Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • anotheruser0000
      Highview/DCB(L) ANPR PCN - Letter of Claim - Now Claimform - overstay - Riverside Retail Park in Norwich, Norfolk.

      By anotheruser0000 · Posted

      Hi LFI, With regard to the ANPR cameras in your post #65, while I was on the phone to the Planning Department, they did take a look at Google Streetview and went back to 2012 where they could see the ANPR cameras in place so therefore they would have deemed consent. I had previously read the T&C Planning Regulations and had read the section on deemed consent so I understood the point they made on the phone. It doesn't matter though, that doesn't harm my case any, and I shouldn't really mention this now, (this is what you reminded me of on another thread) but in the past I was a member of a scheme that gave me access to legal advice, I have spoken to a barrister previously through this scheme on another matter and I think I am still a member. I am going to check if I am still a member of the scheme, and if I am I will discuss my case with a barrister or solicitor, whichever the scheme deems appropriate. I will let you know the outcome. I am also going to take Bankfodders advice in the sticky and go to the local court and ask if I can sit in on a case in the Judges office.
    • Lesley A
      Licensed breeder Puppy farm & genetically sick pups.***Settled***

      By Lesley A · Posted

      deed?  you mean consent order you and her signed? concluding the case as long as you nor she break it's conditions signed upto? dx Yes sorry. they called it a deed at first in court.  Then Judge said she was happy to have it sealed as something else  exact names of orders in message above.     The disease was tested for when his cardiac testing was done immediately after purchase and part of the now sealed case.   However, results were disclosed incorrectly and I only found out  two days ago.   This disease did not form part of my knowledge during the case as I had been informed of a normal result that was not the case.   it is perfect clarity of a genetic disease where as the previous cardiac issue could be congenital until the pup is genetically tested. 
    • Deathbybanking
      Halifax debt sold to Cabot

      By Deathbybanking · Posted

      Hi, Halifax recently sold a credit card account of mine to Cabot. I am unemployed and have no assets and was thinking of making token £1 payments for 12-18 months in order to drag things out a bit and reduce the chance of Cabot being able to get the correct CCA documents from Halifax if I requested them in future. However, I saw on the pages on this forum about defending county court claims that one of the standard approaches when defending such claims is to say “I had an account with bank X, but I don’t remember the details and so don’t know if I owe this debt…”. If I made £1 payments to Cabot, would it prevent me from using such a defence in future? OC: Halifax DC: Cabot/Wescot Card account opened: 2016 Defaulted: 2023
    • Lesley A
      Licensed breeder Puppy farm & genetically sick pups.***Settled***

      By Lesley A · Posted

      Paperwork says sealed consent order and composite settlement agreement      YES  ADDISONS DISEASE 
    • jk2054
      CPR 31.14

      By jk2054 · Posted

      Hi, This may be the wrong place for a thread BUT If you receive a defence, can you send a CPR 31.14 request for document mentioned in the defence, and then apply to proceed with the case only after (14) days passed or they respond OR is it only if you receive a claim I see @dx100uk thread is for when you receive a claim, but can you also do the same when you receive a defence?

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Bank threats to close your account may be unfair

MoneyBAGs

By MoneyBAGs
in Historic Bank Claims

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1877 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

MoneyBAGs

MoneyBAGs

Posted
Posted

A threat to close your account might be the Bank's big stick. It is more than mere account closure because with the temination notice will come a demand fro immediate repayment of any overdraft. An entry made to the credit register as well as the porblems caused by having to open a new account, overcom the effects of your previous bank history etc.

However, it seems that a contractual term which permits arbitrary closure of your account - and also closure of your account without notice is unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Consumer Contracts Regulations

 

There is a very readable analysis of the Regulations by John Carruthers at:-

http://www.journalonline.co.uk/article/1001153.aspx

 

Extract:-

 

Unilateral Termination Terms

Terms which allow the supplier to unilaterally terminate all or part of the contract may be unfair. Terms which allow termination on an arbitrary basis will be always be difficult to justify. Terms which state that the contract may be terminated in the event of a material breach of contract may be fair. For example the OFT upheld a clause which allowed a canal boat operator to unilaterally refuse to release a boat where the renter was an unsuitable person. Unsuitability could include drunkenness and inability to operate the boat or for general safety reasons. If this type of term is used then an illustrative list of good reasons for refusal to perform should be included.

 

Termination of a contract without notice

Clauses allowing the supplier to terminate a contract of indeterminate length without notice will usually be considered to be unfair. In Falkirk Sunbeds, Bulletin 1 Case No 6, the term provided that management could refuse entry without providing reasons. This term was found to be void. But in American Golf, Bulletin 5 page 18, a term allowing a consumer to be suspended or expelled from the golf club for acting illegally or bringing the club into disrepute was held be acceptable

Link to post
Share on other sites
kevin.philips

kevin.philips

Posted
Posted
Terms which state that the contract may be terminated in the event of a material breach of contract may be fair

 

Very difficult to defend against, the bank are stating that there has been a breach and can/will close your account and demand full payment of any os borrowing. Even before you have the opportunity to create a claim you may be hindered by the situation they place you in. However that said it doesn't look good for customer services.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

However, it DOES explain why any GENUINE bank error (and yes, they do occasionally make a mistake, even if most of the time it's deliberate) disappears without trace from statements, because obviously if push comes to shove the banks don't want you to be able to prove that they've been JUST as guilty of breaking the contract as they're accusing you - and therefore can't shut your account for that reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
kevin.philips

kevin.philips

Posted
Posted
However, it DOES explain why any GENUINE bank error (and yes, they do occasionally make a mistake, even if most of the time it's deliberate) disappears without trace from statements, because obviously if push comes to shove the banks don't want you to be able to prove that they've been JUST as guilty of breaking the contract as they're accusing you - and therefore can't shut your account for that reason.

