Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In answer to your questions yes even though it wasn't called that, it was the NTK. Had it been a windscreen ticket you would not have received the NTK until 28 days had elapsed. In earlier times if the warden was present then a windscreen ticket would have been issued. It nows seems that the DVLA and the Courts don't see a problem  with not issuing a ticket when a warden is on site. A period of parking must mean that ther e has to be a start time and a finish time in order for it to be considered a period. A single time does not constitute a period. I am not sure what you mean by saying it could be taken either way.  All they have mentioned is  the incident time which is insufficient. There are times on the photos about one minute apart which do not qualify as the parking period because they are not on the PCN itself. The reason I asked if the were any more photos is that you should be allowed 5 minutes Consideration period for you to read the signs and decide whether you want to accept them and you do that by staying longer than 5 minutes. if  more  do not have photos of your staying there for more than 5 minutes they are stuffed. You cannot say that you left within the 5 minute period if you didn't , but you can ask them, should it get to Court , to provide strict proof that you stayed longer than the statutory time. If they can't do that, case over.
    • I recently bought some trainers from Sports Direct and was unhappy with them and their extortionate delivery and return postage charges. I tweeted about being unhappy, and received a reply from someone claiming to be from Sports Direct asking me to send my order number and email address by pm, so a claim could be raised. Which I (stupidly) did. The account used Sports Direct's name and branding, and a blue tick.  The following day I received a call from "Sports Direct Customer Service", and with a Kenyan number. They asked for details of the issue, and then sent me an email with a request to install an app called Remitly. They provided me with a password to access the app then I saw that it had been setup for me to transfer £100, and I was asked to enter my credit card number so they could "refund" me. I told them I was uncomfortable with this (to say the least), and was just told to ring them back when I did feel comfortable doing it. Ain't never gonna happen.  I just checked my X account, and the account that sent the message asking for my details is gone. I feel like a complete idiot falling for what was a clear scam. But at least I realised before any real damage was done. if you make a complaint about a company on social media, and you get a reply from someone claiming to be from that company and asking for personal details, tread very carefully.   
    • The good news is that their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012  Schedule 4.. First under Section 9 (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; (b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; The PCN does not specify the parking period. AS you rightly say the ANPR times do not include driving to the parking space and then from there back to the exit. And once you include getting children in and out of cars especially if seat belts are involved the time spent parked can be a fair bit less than the ANPR times but still probably nowhere near the time you spent. But that doesn't matter -it's the fact that they failed to comply. Also they failed to ask the keeper to pay the charge.  Their failure means that they cannot now transfer the charge from the diver to the keeper . Only the driver is now liable. As long as UKPA do not know who was driving it will be difficult for them to win in Court as the Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. Particularly as anyone can drive any car if they have the correct insurance. It might be able to get more reasons to contest the PCN if you could get some photos of the signs. both at the entrance and inside the car park. the photos need to be legible and if there are signs that say different things from others that would also be a help.
    • Farage rails and whines about not being allowed on the BBC ... ... but pulls out at the last minute of a BBC Panorama interview special. It was denied it was anything to do with his candidates being outed as misogynists and Putin apologists, or that farage was afraid Nick Robinson might throw some difficult questions at him ... despite farages recent practice at quickly cowering in fear.   It was claimed 'it wasn't in Nigels diary'     Nigel Farage pulls out of BBC interview at last minute amid Hitler row WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK ‘Panorama’ special postponed as Reform UK party faces row over candidate who claimed UK would have been ‘better off’ if it had...   Waaahhhh
    • i'd say put lowells to strict proof of where the payment came from. cant hurt to send SB letter, even if proved not. at least they get your correct address. they'd have to link the old IVA times scale to a payment  these IVA F&F pots (if thats where it came from) most mugs dont even know they are not only taking most of your payments on fees but also creaming money off to supposedly offer F&F's.  funny when the IVA fails or is complete these sums of money in F&F pots never get given back or even mentions... these IVA firm directors esp with regard to knightsbridge and creditfix were fined and struck off more times than Paul Burdell of Link Fame and still managed to continue to scam people.
  • 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 4980 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

Hi m55

 

Is all this cloak and dagger DCA bashing making you just a wee bit paranoid? :o

 

I made some of my very earliest posts in this thread and had more CCA knowledge and experience of court claims than most posters on this thread put together and from long before this site was even thought of!

 

As Lantana has indicated, this forum is public and any sensitive discussions can be kept to PM or email if required.

 

Regards, Pam

 

Welcome to the inquisition.

