Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • next time dont upload 19 single page pdfs use the sites listed on upload to merge them into one multipage pdf.. we aint got all day to download load single page files 2024-01-15 DBCLegal SAR.pdf
    • If you have not kept the original PCN you can always send an SAR to Excel and they have to send you all the info they have on you within a month. failure to do so can lead to you being able to sue them for their failure.......................................nice irony.
    • Thank you and well done  for posting up all those notices it must have have taken you ages.. The entrance sign is very helpful since the headline states                    FREE PARKING FOR CUSTOMERS ONLY in capitals with not time limit mentioned. Underneath and not in capitals they then give the actual times of parking which would not be possible to read when driving into the car park unless you actually stopped and read them. Very unlikely especially arriving at 5.30 pm with possibly other cars behind. On top of that the Notice goes on to say that the terms and conditions are inside the car park so the entrance sign cannot offer a contract it is merely an offer to treat. Inside the car park the signs are mostly too high up and the font size too small to be able to read much of their signs. DCBL have not shown a single sign that can be read on their SAR. Although as they show photographs which were taken the year after your alleged breach we do not know what the signs were when you were there. For instance the new signs showed the charge was then £100 whereas your PCN was for £85. Who knows, when you were there perhaps the time was for 3 hours. They were asked to produce  planning permission which would have been necessary for the ANPR cameras alone and didn't do so. Nor did they provide a copy of the contract-DCBL  "deeming them disproportionate or not relevant to the substantive issues in the dispute" How arrogant and untruthful is that? The contract and planning permission could be vital to having the claim thrown out. I can find no trace of planning permission for the signs nor the cameras on Tonbridge Council planning portal. and the contract of course is highly relevant since some contracts advise the parking rouges that they cannot take motorists to Court. I understand that Europarks are now running that car park which means that nexus didn't  last long before being thrown out.....................................
    • Hi,   I am not sure if I posted this already here but I don't think I did. I attach a judgement that raises very interesting points IMO. Essentially EVRi did their usual non attendance that we normally see, however the judge (for the first time I've seen in these threads) dismissed the notice and awarded me judgement by default because their notice misses the "confirmation of compliance" paragraph. in and out in 3 minutes (aside from the chat at the end with the judge about his problems with evri) Redacted - evri CPR loss.pdf
    • Just to update this. I did apply to strikeout and they did not attend the hearing. I won by defualt and the hearing lasted 5 minutes (court only allocated 15). The judge simply explained that the only matter he was really considering is if the Defendant could have any oral evidence to defend the claim. However he said he had decided that based on their defence, and their misunderstanding of law, and their non attendence he did not think they had any reasonsable chance so he awarded me SJ + Costs on the claim form + the strikeout fee. Luckily when I sent the defendant the order I woke up the next day to a wire trasnfer for the full sum of the judgement
  • 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 
        • 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 4969 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

Guest The Terminator
Right, I've got an application form style agreement, filled in in a shop, with a bad copy of a faxed microfiche. This is not an executed agreement. How am I going to convice a judge that this does not constitute what is required under s78. The DCA is progressing this....

 

The signature of the person executing the agreement is the same as the person who authorised the 'in store credit' of £130.00 There is a statement above the signature box headed Instant Credit that states 'your right to cancel in the box below will not apply to this agreement'. The cancellation box states 'once you have signed this agreement you will have for a short period of time a right to cancel it. Exact details of how and when you can cancel it will be sent to you by post by us.

 

Is it cancellable or not? Doesn't this indicate that the application is not guaranteed and therefore the issue of card is not certain? It also goes on to state that 'if you do receive a card from us this agreement shall continue from the date shown on your card carrier.'

 

The dates on this then are irrelevant are they not? If the agreement continues from the date on the card carrier, is that not the date the agreement started then, by all accounts?

 

How does this instant credit stuff affect the agreement / application arguement?

 

Does it say anywhere regulated by the Consumer Credit Act(1974).If it doesn't your home and dry.

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

Does it say anywhere regulated by the Consumer Credit Act(1974).If it doesn't your home and dry.

