

 

This is followed on the next line, and in smaller type by "This is a credit agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be legally bound by it's terms".

 

Then comes the debtors signature and the date.

 

What part of the CCA, or which regulation does this miswording breach?

 

Pete

I will not make any deals with you. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. Number 6

Link to post
Share on other sites
Number6

Number6

Posted
Posted

Sorry pt, I thought that was the case but my memory is like a sieve these days so I wanted to be sure.

 

I appreciate your time and knowledge, many thanks.

 

Pete

I will not make any deals with you. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. Number 6

Link to post
Share on other sites
noomill060

noomill060

Posted
Posted (edited)

Dont forget- it was an agreement for a Morgan Stanley card which was requested!

 

This is contemporary with my MS application and is what Barclaycard appear to claim are the original terms of my MS card.

 

img271.jpg

Edited by noomill060
Link to post
Share on other sites
noomill060

noomill060

Posted
Posted (edited)

I do not believe that this satisfies my s.78 request. :rolleyes:

 

It doesnt satisfy s.61 (b) never mind s.61(a) Its a set of conditions for a product from entirely different company!!

 

Shall I go for a declaration of unenforceability on top of my claim for PPI?

 

Their reponse to a complaint about PPI was that premiums were applied in accordance to T&Cs, so presumably as T&Cs seem to have gone AWOL that fillets their donkey.

 

But... can I then draw the judge's attention to this (in POCs of course) and say "hey look, your Honour- no agreement!!"

Edited by noomill060
Link to post
Share on other sites
steven4064

steven4064

Posted
Posted

Hi noomill

 

I think it probbaly does satisfy your s78 request - thay are allowed to respond with a copy of an application form and current T&Cs. These would be the current T&Cs since BC took over MS.

 

You are right that it doesn't satisfy s61 though. As such, s65 says that only a court can enforce it. Section 127(3) limits what the court can enforce and this comes nowhere near the criterion.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
banker_rhymes_with

banker_rhymes_with

Posted
Posted

Thanks PT!

 

SI 1983/1553 doesn't come up in the...

 

The UK Statute Law Database

 

...for some reason. At least not searching for it as SI 1983/1553, or 1983, or 1553, or Consumer!

 

Unless I'm not pressing all the right buttons!

 

Good to see it was on CAG all along.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4986 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.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...