 

Agreed. Now can we chill out and get focus back onto the battle please.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

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

Pam

 

Can you confirm the information that must be supplied by a lender for an OD?

 

thanks

 

 

Pam i know what has already been established i established it,on here a cuurent account is regulated by the fsa.

This is because their is no credit involved however ther are such things as multi agreements where part of the agreement may fall outside of the cca.

 

Now going back to the cca 1974 any sensible comments.

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

That's brilliant Pam, you've answered my question.

 

My next question is this: Where in the Act/Regs is this information?

 

Hi

 

Quote from OFT FAQs 29/04/05:

 

1.5 Are all bank overdrafts exempt?

 

The s74 determination in respect of bank overdrafts (see Q1.4) applies subject to the following conditions:

• the creditor must inform the OFT in writing of his general intention to enter into such agreements;

• the debtor must be informed, at or before the time an agreement is concluded, of the following:

o the credit limit (if any)

o the annual rate of interest and any charges applicable, and the conditions under which these may be varied

o the procedure for terminating the agreement;

• the above information must be confirmed in writing.

 

I haven't found the exact section of the regs. but will keep looking.

 

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

Hi all you clever people on this thread...Just one question if you forgive me from not wanting to wade through this entire thread again... When do the new regulations come in re DCA's being fined if a complaint is investigated, and which body is doing the fining ?

Just hate every DCA out there

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pam i know what has already been established i established it,on here a cuurent account is regulated by the fsa.

This is because their is no credit involved however ther are such things as multi agreements where part of the agreement may fall outside of the cca.

 

Now going back to the cca 1974 any sensible comments.

Peter

 

Hi

 

Yes, an OD + current account could be classed as a multi-part agreement but the part that is regulated is still exempt from the form and content regs. I don't see how calling it a multi-part agreement could change this exemption.

 

Also, I copied the s74 (4) section from the 1974 CCA as well - so which version are you copying from??

 

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

Hi

 

I have copied s74(4) from my own saved copy of the CCA but you can read this section in the link on this site:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/statutes-library/27535-consumer-credit-act-1974-a.html

 

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

Hi Peter

 

I've just found where you're quoting from - the original version of the CCA - which does include subsection 1(b).

 

This was amended years ago!!

 

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

Just a quick question. When the amendments in The Consumer Credit Act 2006 come into force, will they apply to previous agreements or just to agreements made from now on?

 

sure someone will already have replied - they usually have an effective date in the future - ie for all agreements made after a future date - I remember quickly reading it but whether its mid 2007 or during 2008 - cant remember.... old age :mad:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was aware of that, what the original point was the fines would make them go bankrupt.

 

And it is a fine for letting it go past the calendar month AND for each attempt to collect while in breach (somewhere in the hundreds of the CCA1974)

 

 

m - you been on the pop again??? my interpretation was just the single fine /prison sentance. not for multiple responses - I agree with meagain who seems to know what he/she is talking about - ie is ex-Finance company.

 

thanks

 

Z

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
sure someone will already have replied - they usually have an effective date in the future - ie for all agreements made after a future date - I remember quickly reading it but whether its mid 2007 or during 2008 - cant remember.... old age :mad:

 

April 2007 and another part of the act comes into force in 2008

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Peter

 

I've just found where you're quoting from - the original version of the CCA - which does include subsection 1(b).

 

This was amended years ago!!

 

Regards, Pam

so i am

 

I will have to erase my old files oh well it was only a thought.

 

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

Hi

 

Perhaps if several members who have the same issues with each particular lender where to coordinate a collective complaint, they might take it more seriously. :|

 

Regards, Pam

 

I have a big issue with the regulators - both ICO and TS in their inability to meet their obligations and police effectively the law.

I will be starting new threads soon addressed to each so that they can freely comment and respond to questions and criticism.

Some of the questions I have are - who are they accountable to, how do they measure their effectiveness, what process do they follow in objectively responding to an individual complaint against a CCP and what remedy should that person expect from their actions.

I could go on - that is why I think we need to setup a thread and then invite the regulator to respond to questions on the thread...

 

comments???

 

Z

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zubo, great idea about ICO and TS threads. Regulators are a little on the back foot just now following the premium rate TV phone scandal (ICSTIS).

 

They clearly aren't getting the job done. It's increasingly becoming our role to 'watch the watchers'

 

Hooray, I've just become a 'Classic Account' customer!

 

Regards

 

Lantana

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Would someone be so kind as to pm me a copy of the 1983 Copies of Agreements etc regulations or could it be put into the library section?

