Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • 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
        • Like
      • 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 4970 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

Sorry to disagree with everyone, but then again thats what this forum is all about people putting forward different views and the making our minds up.

 

But ask any good solictor who has knowledge of the CCA and he will tell you that The Consumer Credit Act was enacted with the INTENT of protecting both the creditor and debtor BUT the way it is written it is heavily loaded AGAINST the Consumer, and that is its problem, no matter what section you look at ...you will find another section that completely contradicts that section and that is why its a minefield to even tread lightly into its liable to blow up inyour face , and one of the main reasons the TS and OFT are reluctant to take action under it.

 

Because these CCA barristers will rip it apart.

 

 

If folks really want to find out that what I say is pretty true and can afford Professor Goode and Guest's book on " Problems arising from Consumer Credit Agreements ......its about £60 but your local TS office will have a copy go and read it I did ( I knew a guy in our TS office who lent it me) took me a week to even get 25% understanding of it.

 

sparkie

So what do we do??????

 

not try to make these FI take notice? and get their act together??

Might as well throw the towel in!!!!!!!!

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal experiences. I have no legal training, but have educated myself in aspects of consumer legislation. My motto "NEVER GIVE IN, NEVER SURRENDER", THERE IS A WAR ON YOU KNOW

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

See my thread after a chat with MBNA legal dept...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mbna/99086-interesting-convo-mbna-legal.html

 

the whole crux of 'our' argument is fully counterable by them by what he was saying...

Barclays :- Settled March 07:o

 

RBS:- Acct Discharged May 07 :o (chase for more and CRA deletion???):confused:

Barclaycard: - CCA recieved 24/1/07. WOW! :o (GITS!!!) :-|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Volvo

Can you post the full address of this Bryan Carter & Co Solicitors, because at first search, these solicitors are not registered as a Data Processor with the Information Commissioners Office if that is so ....then Bryan Carter & CO are committing an offence under the Data Protection Act obtaining and further processing information anad Data about you, but I need their full address.

below is copy of initial search of Information Commissioners Office register

 

 

sparkie

 

* There are no entries that match your search criteria.

 

Registration Number

Name Bryan Carter & Co Solicitors

Address

Postcode

Organisation sub-division

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So what do we do??????

 

not try to make these FI take notice? and get their act together??

Might as well throw the towel in!!!!!!!!

 

No, don't throw the towel in - it just means that we hae to take action ourselves through the courts, rather than relying on TS etc!!

 

At the end of the day, like bank charges, I don't think any of these lenders would ever want this to even go into a court room!!

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

Hi guys - just to add to this discussion: I have in front of me a piece of paper........:)

it's meant to be a copy agreement and it has so many cut and paste marks all over it, looks like its been photocopied a million times! - has no date, signatures, sig. dates, or full cost of loan, it includes a statement that the interest rate may be varied but gives no valid reason for doing so, and therefore may be subject to the Unfair Terms rules, among other things. The company sending state in their letter: "s77 of the CCA imposes an obligation to supply...s180 provides for the making of regulations governing the form and content of copy agreements (1983).... Reg 3 (2) provides that a copy need not be an exact copy...blah blah, but where oh where, does it state that you may exclude the date of the agreement itself? how can you defend a document that may be 5,10,15 yrs old and under what pertinent Regs without a date??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys - just to add to this discussion: I have in front of me a piece of paper........:)

it's meant to be a copy agreement and it has so many cut and paste marks all over it, looks like its been photocopied a million times! - has no date, signatures, sig. dates, or full cost of loan, it includes a statement that the interest rate may be varied but gives no valid reason for doing so, and therefore may be subject to the Unfair Terms rules, among other things. The company sending state in their letter: "s77 of the CCA imposes an obligation to supply...s180 provides for the making of regulations governing the form and content of copy agreements (1983).... Reg 3 (2) provides that a copy need not be an exact copy...blah blah, but where oh where, does it state that you may exclude the date of the agreement itself? how can you defend a document that may be 5,10,15 yrs old and under what pertinent Regs without a date??

 

Hi maybe copy need not be an exact copy but in court they would have to produce the agreement so why are they wasting time on a cut and past job, me thinks do they have an agreement.

