Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I apologise if I was being unclear. Where it currently stands is that they will have it repair, placing scaffolding in our garden for 5 days. They have moved fast, but we will still have to postpone our contractors, meaning, we won't necessarily have the work done in time for the wedding and therefore will incur additional expenses for either a marquee or a wedding venue. They are vehemently against having any kind of liability in any regard but continue repeating that they are legally entitled to use our garden for their repairs (I believe this is true unless the work can be carried out using a cherry picker). The neighbour seems either indifferent or oblivious to the fact they can't reach all of the side of the roof from the space where they can place the scaffolding. They have asked their roofer of choice about using a cherry picker but the roofer has said it wasn't possible. It's not clear whether the roofer doesn't want to use a cherry picker or whether there is an issue with it. They have told us it is a problem that we are installing a gazebo as it will prevent them to access their roof from our garden in the future?!?  
    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
  • 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

Cap1 & CCA return


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4972 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 17.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/33174-consumer-credit-act-agreements-760.html#post2176126

 

Just a little further up the page here FG - This confused.

 

You are right FG though about the Heath issues. Barrister says he has to raise Heath as a matter of protocol with the Judge and if it goes into court the Judge may well just state Heath is going on to appeal and pop a stay on the case. I agree with you, the barrister should feel okay to fight our corner and he does without any hesitation, he's very confident mine is pretty clear cut as far as previous cases etc, but there are not cases available as reported cases apparently on multiple agreements so the Judge might just see the Heath as a directive for others. Apparently Judges don't like making decisions :shock: so is more likely to pass the buck to the appeal..Incredible isn't it? Other thoughts were that SPML might not want to see this in court as a test case because it's half baked as it is and if they create a losing reported case in the High Court then the Finance Industry as a whole might not thank them, so opinion is this might get settled before it gets that far. Whilst we all know the Barrister representing this Heath case wants to add this scalp to his trophy cabinet, this is not about the barrister, just the client, Mrs. Heath in this case and he'll have to act in her best interest if an offer is made to settle out of court... Just meanderings of course, but we have to explore every possibility.

 

Still don't understand what Steven was referring to... :cool:

 

SC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I am a new member. I wanted to post a new thread, but do not know how???? I am registered as a basic member.

 

Sorry to jump in on this thread, but i could not see any other of getting this info other than by asking.

 

Many thanks for your help.

i am an old member and even i dont know ....just that i am either thick or dumb or what ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am an old member and even i dont know ....just that i am either thick or dumb or what ?

 

Hi Alisindebt,

 

To make a new thread, you need to go to the forum you want it to appear in (e.g. General) and click the newthread.gif button at the top left of the thread list.

 

Hope this helps!

H

 

Hi

 

I am a new member. I wanted to post a new thread, but do not know how???? I am registered as a basic member.

 

Sorry to jump in on this thread, but i could not see any other of getting this info other than by asking.

 

Many thanks for your help.

 

There's also a beginners guide to CAG that will help you linked in my signature, just below this post ;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Still don't understand what Steven was referring to... :cool:

 

 

Me neither. I didn't think I'd said anything that wouldn't already have been obvious to you SC & as far as I can see 14d is standard 'interest only' clause. :confused:

Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Me neither. I didn't think I'd said anything that wouldn't already have been obvious to you SC & as far as I can see 14d is standard 'interest only' clause. :confused:

 

 

maybe he'd been on the pop :D got to give the poor fellow a bit of space, he works so hard on here :p Take it easy Steven :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to go off on a little tangent here...

 

What would the implications be (if any) if a creditor didn't follow their own t's and c's regarding charges?

 

I recently received my SAR from Egg, and in it was included a direct copy of every statement - not just the transactions, but the terms that go on the back of each one (just as you receive each month).

 

In the terms on the back it states overlimit charges as being £16, but each charge I have had has been £20. It's not a misunderstanding on my part as far as I can see, and it's not that I'm looking at new terms - these are on the back of each statement that shows a £20 charge where it should be £16.

 

Is this anything I can use to my advantage (they've broken the terms of the agreement or something?)

 

Thanks for any input - I've asked on my own thread but although people are very helpful with ideas about it, if anyone who knows if this is/isn't worth pursuing could comment I'd appreciate it.

 

Lexis:)

Time flies like an arrow...

Fruit flies like a banana.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Steven, what did FG say? -

 

Me neither. I didn't think I'd said anything that wouldn't already have been obvious to you SC & as far as I can see 14d is standard 'interest only' clause. :confused:

 

What FG said was:

PCB, I think the point of SC's argument may be that this has been 'split' into 2 parts each under £25000 & therefore should be considered as seperate 'parts'. If you read the Heath v. S. Pacific judgment above, you will understand the references & their application (or otherwise!)
Do try and keep up :rolleyes:

 

 

 

 

(ps I never mentioned 14d :confused:)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

(ps I never mentioned 14d :confused:)

 

No, doc did.

 

Do try & keep up :D

Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but it is a cca regulated agreement Steven, multiple agreement and I'm in court shortly arguing the toss...

