Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Probably to do with the Creditor accepting the reduced payments claim as part of the IVA. - Thats my guess anyway.  As for the mount outstanding... 60k is incredible and im pretty sure a DRO wouldnt cover that much even after the new legislation.    For you @Alfy - Please stay headstrong and stop worrying. My viewpoint on debt with debt collectors is simple. You are a figure on a spreadsheet loaded into a database for them to run a collection cycle through.  They dont care about emotions or your situation, they just care about paying off their shareholders and trying to turn a profit.  They use varying tactics to increase the pressure on you to the point where you will break. People then fall for this an either cave in to DCAs before doing their own due diligence on the debts that are purchased or turn to IVAs like you have.    They are better ways to handle this and Im glad you feel better after a good nights sleep - I hope you can keep it up. 
    • Good afternoon,    I am writing in reference to the retail dispute number ****, between myself and Newton Autos concerning the sale of a Toyota Avensis which has been found to have serious mechanical faults.    As explained previously the car was found to be faulty just six days after purchase. The car had numerous fault codes that appeared on the dash board and went into limp mode. This required assistance from the AA and this evidence has already been provided. The car continues to exhibit these faults and has been diagnosed as having faults with the fuel injectors which will require major mechanical investigation and repairs.    Newton Autos did not make me aware of any faults upon purchase of the vehicle and sold it as being in good condition.    Newton Autos have also refused to honour their responsibilities under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires them to refund the customer if the goods are found to be faulty and not fit for purpose within 30 days of purchase.    Newton Autos also refused to accept my rejection of the vehicle and refused to refund the car and accept the return of the vehicle.    It is clear to me that the car is not fit for purpose as these mechanical faults occurred so soon after purchase and have been shown to be present by both the AA and an independent mechanic.   Kind regards
    • Commercial Landlords are legally allowed to sue for early cancellation of the lease. You can only surrender your lease if your landlord agrees to your doing so. They are under no obligation even to consider your request and are entitled to refuse. You cannot use this as an excuse not to pay your rent. Your landlord is most likely to agree to your surrendering the lease if they want the property back in order to redevelop it, or if they wants to rent it to what they regards as a better tenant or at a higher rent. There are two types of surrender: Express surrender in writing. This is a written document which sets out the terms of the surrender. Implied surrender by conduct. (applies to your position) You can move out of the property you leased, simply hand your keys back and the lease will come to an end, but only if the landlord agrees to accept your surrender. Many tenants have thought they can simply post the keys through the landlord's letter box and the lease is ended. This is not true and without a document from the landlord, not only do you not know if the landlord has accepted the surrender, you also do not know on what basis they have accepted and could find they sue you for rent arrears, service charge arrears, damage to the property and compensation for your attempt to leave the property without the landlord's agreement. Unless you are absolutely certain that the landlord is agreeable to your departure, you should not attempt to imply a surrender by relying on your and the landlord's conduct.  
    • I had to deal with these last year worst DCA I have ever dealt with. Just wait for the constant threats of CCJ and how you'll lose in court and how they won't do mediation and they want the judge to question you with a load of "BIG" words to boot with the letter. My case was struck out in the end, stupidity on their part as I admitted to owing the debt in the end going through the court process was just a formality as they wouldn't let it drop despite me admitting the debt regardless. They didn't send the last part of the court paper work in so it ended up being struck out     .
    • Well, that's it then. Clear proof of the rubbish cameras. Clear proof of double dipping. G24 won't be getting a penny. Belt & braces, I would write to the address LFI has found, include the evidence of double dipping, and ask Fraser Group to call their dogs off.
  • 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

SPML / Capstone charges reclaim?


mustard7
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3698 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

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ok, so I have now had a response.

Though it is a standard 'we acknowledge your letter blah blah blah'

They state that they will investigate my complaint and get back to me within 4 weeks.

Question is.. Do I sit back and wait 4 weeks for them to send me a letter saying they think all the charges are fair?

Or, do I take the next step seeing as I originally only gave them 2 weeks to respond in full?

Talking if next steps... What would that be?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question. I will need to decide the same thing when I probably get the same standard letter. Even if it drags I think eventually I would follow up with court, so they would only be delaying the inevitable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I got my reply letter yesterday, also giving 4 weeks to "investigate" which they say is their procedure. I think I'm just going to to run with it until it gets to the court. Have you decided what to do, mustard7?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I decided that I was going to pursue SPML as they were the ones that I took the loan out with. The address above is a point of contact they gave me some years ago with a statement, so hence why I used it. Never the less, they received it and got all my information that was requested in my SAR back to me in under a month! The correspondence I have received from them has been headed from 'Ascenden', though.

I make you right Joy, as long as you get what you have requested and in full, then who cares!