 

It does, but not on the page where you sign it. The signature page does not contain ANY personally identifiable info other than my wifes signature (no acc no's, anything). It could be for any agreement or any product whatsoever.

 

The form is executed, but that is for the instant credit and not for the credit account. The instant credit is allegedly not cancellable, but there is a statement under the sig box stating cancellable status.

 

The instant credit is guaranteed by giving a debit card number on the original.

 

I'm going to have to stand up in court and argue that this is not an agreement, it is merely an application form. I'm going to need to go into s63.4, s85 et al to beat this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
It does, but not on the page where you sign it. The signature page does not contain ANY personally identifiable info other than my wifes signature (no acc no's, anything). It could be for any agreement or any product whatsoever.

 

The form is executed, but that is for the instant credit and not for the credit account. The instant credit is allegedly not cancellable, but there is a statement under the sig box stating cancellable status.

 

The instant credit is guaranteed by giving a debit card number on the original.

 

I'm going to have to stand up in court and argue that this is not an agreement, it is merely an application form. I'm going to need to go into s63.4, s85 et al to beat this one.

 

Could you email or pm me with a copy including the T&C and I will look it over for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's a DL an WW? lol

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

Wake up!! We've established the DL, and found out there are two WW's. :p

 

Sorry, I posted before reading the rest of the posts, lol

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

I'll post it out later tonight. I've got Terms email, but if anyone else wants to take a peek (and they are sending me a better copy later apparently) PM me with your email address.

 

I've decided how I'm going to play this, I'm going after GE Cap under s63.4 and s85, followed by an application for a stay on the DCA stuff until there is an outcome with GE Cap. In the mean time, I'm going after the DCA for s78 breach and DPA breach.

 

Got to get the kids in bed before I do anything though, and I'm starving!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll post it out later tonight. I've got Terms email, but if anyone else wants to take a peek (and they are sending me a better copy later apparently) PM me with your email address.

 

I've decided how I'm going to play this, I'm going after GE Cap under s63.4 and s85, followed by an application for a stay on the DCA stuff until there is an outcome with GE Cap. In the mean time, I'm going after the DCA for s78 breach and DPA breach.

 

Got to get the kids in bed before I do anything though, and I'm starving!

 

M! Have I got to chase you round the threads???!!!! LOL! I am going to PM you, perhaps you'd have a look after dinner and kids!!:)

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

30th November 2006, 19:40 #734 (permalink) The Terminator vbmenu_register("postmenu_405171", true);

Gold Account Customer

 

Join Date: Sep 2006

Location: Cyborg City near Barnehurst,Kent

Posts: 707

reputation_pos.gifreputation_pos.gif

 

 

icon1.gif Re: Consumer Credit Act Agreements

Statutory Instrument Practice

 

Statutory Instruments (SIs) are the commonest form of subordinate legislation (also known as secondary or delegated legislation). They are made by or under powers conferred by or under statute on Her Majesty in Council or on a Minister, the National Assembly for Wales or other body or person, and provide the detailed regulations which implement Acts of Parliament. As such they must always be intra vires, that is, they must be within the scope of the enabling power in the parent Act.

 

 

 

JUST TO REMIND EVERYONE WHAT TERMINATOR SAID IN NOVE

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry: Wrong section of the Act it should be:Part 10 S248 - S272

 

Ah!, right I get it now - mass insolvency!!:D

 

If it was feasible and practical for enough people to take this course it would indeed be great fun to watch the vultures starve!:lol:

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to CL and the agreement I've given to a couple of people, do you think it is better that I send a s85 to CL (by changing my defence) or should I send it to GE (and go for a stay against CL) or should I do both. We're talking about 1993 here, so even if I surmise the card would have been replaced by the end of 1996, we're still talking 10 years of interest. This would wipe out the current balance about 4 times over!

 

In the defence I've already got about £500 in charges to come off. Are CL likely to go into court and discuss the charges issue? How do you think they would contend with the s85 defence? Things are pressing now as I've only got 10 days to file the AQ.

