Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'd say concern about the landfill operator is absolutely necessary. I think the word they could mean is 'embarrassing'.
    • Just to cover yourself, you should write them a letter in response telling them that you are rejecting their offer. That they know full well that their insurance is an attempt to limit or exclude liability contrary to section 57 Consumer rights act and is a secondary contract contrary to section 72.  By the way was the offer made without prejudice or in confidence or anything? Maybe you could post up their offer here please
    • "Dear HR, I refer to my correspondence of *date* in which I challenged xxx, copy attached. Clearly this was a grievance, and yet does not seem to have been heard under the grievance procedure. I am exceptionally dismayed that this 'review'. which never took place, seems to be being used as a criteria in redundancy selection proceedings. As this is time critical, please advise asap."            
    • Just to update, received a revised offer of £75 from P2G after they got my LOC last Friday. They stated that because it was not insured this would be their final offer. Looks like we are going to court.
    • and speaking of cover-ups .. from the environment agency with collusion/negligence  from the ICO   Environment Agency chief admits regulator buries freedom of information requests Speaking at the UK River Summit, Philip Duffy said officials do not want to reveal the true ‘embarrassing’ environmental picture ICO - waffle Environment Agency chief admits regulator buries freedom of information requests | Environment Agency | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Speaking at the UK River Summit, Philip Duffy said officials do not want to reveal the true ‘embarrassing’ environmental picture   Environment Agency ‘hiding’ report into Lancashire landfill making locals ill Exclusive The agency has refused to share details of how a landfill operator is breaching its permit because it could 'potentially cause unnecessary concern'    Environment Agency ‘hiding’ report into Lancashire landfill making locals ill INEWS.CO.UK The agency has refused to share details of how a landfill operator is breaching its permit because it could 'potentially cause unnecessary...  
  • 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

Arrows and old A+L Keyway Account - poor CCA return?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4505 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 have a very old debt (1995) originally with A&L currently with Arrow Global/Rockwell. I paid off this debt until May 2009 through a CCCS DMP and it has been passed through several DCAs. At that point I stopped paying.

 

It it currently with Arrow Global and being managed by Rockwell. I was sent a letter by Fenton Cooper on their behalf.

 

I recently sent a CCS request and have been sent in response a very indistinct and blurred photocopy of what looks like my original agreement. The photocopy has reduced the pages which were originally A4 to about A5 size. This was supplied by Santander (my current bank)

 

Even with a very strong magnifying glass it is impossible to read the terms and conditions of this document to ascertain whether these contain the prescribed terms. This is because the copy is poor, dark and blurred. I am willing to post this online but doubt that it would serve any useful purpose for experienced members to look at.

 

My reaction is to write back to the sender and tell them that this document is unacceptable. I assume that a "true copy" would be something that was the same size as the original document and a legible copy. This would certainly not be acceptable to a court.

 

Before I do this advice would be valued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have right send the the account in dispute letter

from the CAG library and clearly state they are in breach

of CCA 1974 as the agreement is ilegible.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes thats what I assumed! What I have appears to be a "photocopy of a photocopy" from A&L's dead records.

 

I am also in doubt as to whether this is even the correct agreement. The default was concerning an A&L credit card but what I can read of this document refers to a "Keyway" account. This as I recall is a very old type of A&L account which eventually in the course of time became simply an ordinary current account. Indeed I still have this account! So I am pretty sure its the wrong document entirely.

 

Perhaps there are some members with aged A&L accounts/experience who can recall what a "Keyway" account was.

 

I will send the "account in dispute" letter in response. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Arrows and old A+L Keyway Account - poor CCA return?
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...