 

all the best dpick:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys - just to add to this discussion: I have in front of me a piece of paper........:)

it's meant to be a copy agreement and it has so many cut and paste marks all over it, looks like its been photocopied a million times! - has no date, signatures, sig. dates, or full cost of loan, it includes a statement that the interest rate may be varied but gives no valid reason for doing so, and therefore may be subject to the Unfair Terms rules, among other things. The company sending state in their letter: "s77 of the CCA imposes an obligation to supply...s180 provides for the making of regulations governing the form and content of copy agreements (1983).... Reg 3 (2) provides that a copy need not be an exact copy...blah blah, but where oh where, does it state that you may exclude the date of the agreement itself? how can you defend a document that may be 5,10,15 yrs old and under what pertinent Regs without a date??

 

Is this MBNA by any chance?

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

Hi guys - just to add to this discussion: I have in front of me a piece of paper........:)

it's meant to be a copy agreement and it has so many cut and paste marks all over it, looks like its been photocopied a million times! - has no date, signatures, sig. dates, or full cost of loan, it includes a statement that the interest rate may be varied but gives no valid reason for doing so, and therefore may be subject to the Unfair Terms rules, among other things. The company sending state in their letter: "s77 of the CCA imposes an obligation to supply...s180 provides for the making of regulations governing the form and content of copy agreements (1983).... Reg 3 (2) provides that a copy need not be an exact copy...blah blah, but where oh where, does it state that you may exclude the date of the agreement itself? how can you defend a document that may be 5,10,15 yrs old and under what pertinent Regs without a date??

 

It does have to be an exact copy - secs 77-79 clearly state that any copy must be a TRUE copy.

 

The only thing they can do is omit the signatures but even then it has to be an exacct copy of the original.

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

A friend has given me an agreement from Direct Auto Finance (Yes Car Credit) to check is enforceability. From first look, I can see that it is a true copy of the original.

 

1)The signatures are on the first page but no date. They have also signed the second page, along with DAF who dated it 21/04/05. The two DAF sigs on the two pages are signed by different people.

 

2)It is two agreements on one page, both signed under each

 

3)The car sale part is called "CONDITIONAL SALE AGREEMENT REGULATED BY THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974"

 

4) The 'optional' insurance part is called "CREDIT AGREEMENT REGULATED BY THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974"

 

5) The car part has the termination rights, but the insurance has a specific note saying that "the right of termination mentioned in 2.2 only applies to that part of the agreement which related to the purchase of the vehicle. The exercise of your right of termination will have no effect on your obligation to pay the Insurance Installments."

 

6)Even though it's headed 'Additional Optional Insurances', she was told at the time that she wouldn't get the car if she didn't take insurance.

 

DAF of YYC whatever you want to call them, are trying to claw back as much money as they can get. They have already told her a year or so ago, that if she payed £4000, she would owe no more for the car. So she did and now owns the car outright.

 

They have now written to say they will accept £500 to clear a balance of £1976.40, but only if it's paid in full and by the 21st June.

It also says that "If you fail to comply with the settlement terms, the discount offer will be revoked and the full balance will become immediately due and payable".

She has been paying £75 a month for this insurance since she paid off the car, so why would the full balance become payable?

 

Can someone please comment on the points I've mentioned?

I think that as there was no cancellation rights, this is unenforceable and she should be able to claim from them for it being mis-sold, not pay them £500, but I'm not sure.

 

Sorry for massive post....:rolleyes:

Abbey - *SETTLED IN FULL!* ;)

-£445 refunded after one phonecall

HERE

 

Lloyds - Reclaiming Charges ***WON!***

-09/05/07 - Prelim delivered

-22/05/07 - LBA sent - no response

-11/07/07 - Filed at court

- 26/07/07 - Full settlement offer!!!! Donation made ;)

HERE

 

Next - Trying to Sue us with no agreement! :lol:

-29/06/07 - Defence filed

-16/08/07 - AQ filed

-19/09/07 - Claim struck out!! :p

HERE and continued HERE

 

PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES IF I'VE HELPED!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya

 

I have just Egg's response to my CCA request.

 

They have provided an agreement signed April 2004 although the two pages have nothing to link them together.

 

They have also supplied a load of pages which are a printout of their terms and conditions online. The first sentence says:

 

Small Print. Legal information you need to be aware of.

 

Applicable to customers who applied from 01 October 2001

 

Now, is this a non-cancellable, right?

