Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • 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

How to remove a lender's continuous payment authority


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3941 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

The payday loan firms will say this is not possible, but it is - in accordance with Regulation 55 of The Payment Services Regulations 2009:

 

55.—(1) A payment transaction is to be regarded as having been authorised by the payer for the purposes of this Part only if the payer has given its consent to—

 

(a)the execution of the payment transaction; or .

(b)the execution of a series of payment transactions of which that payment transaction forms part. .

(2) Such consent—

 

(a)may be given before or, if agreed between the payer and its payment service provider, after the execution of the payment transaction; and .

(b)must be given in the form, and in accordance with the procedure, agreed between the payer and its payment service provider. .

(3) The payer may withdraw its consent to a payment transaction at any time before the point at which the payment order can no longer be revoked under regulation 67.

 

(4) Subject to regulation 67(3) to (5), the payer may withdraw its consent to the execution of a series of payment transactions at any time with the effect that any future payment transactions are not regarded as authorised for the purposes of this Part.

 

This means that you can simply ask your bank to refuse the payments, it is also good practice to let the lender know too.

 

So, if you would like your creditor to stop trying to take a payment all you need to do, in theory, is to inform them that you remove their authority. It's probably better to do this in writing and via recorded delivery - if possible.

 

You can learn more about your rights via the following FSA guide:

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/pubs/consumer_info/know_your_rights_guide.pdf

 

And

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/consumer_info/know_your_rights_payments.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 264
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Cancelling a regular card payment

 

When you give your credit or debit card details to a company and authorise them to take regular payments from your account, such as for a gym membership or magazine subscription, it is known as a ‘recurring transaction’ or ‘continuous payment authority’.

 

These are often confused with direct debits, but do not offer the same guarantee if the amount or date of the payment changes.

 

In most cases, regular payments can be cancelled by telling the company taking the payments.

 

However, you have the right to cancel them directly with your bank or card issuer by telling

it that you have stopped permission for the payments. Your bank or card issuer must then stop them – it has no right to insist that you agree this first with the company taking the payments.

Be aware, though, that you will still be responsible for paying any money that you owe.

Page 15: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/pubs/co...ghts_guide.pdf

 

 

 

Consumer Focus submission to Payments Council regarding continuous payment authorities:

 

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) advice, as set out in its Know Your Rights booklet, is that if the bank makes a payment after the consumer has cancelled the CPA, then it will be an unauthorised transaction and therefore (as per the Payment Services Regulations 2009) the consumer will be entitled to an immediate refund from the bank. We doubt that many consumers are aware of their rights in this situation. Furthermore, we are concerned that this is not how banks have been consistently dealing with this problem, as illustrated with the issue of cancelled CPAs being charged to new cards (referred to above).

Edited by Michael Browne
Link to post
Share on other sites

OFT play catch up

 

The OFT previously maintained that:

Unlike a direct debit, however, a continuous-payment authority is not covered by any bank guarantee and can only be cancelled by the business that holds the authority. Consumers often find this surprising. They generally assume the bank or credit card provider will ultimately be responsible for any overpayments

 

 

They have now launched a suplementary consultation on CPA's

 

Revised OFT guidance on debt collection (OFT664Rev) was published in October 2011.

Following representations received, the OFT has decided to undertake a supplementary consultation on its position on use of 'continuous payment authority' as a means of recovering monies owed in respect of consumer credit related debts as set out in paragraph 3.9m of that document.

 

We are also taking this opportunity to consult on the specific practice of debiting monies from an account in the absence of having the express authority to do so (including under circumstances in which the lender may have the authority, under a continuous payment authority or otherwise, to recover monies from another account(s)). This practice is dealt with in what could, subject to consultation, become a new paragraph 3.9n of the Guidance. This would replace what is currently the third bullet point of paragraph 3.9m in the revised Debt Collection Guidance.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/OFTwork/consul...supplementary/

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Can I just check - are you saying that you can withdraw authority even if you owe the company money? I'm having horrendous problems with a payday loans company, with whom I have been trying to come to terms, but who are refusing to negotiate. I want if possible to keep my current account open (although I have moved my pay cheque to another account), but this is proving difficult as any money I pay into the account is snatched immediately by these sharks.

 

I have withdrawn permission via email and have forwarded it on to my bank. They have said that they can dispute transactions, but didn't appear to hold out much hope either to refund payments or to stop the transactions happening. I do want to pay the company off, although I'm disputing the total debt - but I want to do it in such a way as is fair to everyone and that doesn't bankrupt me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

iv just got of the phone to my bank to try and cancel a continuous payment and they were most unhelpfull basicaly said i was wrong and they couldnt cancel a payment and that was law ? he went on to say it was because its a financial service and they wernt allowed to get involved ?

is the above post valid? anyone know my next step if the bank isnt playing ball ?

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. Has anyone had any success with this?

 

I followed the instructions and told my bank I had withdrawn consent for a payday company to take money from my account using continuous payment authority and they said in reply I could not do that.

 

Specifically they said: "When you enter into an agreement with a company the only way to cancel the payment is to cancel the agreement. If you do not cancel the agreement the company will still have a legal right to collect funds from your account which the bank cannot stop."