All the best,

Phil

 

Not wishing to hijack your thread but I am currently assisting a good friend with her claim of PPI and unfair charges for a mortgage she had through LloydsTSB but was recently advised by them that she should send SAR to SPML and the address they gave her was in Prospect House, Lakeview, Eastfield, Scarborough!!! She enclosed Postal order but hasn't received even an acknowledgement from these creeps.

Any ideas?

Appreciate your help.

Santander PPI X 2 **WON** claims on behalf of son (Oct 2010/ Mar 2011)

Citicard O/H (PPI) - **WON** Compound Interest Dec 2011

Citicard O/H (Charges) Bailiffs sent in August 2012

Barclaycard - **WON** Compound Interest Oct 2011

Monument - account information being sought for OH

Citicard - self - N1 submitted August 2012

Barclaycard - self - **WON** damages for non disclosure/information now rec'd. Aug 2012

Barclaycard - relation - Failed SAR sent 29/09/11

Halifax SAR sent 18/08/2011 for relation

LTSB - SAR sent 09/08/2011 for friend

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi joyjoy,

No, I'm going to send a letter before action letter off next week.

I'm on half term so have plenty of time to sort it.

How about you?

 

I'm almost sure that when Ascendon do reply (which will be longer than their 4 week they say it will take) they will just send out a standard letter saying that the charges are fair and were in the terms and conditions etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're probably right. Where is the letter before action so I can have a look too? I sometimes find it hard to find these things on the site.

 

Thank you.

 

I found this on the web xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwhich apparently is taken from this site. However, can't see it on the site. I'm going to fiddle around with it and send it off. Not sure about time frames though as I'll be away from home soon till middle of July.

Edited by MARTIN3030
Link to post
Share on other sites

You wont find it, as its a very old temp and not even suitable now following the Supreme Court ruling.

I am editing out the link since we dont want further confusion.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You wont find it, as its a very old temp and not even suitable now following the Supreme Court ruling.

I am editing out the link since we dont want further confusion.

 

Fair enough, but not being an expert on these things it's hard to know where to turn for advice sometimes. Guess I'll have to find an up to date template elsewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the LBA for either CC or bank a/c's will do

 

jut adapt it.

 

its HASN'T got to be a specific format.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just a quick update really.Recieved a letter from Ascendon the other day saying that my complaint is taking a little longer than expected to resolve and that I will recieve a response by the beginning of July.Have you heard anything more Joyjoy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Update!!!!!!

 

I have just recieved a response from Ascendon, the particulars of which are set out below.

As predicted and expected they have said that there charges (on the whole) were applied fairly and correctly, though they have offered me £140

to be returned to me. A huge way short of what my calculations came too.

 

- Firstly, they state that 'In accordance with the statute of limitations, it is not considered appropriate to consider and fees applied to the account over six years ago. They have therefore only provided details for fees applied within the last 6 years'

 

- Unpaid direct debit fees of £25 were applied correctly

 

- Arrears management fees of £50 were applied correctly (there were many of these applied)

 

- Litigation fee of £100 was applied correctly

 

- Early repayment statement fee of £15 was applied correctly

(This was charged 5 times in 2 years - Not once did I ask for it)

 

- Administration fee of £40 was correctly charged (there were plenty more administration fees of £40 and £60, but these were over 6 years ago so these havent even been mentioned)

 

- Legal costs of £900 were correctly applied

 

- Interest on arrears were correctly applied.

 

- Repayment charge of £140 - they have offered £40 back

 

- Early repayment charge of £1026.84 was correctly applied because I didnt give them one months notice.

Utter rubbish! It was this company that forced me into selling the house in the first place and they were fully informed through all stages of the sale as at the time there was a suspended repossession order on the house.

 

- Higher lending charge of £1332 was correctly applied as I had borrowed 89% of the house value

 

- Own insurance charge of £100 was applied correcly (However this was applied twice. Once at the start of the mortgage and again in January of 2006. Though the buildings insurance only commenced with them in march 2007!)

 

Therefore they are unable to uphold my complaint and a cheque for £140 will be sent to me in the next 14 days.

 

So,

What happens next? I am not happy in the slightest with there findings. I kinda knew this would come but need serious advice on the next steps.

Any input most gratefully recieved

Edited by mustard7
Link to post
Share on other sites

just point out to them too that mortgage under the limitations act is 12yrs!!

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will do indeed dx.

 

My question is though..... of the charges I am trying to reclaim, which ones do I have the right to try to reclaim?

I am rather confused by it all!

What I really need is someone who can guide me in the right direction. Who can advise me on the next steps etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

basically anythng with FEE after it!

 

if you deem it a 'penalty' then it reclaimable

 

most of what you list above are penalties

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

do a spreadsheet so's you know what you SHOULD be getting

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...