 

I am dealing with several sets of folks and like quoting chapter and verse in response to lies/disinformation - delete as appripriate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
Zubo, great idea about ICO and TS threads. Regulators are a little on the back foot just now following the premium rate TV phone scandal (ICSTIS).

 

They clearly aren't getting the job done. It's increasingly becoming our role to 'watch the watchers'

 

Hooray, I've just become a 'Classic Account' customer!

 

Regards

 

Lantana

 

Now I wonder if they are going to come down on the DCA'S who all use premium rate numbers which is against the OFT guidelines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe
Oh my god! it's taken me nearly 5 days to read this bleedin thread !

 

 

my question tho since i have seen no mention on here (sorry if i have missed it frazzled brain) on the application form they sent my huband has put his date of birth as 3 days before he dated and signed the form making him 3 days old when he applied lol

 

is this worth pointing out to them or does this not have any baring on the matter at all??

 

 

Don't point it out them, they are lending to minors now. A fellow got off a speeding ticket on that same point. They entered the wrong date of birth, which made 12 hours old when he committed the offence. he got a statement from his mother regarding where he was at the time they claimed he committed the offence. So three days old, what a talented child being able to read write and talk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't point it out them, they are lending to minors now. A fellow got off a speeding ticket on that same point. They entered the wrong date of birth, which made 12 hours old when he committed the offence. he got a statement from his mother regarding where he was at the time they claimed he committed the offence. So three days old, what a talented child being able to read write and talk.

 

Is this for real?? :D

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

Don't point it out them, they are lending to minors now. A fellow got off a speeding ticket on that same point. They entered the wrong date of birth, which made 12 hours old when he committed the offence. he got a statement from his mother regarding where he was at the time they claimed he committed the offence. So three days old, what a talented child being able to read write and talk.

 

 

that is funny :D

 

A few years ago my youngest son got a letter saying he'd not paid enough NI contributions and a bill saying he could pay it "voluntarily" - he was still at school and not even got a NI number etc.. as he was way too young!! How the devil letters like this even get printed and sent to people I shall never know!! Kind of knocks the 'trust' out of us deosn't it? To think these clowns are responsible for our future pensions etc.. and they bill children?

 

It's always been a standing joke of my sons when he save his money up -he says "it's for my pension - as the Gov't are gonna muck up again" he laughs :D

 

But it's actually sad to think they had a NI number against his name etc.. on this letter - totally different number to his real NI - so goodness only knows where the number they billed him with came from!! :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was it this thread that Robert Udy of Capital One has been mentioned? It has just struck me that as they are based in Nottingham, it is clearly Robin Hood's alter ego - robs from the poor to give to the rich!

 

If you have always read the name as 'you-di' then you won't get the joke, you have to pronounce it like a very short udder. Sorry, if you have to explain a joke it isn't a good one. I'll get me coat!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe

I found the original paperwork titled Cashcard Account Agreement, when we opened our current account but for the life of me I cannot find the conditions that is supposed to be with it, and on the Agreement is no where which states they can share our information with CRA's or anyone else; only within the Group.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been looking at this the last few days in my spare time after seeing the s85. I still cant find anything relevant to it.

 

AFAIK the ability to charge interest would be stated in the agreement. And under what circumstance. THe right to have interest reclaimed from the breach under an agreement would have to be taken up under each case from that agreement generally headed Responsibilities Under This Contract etc. Normally it only deals with legal fees etc.

 

The point of non-compliance on subsequent card issues with s85 is that there is NO agreement so the creditor cannot claim any payment

Link to post
Share on other sites

No Professor Fate tonight, interesting.

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an extention of the input from Professor Fate and the replies therto.

 

If this person is MIB it does matter because this thread is there to argue around the CCA & give advice to those who are sticking their toe in the water. The mention of Stautory Demand and the 'B' word is enough to put aload of people off, who wouldn't be, if they are just starting to establish their rights.

 

For those who may have been affected by this persons input, please please Google 'stautory demand', the information that you gain by that cursory inquiry and the instructions that you gain should be nough to put your mind at rest. Remeber a Stat demand is just as dangerous to the filer as it is to the defendant if the former hasn't got all his facts right.

 

As for clicky, to some extent this thread is, its IS very exclusive because the arguments have developed and are at times very technical, unless you take the time to read over 200 pages. However, that doesn't make it any the more less informative.

 

As reagrds PF, he obviously has a IP address it may be interesting to see how that compares with the other 'commando raids on our gang'.

 

Kind regards,

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4980 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...