 

It has no default charge info on the sig doc, so that's makes it unenforcable, is that right?

 

Also, are the "terms and conditions" supplied correct? Would it not have to be in the format which was attached to the agreeement as these "online" ones could have been changed.

 

I have just noticed that the second page with my sig on it, I signed it after them.

 

All comments welcome.

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

Hiya

 

I have just Egg's response to my CCA request.

 

THey have provided an agreement signed october 2007 although the two pages have nothing to link them together.

 

They have also supplied a load of pages which are printout of their terms and conditions online. The first sentence says:

 

 

 

Now, is this non-cancellable? It has no default charge info on the sig doc, so that's makes it unenforcable, is that right?

 

Also, are the "terms and conditions" supplied correct? Would it not have to be in the format which was attached to the agreeement as these "online" ones couls have been changed.

 

I have just noticed that the second page with my sig on it, I signed it after them and the first page of the agreement says, "This was sent you on xx April 2004" So, why was it sent ot me 6 moths later? I'm confused. How can the second page have a different date on it?

 

All comments welcome.

 

Is October 2007 just a typo or are they mad

 

dpick

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is October 2007 just a typo or are they mad

 

dpick

 

Sorry, it's a typo!!!

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

Their covering letter makes reference to a copy of the default notice I have requested and to a deed of assignment. It tells me that they have prooduced a screenshot confirming that it was defaulted.

 

Now, this is worrying as I didn't mention anything at all about a defualt notice, nor a deed of assignement - my account has never been defaulted!!!

 

What are they on?

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

Just checked the OFT regs and this agreement has no mention at all of any default charges in the sig document - they are only in the terms and conditions.

 

That makes this agreement unenforcable, even with a court order, doesn't it?

 

Ok, letter being written now!! :)

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

Just checked the OFT regs and this agreement has no mention at all of any default charges in the sig document - they are only in the terms and conditions.

 

That makes this agreement unenforcable, even with a court order, doesn't it?

 

Ok, letter being written now!! :)

 

un1,

 

Can you quote the OFT regs reference and extract please - I'm not doubting you - I happen to need that too.

 

Z

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Default charges are a required term, not a prescribed term - this would make it improperly executed, and open to enforcement with the courts leave

 

See CCR 1983, SI 1553, Schedule 3 (10)

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

un1,

 

Can you quote the OFT regs reference and extract please - I'm not doubting you - I happen to need that too.

 

Z

 

Do you want it quoted or emailed to you mate?

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

Default charges are a required term, not a prescribed term - this would make it improperly executed, and open to enforcement with the courts leave

 

See CCR 1983, SI 1553, Schedule 3 (10)

 

Damn it....have you got a link so I can make sure I check them in future?

 

So, should I write back and advise that I'm not making anymore payments until a Judge has ruled?

 

Also, what about the format of the terms and conditions? They have provided a printout of the online terms and conditions which states: "applicable to agreements after 01 October 2004" surely, it should be a copy of the actual ones that were on the agreement?

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

Damn it....have you got a link so I can make sure I check them in future?

 

So, should I write back and advise that I'm not making anymore payments until a Judge has ruled?

 

Also, what about the format of the terms and conditions? They have provided a printout of the online terms and conditions which states: "applicable to agreements after 01 October 2004" surely, it should be a copy of the actual ones that were on the agreement?

 

This fails the test and must be

78.--(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within

the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor

and payment of a fee of 15 new pence , 1, shall give the debtor a copy of the executed

agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it

 

So, the T&C cannot be current, and they must not only be those issued at the time of the alleged agreement they must also be proven to relate to the agreement. I have issued a default notice to a Creditor using that exact argument, details elsewhere.

 

Z

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

OOH, now the eggy thing is starting to come up to the boil!

 

I will reiterate what I have already stated-

In response to my Egg CCA S78 request, I was sent two pages as the alledged agreement. Now this would be the front and reverse of the doc.

However, I was not sent the full T&C's that were applicable in July 2001.

Interestingly enough, I 'know' that the Egg full T&C's were incorporated into the alledged Egg agreement. Therefore why were the full T&C's not provided?

 

Obviously, as no T&C's have been provided then no Default charges have been provided either, which I understand are a required term.

 

Love AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4970 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...