 

Oh, just a thought, the application form states the date of the agreement will change, and the cooling off period means that the signature added to the application form by the sales rep is for the instant credit, not for the card and real credit. The card issuer hasn't decided that a card is inevitable, therefore the signature by the sales assistant is persuant to the imediate credit and cannot be for the actual store card.

 

The card has not been executed at this point as the card agreement date is after the application date. Does anyone else who as seen it have any further comment?

 

Oh, and what form do I file to change my defence? I'm going to scare them a little by adding s85 to it. Should I do this sooner rather than later, or should I stay to the getting GE Cap to recall the debt as there is no debt due to the s85 default that occurred at least 10 years ago.....

 

I'm not nervous really.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating thread....I'm trying to determine the vaiidity of an application form as an 'executed agreement'. It's from Amex, it's my application form, w/very fine print describing the CCA 1974, signed by me but NOT by 'authorised by Amex' signature.....I apologise if I've missed the definition on this thread. It doesn't look right to me. Amex aslo enclosed a 13 page T&C, unsigned. Am exhausted!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe

M55,

 

I would throw in Sec 85 as a curve ball. Something they wont really be expecting. It will be interesting to see how they respond.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to, but should I send it to the Creditor (and get a stay against the DCA), to the DCA or to both. Oh, and what do I do with charges? Is the DCA going to enter the court room and discuss charges? Has anyone had any experience on that side?

 

Oh, and I need to contact the ICO, TS and OFT regards breaches of DPA 40 days and s78 12+31 days. The AQ needs to be filled in by the 15th

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe

M55

 

Send it to the creditor cc'd to the DCA, iwth cc's to ICO TS and OFT, just to ginger things up. I have found by sending cc's to the stat authorities puts the creditor on alert.

 

Get those notifications of breaches in ASAP, so at least you might have a response back by the 15th stating they are going to investigate and this can also be added to the AQ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, will get breaches in the post today. Do you have any specific addresses for the stat authorities, or do I need to look for them (and potentially send them to the gardening department or something!)

 

What are the chances of getting a stay from the case brought about by the DCA as I'll be taking the CCP to court, questioning the balance and their ability to sell the debt in the first place?

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe

M55,

 

I can only go the experience of the Court last Monday. the Judge is letting the defendant redo her defence becausae of the Section 85 and the DCA had no option other than to agree, because we reaised Section 85 and the legality of sell the debt while it was in default. This is why You have to let the DCA know what you are doing. Why don't you write to the Court, and cc the DCA in on this letter also.

 

Look up the addys on the web sites of the stat authorities. You can lodge the complaints on line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe

Letter this morning from Crap One, they can no longer help and telling me to go the FOS.

 

They have completely ignored the Section 85 default notice served on them and then in the letter I wrote back raising the Section 85, they have not made any comment expect to say Refer to Credit Agreement and Terms and Conditions.

 

Hey Ho, looks like a those CCJ's are going to be served on Capital One.

Anothr letter will be winging it's way back eminding that while they are in default they cannot enforce anything on either account.

 

Oh yes the letter has been signed by that very busy computer enitity Mr Robert Uddy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right..

 

I've filled in the online form on the ICO website, and all was going well until:

 

1) I phoned the OFT. They said put it in writing, but then told me to call...

2) The Consumer Credit Councilling Service, who told me to call...

3) Community Legal Services, who told me to call...

4) The Financial Ombudsman, who told me to call...

5) The Finance and Leasing Association, who told me to call...

6) The OFT.

 

Anybody else got similar responses from these guys?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
HEY WILLOWB NEEDS YOUR OPINIONS ON AN APPLICATION

FORM SO COME ON TERMINATOR ETC

 

HERE IS THE LINK (TO KEEP HIJACKING TO A MINIMUM)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/61298-willowb-rbs-mint-cca.html#post618193

Advanta.jpg

That is exactly what it is an application form not an executed agreement.Not only that but whoever wrote across the T&C has invalidated it as the T&C are now not illigable.And another thing what if the card had been declined they would be processing your data which as you know is against the law without your permission.
Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4969 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...