 

What do I do now? I've queried it again - but what happens if they won't budge? :-x

thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I should print off this - send it to them and draw their attention to Page 15 http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/pubs/consumer_info/know_your_rights_guide.pdf

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Darren,

 

I have had the same problem with the Halifax and have quoted them the FSA guidlines verbatim but they still won't budge. I do think the Halifax, all banks, know the FSA guidlines but bascially don't give a damn. It is my humble opinion that they expect 99.9% of customers to go away and not take their complaint any further.

 

You need to make and official complaint to your bank in writing, as I have done, if they still refuse to co-operate then you can take your complaint to the FOS. I am currently awaiting their response (Halifax) to my complaint about their refusal to cancel my PDL CPAs. More recently, they have not sent me a new debit card so I think they don't want my custom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tom - please let me/us know how you get on. The weirdest thing is that this clause - matching the FSA ruling - is in Santander's own revised terms & conditions - it just seems no-one has told the staff...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure you are right. I have spoken to the halifax, including a supervisor, on numerous occasions and sense that it is 'NEW' policy. Whether this is driven by lots of people with PDLs ringing them to stop CPAs or whether its because the Halifax have adopted Lloyds policy I am not too sure. I can say that the Halifax until recently had a system that allowed their customer service staff to implement or initiate CPA charge backs but this avenue has been removed! In other words, even if the person you speak too agrees with what you say there is nothing they can do other than pass your complaint onto their customer relations/complaints department.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sequenci

 

I appreciate and thank you for highlighting current law surrounding CPAs as your post has lead me and others to beaware of it.

 

However, my concern is that some banks are not following the law and infact seem to be clearly flaunting it. I have asked the Halifax to stop these CPAs and they have refused, and have subsequently allowed numerous payments, totalling £230.00, to be taken from my partners account. So yes, while the law is clear to see, I also want to highlight and warn people that quoting the law to some banks may not be enough to protect them from PDLs taking unauthorised CPAs. I personally cannot currently afford or risk anymore PDLs to continue to dip into my account at will. With this, I suggest people divert there funds to another bank account or simply get a new account with another bank until such time that unco-operating banks start recognising and implementing the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know they flout it. All the time. It's massively frustrating. The only thing that can sort this mess out is mass complaints via the FOS. I totally agree that setting up a 'safe' account should be undertaken ASAP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi Tomtom - it is incredibly frustrating, yes. I'm not sure what's going on at Santander as it is spelt out in their current account terms and conditions (http://products.santander.co.uk/bankaccounts/legaldetails.html) that customers can cancel CPAs. It says:

 

If you are stopping a recurring debit card transaction (that is, a continuous payment

transaction on your debit card initiated by a payee and authorising us to make payments)

you must also tell the payee. You should provide us with a copy of any notice of withdrawal of consent given to the payee. We will stop the payment provided that we receive notice from you no later than close of business on the working day prior to the date the payment was due to be made.

 

But when I try and do it they say there's no such policy. I've queried it again. We'll see.

 

And sequenci - I understand about setting up another bank account / moving wages etc. But isn't that irrelevant if a payday lender uses a CPA to take their payment?

 

The bank will pay out to the payday firm regardless of whether there is or isn't any money in your account, in my experience. So even if I move my wages elsewhere, I'll still have a negative balance plus overdraft charges in my old account... :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

And sequenci - I understand about setting up another bank account / moving wages etc. But isn't that irrelevant if a payday lender uses a CPA to take their payment?

 

PErhaps not. If the funds are no longer in the account the lender may find that their card payment gets declined.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly I have experience of having payments taken out by payday lenders even when i have deliberately emptied my account :( The bank just honours the payments and puts me in an unauthorised overdraft.

 

I feel totally stuck. I spoke to my bank who again denied any knowledge of their own terms and conditions. They said the only way of stopping a payday loan payment would be to have my debit card blocked.

 

That cannot be right can it? I am prepared to do that, but I'm afraid it would be a waste of time, and that the payday loan company will still just take all the money anyway via the continuous payment authority?

 

What a nightmare. I don't know how to convince my bank to stick to the law / their own terms.

 

And I also really don't understand how anyone ever defaults on a payday loan! This seems to be a watertight way for payday lenders to raid your account, even if it is empty.... :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Blocking' debit card is awful - it doesn't allow any transactions out

 

This when having a basic account comes in best, really I just think current accounts are set for this type of misery and hardship

I've had basic accounts for a couple of years now and it only allows out what you have in there as cleared funds

http://moneyfacts.co.uk/compare/banking/basic-bank-accounts/

 

Many of the basic accounts give free weekly text messages on balances automatically, in the payday loan default situation I found change of bank was the most appropriate solution

 

There are letters that can be found on the forum that will now help you revoke permission for banks to allow payments out, could give that a whirl

Happy to share my experience but for your own protection, please check and double check what myself and other Caggers inform

...

“Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence.”

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi - thanks. I have tried everything with my bank to cancel these payments - they refuse. They say they are normal card payments, not CPAs. And I can't close the account in time.

 

I give up. Don't know what to do. If I empty my account to try and stop the loan company taking payment, and so the bank blocks the payment, won't the bank then charge me £20 for a failed transaction?

 

And if the payday company keeps trying to take payments all morning, as they often do, isn't that £20 for every failed transaction?

 

argh :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you sent a letter to the bank telling them not to make payments to that company ? they must follow your instructions

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3941 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...