Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   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? Credit Card   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 ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   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. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   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? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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 4933 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

I'm paying no bugger & it's getting quite funny. They keep asking for money.....nay pleading more like & I keep hitting them with SAR & CCA demands & letters demanding that they comply with their legal responsibilities & I am now getting letters from either the creditor, their lawyers or their DCA's most of which appear to have crossed in the post

 

I always give them a litany of events pointing out their failures & it's clear that not always is it the same person dealing with the matter or that they read their file as each time they have to go back to the drawing board......I've become quite a dab hand at cut & paste

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

hello tamadus, why did you resume payments to lloyds, I just stopped payment to the people who have charged the MIG I believe this has been missold after querying it here, and will be challenging, but sitll trying to sort out the paperwork, just cannot understand descriptions and so on, they used to turn up at my doorstep and ring me from the doorstep over and over again if I refused to speak to them , then they wrote to me and said they would continue to do so until I spoke to them, I was terrified, now they have started ringing again. I tried writing to complain but it made no difference, by the way, anyone, I have a friend who is being rang at work continually, is this allowed?

 

Maybelline I resumed payments as they did send enough to partially satisfy my CCA request and as I am such a nice guy I decided to offer a GOGW ;) while I sorted out the axact staus of the rest of the paperwork. plus I lodged a claim for unlawful charges against them.

 

Unfortunately they have totally ignored all my letters concerning the agreement and their failings. Plus I am going to have to issue proceedings for the charges. I was hoping that my GOGW would actually result in them playing the game in a decent manner. Ah well I can live in hope and die in despair lol.

 

As they just don't seem capable or to want to explain their misgivings then it's time to get tough with them again.

 

TS have already been informed of their harrassing phone calls which have made my life a misery ;) (actually I am missing them after a week lol). I am investigating a Data Protection Act breach in passing my data to their call centre in India. ( that is something they are assuming permission for, as the DPA barely existed when this alleged 'agreement' was started, certainly I had no idea then that they would move their staff to a country outside of the UK and Europe. In addition reading the application form I only gave permission for them to check information in relation to the application, and I think thats somewhat different to disclosing information to any other third party such as a DCA.

 

Strange but I left this one towards the end of my list as I actually expected it to be a simple matter. Trust a bank to make the simple into the impossible lol

 

Oh and they are way out of order phoning your friend at work. Tell them to refuse any security questions and send a cease and desist letter. If they ignore it then he/she should report them to TS.

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm paying no bugger & it's getting quite funny. They keep asking for money.....nay pleading more like & I keep hitting them with S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) & CCA demands & letters demanding that they comply with their legal responsibilities & I am now getting letters from either the creditor, their lawyers or their DCA's most of which appear to have crossed in the post

 

I always give them a litany of events pointing out their failures & it's clear that not always is it the same person dealing with the matter or that they read their file as each time they have to go back to the drawing board......I've become quite a dab hand at cut & paste

 

Jon, I am now getting to the same stage of refusing payment to move things along. They have the choice then of either complying, declaring the alleged debt non-existant, or showing up in a court and explaining their actions and non-compliance to a Judge. My Barclaycard case has been ongoing since June and GE Money for a similar amount of time. Asset Link (the DCA for GE) have point blank refused to send a copy of the deed of assignment, and simply waffel about how I would have been informed of default notices. Strange how I haven't had any default notice on any of the 3 accounts, and they all got passed over to Asset Link just after I raised issues on them. If they choose to deny me my LEGAL rights then I choose to deny them payment.

 

Guess I will be paying a few visits to my local court house this year :D

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks Tamadus, this is where I am struggling, sorting out what they have and have not complied with under what section of what act. I have also noticed that 'under the consumer credit act 1974 the lender should have given you a copy of the agreement at least seven days ago to allow you time to consider whether to go ahead. if he did not, the agreement cannot be enforced without a court order' this certainly did not happen in my case but how can one prove this I wonder?

 

back to suspending payment - I understand if they are in breach then suspending payments until they provide the correct info is okay, is it also acceptable to suspend payment while the account charges are in dispute, I think this is the case?

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator

Taken from the OFT Website

 

NOTES

1. Consumer Direct is a telephone and online consumer advice service funded by government and managed by the Office of Fair Trading. It offers consumers clear, practical and impartial advice and information.

2. All consumer credit debt collectors operating in the UK must hold a Consumer Credit Licence and adhere to the guidelines set out by the OFT Debt Collection Guidance 2003. The OFT consider it to be unfair business practice to communicate, in whatever form, with consumers in an unclear, inaccurate or misleading manner including asking or instructing debtors to make contact on premium rate telephone numbers.

3. Only a court can decide whether a contract exists and whether a business is liable to pay a debt. If a claim is issued against an individual, that individual will have a fixed time period in which to respond by either disputing or admitting all or part of the claim. A disputed debt can only be enforced by a court. Only a court can instruct bailiffs. Debt collectors are not bailiffs and cannot attempt to collect payment by taking direct action, such as seizing goods.

 

Your Rights against Creditors from Debt Questions

 

 

Communication

2.1 It is unfair to communicate, in whatever form, with consumers in an unclear, inaccurate

or misleading manner.