 

I won't go into too much detail on this thread about multiple agreements, but if you look at my first document you will see: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/33174-consumer-credit-act-agreements-759.html#post2174507

 

1) Brokers Fee - Cost of credit

2) Mortgage Arrears-pays off for land and Bennion argues this would be deemed an 'exempt category of credit as in the cca '74 (1)

3)Redemption of second charge loan to GE - restricted use (2)

4)Loan Admin fee - cost of credit

5)Telegraphic T/f fee - cost of credit

 

and tucked down in the left hand corner - cash - unrestricted use (3)

 

 

3 categories of credit plus cost of credit missing

 

One only needs 2 categories to make a multiple agreement and they are ALL under £25,000 each - - one clinically executed multiple agreement if ever I saw one. :D

 

 

SC

Link to post
Share on other sites

2) Mortgage Arrears-pays off for land and Bennion argues this would be deemed an 'exempt category of credit as in the cca '74

3)Redemption of second charge loan to GE - restricted use (2)

But the judge in the Heath case found this combination effectively not to be a multiple agreement, didn't he (I know its up for appeal)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to repeat, but if anyone can give an insight into my query below I'd appreciate it - or if you fancy having a look at the thread even better:)

 

What would the implications be (if any) if a creditor didn't follow their own t's and c's regarding charges?

 

I recently received my Subject Access Request from Egg, and in it was included a direct copy of every statement - not just the transactions, but the terms that go on the back of each one (just as you receive each month).

 

In the terms on the back it states overlimit charges as being £16, but each charge I have had has been £20. It's not a misunderstanding on my part as far as I can see, and it's not that I'm looking at new terms - these are on the back of each statement that shows a £20 charge where it should be £16.

 

Is this anything I can use to my advantage (they've broken the terms of the agreement or something?)

 

Thanks for any input - I've asked on my own thread but although people are very helpful with ideas about it, if anyone who knows if this is/isn't worth pursuing could comment I'd appreciate it.

 

Lexis

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/171975-lexis200-egg-cca.html

Time flies like an arrow...

Fruit flies like a banana.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have obviously used new feedstock rather than the old stuff that would have applied when the charges were made. I don't think you need it - just reclaim all the charges as usual

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello gang

 

Have received a letter from HL solicitors on behalf of capquest debt recovery for capital one to pay my dispute by June 01 or court proceedings will be issued.

 

getting scary now, any advice on this stage most welcomed.

 

What shall I do now??

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello gang

 

Have received a letter from HL solicitors on behalf of capquest debt recovery for capital one to pay my dispute by June 01 or court proceedings will be issued.

 

getting scary now, any advice on this stage most welcomed.

 

What shall I do now??

 

up the hammers, got a thread for this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello gang

 

Have received a letter from HL solicitors on behalf of capquest debt recovery for capital one to pay my dispute by June 01 or court proceedings will be issued.

 

getting scary now, any advice on this stage most welcomed.

 

What shall I do now??

 

Have a closer look at the threatogramme from HL Legal. You should discover it says court proceedings MAY be issued and IF successful XY&Z MAY happen

 

HL Legal are Crapquests in house threat monkeys

Link to post
Share on other sites

whu1,

 

ODC is almost certainly right - It's bound to say MAY and IF.

 

Have you joined the Official Capone Fan Club - Sunflower99's thread? Just Recieved A Signed Capital One Agreement Do subscribe. We are all ignoring them. (Actually we did try and arrange a day trip to Nottingham to see our agreements, and everyone wanted to bring wine, scones with clotted cream, even champagne when they couldn't produce the agreements, but Ellie just won't arrange a date. :()

 

DD

Link to post
Share on other sites

whu1,

 

ODC is almost certainly right - It's bound to say MAY and IF.

 

Have you joined the Official Capone Fan Club - Sunflower99's thread? Just Recieved A Signed Capital One Agreement Do subscribe. We are all ignoring them. (Actually we did try and arrange a day trip to Nottingham to see our agreements, and everyone wanted to bring wine, scones with clotted cream, even champagne when they couldn't produce the agreements, but Ellie just won't arrange a date. :()

 

DD

Hi DD!

Glad my crap one thread is still the official Capone Fan club!:D:D I am going for record for longest crap one thread! Yes so dissapointing Ellie will not arrange a date,It would have been a nice Cag meet!:D

Im happy to help with support and my own opinions but as i have no legal qualifications If I offer any thoughts to your problems please take it as from my life experience only and not of any legal standing. Always take further advice from the legal experts in your final action,

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

.. and everyone wanted to bring wine, scones with clotted cream, even champagne when they couldn't produce the agreements, but Ellie just won't arrange a date.

 

 

Oh, isn't she just a killjoy?! :D

Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a closer look at the threatogramme from HL Legal. You should discover it says court proceedings MAY be issued and IF successful XY&Z MAY happen

 

HL Legal are capquests in house threat monkeys

 

 

Yes it does state 'MAY' be issued and 'IF'.

 

I take it you guys have been at this stage?. Did you just ignore it because I don't know now how many times I have sent the 'this is in dispute, need copy of agreement' type letter to all sorts of people since starting this.:-x

 

Please let us know your advice on next step

 

 

Many thanks for replying, good to see I am not alone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it does state 'MAY' be issued and 'IF'.

 

I take it you guys have been at this stage?. Did you just ignore it because I don't know now how many times I have sent the 'this is in dispute, need copy of agreement' type letter to all sorts of people since starting this.:-x

 

Please let us know your advice on next step

 

 

Many thanks for replying, good to see I am not alone.

 

Have you a thread.

 

You will need to educate yourself on why the "agreement" is unenforceable so you are confident on matters when defending in court.

 

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 DD!

Glad my crap one thread is still the official Capone Fan club!:D:D

 

Amazing how focussed these ' Fan Clubs ' make you, seem to remember another certain DCA, who has one! :D

 

It's all in the detail as Pwalton says, "seek and thou shalt find" as we did and Cabot went reeling from many a court :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

HL Legal are not Capquest's in house monkeys. They are an online operation run in association with a firm of solicitors that professional courtesy prevents me from describing.

 

An HL Legal threatogram costs as little as 75p including postage, according to their website (which makes enlightening reading).

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4972 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...