2.2 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. use of official looking documents intended or likely to mislead

debtors as to their status, e.g. documents made to resemble court

claims.

b. leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it

creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors' lack of

knowledge

c. those contacting debtors not making clear who they are, who they work for,

what their role is, what the purpose of the contact is

d. unnecessary and unhelpful use of legal and technical language,

e.g. use of Latin phrases

e. failing to provide debtors or creditors with information on status of debts, e.g.

not providing requested balance statements when reasonably requested

f. contacting debtors at unreasonable times

g. ignoring or disregarding debtors' legitimate wishes in respect of when and

where to contact them, e.g. shift workers who ask not to be telephoned

during certain times of the day

h. asking or instructing debtors to make contact on premium rate

telephone numbers

 

Tam: How about a little campaign to revoke some CCL's.

 

JC: I like your style.I tend to tell them to "bugger off"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
Tam, we have anaonymous callers withheld from our phone and they still try to call for my daughter, but you get a number to call them back.

 

Sorry for butting in tide but if there 0870 No's they are breaching the OFT guidelines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tam, we have anaonymous callers withheld from our phone and they still try to call for my daughter, but you get a number to call them back.

 

These are definite caller witheld their number,

 

Also had a text yesterday asking me to call some 0870 number (which is never going to happen) also if anyone recognises 01273 743574 it would help

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

maybeline

you don't to & can't 'prove' a negative They have to prove they sent it

 

Tide Turner

Consumer Direct often give misleading & downright wrong info as some here can attest to.

 

Terminator

I'm always polite. I completely ignore their requests/demands & counter with my own & it's clear I ain't dealing with the sharpest tools in the box or they can't be bothered......too complicated you see doh!

 

They get into a blue funk.........I don't know how many letters I've got stating "we are looking into your complaints" etc etc.

 

I often suggest, politely of course, that they might like to coordinate their responses if for no other reason than to save paper thereby making a real contribution to saving the planet........but they never respond to that comment!

 

It's called playing them at their own game

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tam you can get "choose to refuse" which means you can block not only anonmyous callers but also a further 10 numbers of your choice.

 

When you put their number into the system & if they are using 0807 or 0845 none geographical number you get their normal landline number given back to you on the automated system

 

As Terminator says 0870 numbers are considered premuim rate & should not be used. To do so is a breach of the OFT guidelines

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator

I'm going to start asking for their CCL's or do's anyone have a link where I can check if they are licenced or not.It could be a very good week with an enormous "turd" hitting the fan. :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Terminator - I have just read through Your Rights Against Creditors - 'Cfeditors must not suggest to a debtor to either sell a property or to take out furtherborrowing in order to pay off the debt to that creditor. For a creditor to request you borrow more money to pay them of is basically requesting you to commit fraud as you are taking oncredit knowing you cannot pay the debt back.' also 'ifa debtor queries a debt, and money that is owed, it is unfair for the creditor to continue with recovery proceedings during the time the debtis being disputed.' well I never!

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

not wishing to hijack this thread, but I have a disputed Credit agreement going back to Dec 2000. It stated an amount, then (mis)said 6 monthly payments after 36 months (deferred credit) shold have really been 36 monthly payments after 6months. i was pursued by the DCA for three years and forced to pay 12 installments when I noticed the anomaly. when it was pointed out, they backed off. But defaulted me (have a thread, but no one talking to me...:sad: ), and checking my Credit ref file see its on until 2008! I have all paperwork and have written asking them poitely to back off and delete the default, and refund the letter fees they've imposed, and the "overpayment under the terms of payment they stipulated" - do you think I have some sort of case?

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon,

 

Don't get me wrong I actually enjoy the conversations now when they phone me :D I take great pleasure in wrapping them up in the legalities they clearly do not understand, just that they have a nasty habit of calling just as I step into the shower or sit down to eat dinner. (checks my house for hidden CCTV cameras). Most of the time they hang up on me :D

 

Terminator,

 

I am all in agreement for getting a few CCL licences revoked. GE Money and Asset Link come immediately to mind :) closely followed by a few others.

 

I'll PM my phone number to you later today then we can discuse a line of attack.

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As 01273 is Brighton, you can bet your bottom dollar it's either LTSB Collections, or your friend and theirs, SC&M.:)

 

Elsinore

 

Then that one is definitely Lloyds TSB :)

 

now where is 01562?

 

 

hmmm it seems to be a worcestershire number. Now I wonder who that is

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then that one is definitely Lloyds TSB :)

 

now where is 01562?

 

 

 

Thatll be Kettering then

 

My mistake...Kidderminster!!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read throught the

FAQ's and when your ready, start a thread in your banks forum to keep us all updated!

If the information I have provided is useful, please click the scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can check the public register for free for a general check but a fee is payable for more information, telephone 020 7211 8608. sorry cannot do the link but is on OFT website.

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator

I've just found an interesting case that went to the House of Lords which proves that the OFT has no backbone

 

House of Lords - Director General of Fair Trading V First National Bank

 

Amazingly this goe's back over 5 years and it mentions on numerous occasions about "unfair terms".In my opinion if there is an unfair term in an agreement then that term should be removed.If not when a dispute arises it has to make the agreement "unenforceable" so looking at the wider picture all agreements post 1999 are technically unenforceable as the unfair terms have not been removed.Also I beleive that agreements have been signed on a "false pretence" as the information provided is sparse.You can't expect a consumer to read the CCA before signing an agreement(not within 7days as the money men expect you to) heck it took me 3 weeks to read it and digest the interpretation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NO Uni

That is not what i meant

(4) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

 

(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the

agreement;

 

The default no longer exists once the agreement has been produced so legally they can pusrue the debt,

However if they do and the have exceded the 40 odd days rquired then they are at risk of being prosecuted for none complience within the terms of the cca,with the subsequent fines and possible imprisonment that may follow,so whether they would is unlikely although legally they could.

 

Bestr regards

Peter

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

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

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4933 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...