 

Not sure where you're going with this..

 

You start with one approach and end with another - banks like all UK organisations are still under the same jurisidiction in maintaining customer records (DPA) and I don't think they could or would ever delete a transaction - it goes against rules in auditing and financial accounting standards, if you can prove they've ever done this then you could add very serious weight to the motion of this group.

 

EDIT - In fact your reply to this topic goes against your statements in claiming against NATWEST in a different thread regarding the DPA that I have just read - If you are a helper you should at the least be consistent http://www.invictadigital.com/bank/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=23

 

Aside from that in putting a few words together on the back of your comments....

 

If a bank feels you have breached the contract THEY can shut your account, it would be up to the consumer to bring a claim to prove otherwise, either through the courts or the financial omnudsmen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Nothing was tampered with, per se.

 

Last year on one occasion the natwest made a geniune mistake on my account. I drew their attention to it, and because they had charged for it they refunded that charge immediately without contest, because it was clear that a genuine error had occurred.

 

My point was that when I next received a statement it didn't give the charge and the refund. It simply didn't show the event at all. This is the problem, when the statements arrive, they don't mention the transaction at all and these tend to be the only records people keep - certainly I can't produce paper evidence to the contrary, because I can't control the account myself, I can only watch. As for tampering, since the statements haven't been produced at the time technically nothing had been tampered with, but I did find it curious that when the statements WERE produced, there was no record of the mistake that caused my account to become overdrawn, or the charge, or the refund, or the correction of the mistake. It was all done over the phone with telephone banking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Guest stephen

Guest stephen

Posted
Posted

Most banks will always leave the option to close your account in there contracts, and i delt if any court would find that unfair, but I would love to be proven wrong.

 

To be honest when I sued abbey National I expected them to close my account, it just so happens they did so at Christmas, so I got even more media coverage for that,

 

However even after all the media attention my case received I walked into another bank and opened a new account, so all I say is don’t worry if the close your account you soon get another.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BankFodder

BankFodder

Posted
Posted

I would recommend opening an account with another bank preparatory to acting against your bank. This prudent step will allow you to open an account befoe your existing bank dishes your credit rating and makes life tough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BankFodder

BankFodder

Posted
Posted

The issue of defamation certainly had occurred to me as well.

I'm trying to think of reasons why it shouldn't be and I can't come up with any at the moment.

However, there may be a defence of qualified privilege which relates to duties in making reports. However, I can't remember all of the details of this and need to look them up at some point.

Maybe you could search this and see what you come up with.

 

The problem with defamation, of course is that although getting your charges back you are generally protected from costs by the Small Claims procedure rules, in defamation there is no such protection.

 

If you lose, you will lose a LOT :Cry:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
nailson

nailson

Posted
Posted
Hmm

I have difficulty imagining that bank statements would be tampered with.

Do you have any evidence of this because it would be a very serious thing to do.

 

Last Christmas I went 27p over my limit on a joint account, the day before my wages went in (easy mistake to make) - got clobbered with a £30 charge. My wife complained and the charge was lifted - literally, didn't appear on the statements or anything. Like it had never been there...

Link to post
Share on other sites
BankFodder

BankFodder

Posted
Posted

Well yes - but No - it's a metter of discretion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BankFodder

BankFodder

Posted
Posted

Go and tell Kate Wicox at the OFT, then :lol::lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
BankFodder

BankFodder

Posted
Posted

put bizou bizou from me, then

Link to post
Share on other sites
martinwhite

martinwhite

Posted
Posted

Two points.

 

1. Since we know all banks are the same, and they won't NEGOTIATE with us on equal terms, what are the chances of someone, e.g. Stephen, having an account closed on them every year, following another claim? Eventually (taking things to their logical conclusion) that person would be effectively banned from all banks!

 

2. Suppose 100 Nationwide customers take legal action to reclaim unlawful charges, and all 100 have their accounts closed by the bank, won't that look odd to the press, OFT, and the Banking Ombudsman? Surely it would then be plain intimidation/bullying (choose your own phrase) and obvious as such to all concerned? When dealing with individuals, the banks can always claim their discretion in closing an account for "commercial reasons" however the steadily increasing number of people claiming (and having their accounts closed because of this) will create a very obvious trend.

 

Martin

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bookworm

Bookworm

Posted
Posted

They could call "streamlining" :x Unfortunately, at this point, I don't think there is much anyone can do, they still have that much power, even if it's quite obviously nothing more than throwing toys out the pram.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mgizmogpc

Mgizmogpc

Posted
Posted

They can call it "Streamlining" and dress it up any way they want, but there is something you can do: Before handing back any Cheque Books, etc and terminating dealings, get yourself a big banner or placard and stand on the pavement outside your bank and describe your beef in big bold letters. Don't obstruct the entrance or pavement and exercise your legal right to protest in person. The internet is fine and this site is excellent, but dont ever forget the impact of direct action and physical protest in person. People will even ask you what you are doing, if you explain logically, then a pound to a pinch of pig s**t they will realise they are also being screwed and there's another recruit for the cause.

Don't forget to advertise this website on the banner, and you might also want to inform the local press of your intention.

This is what I intend to do, because as sure as eggs are eggs my account will be closed when I finish my court action ( in progress ). :twisted:

all ideas and information exchanged willingly, bounce the ideas around,it helps everyone at the end of the day, good luck to you all and God Bless...LoL Graham & Yvonne

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
sazz

sazz

Posted
Posted
Two points.

 

1. Since we know all banks are the same, and they won't NEGOTIATE with us on equal terms, what are the chances of someone, e.g. Stephen, having an account closed on them every year, following another claim? Eventually (taking things to their logical conclusion) that person would be effectively banned from all banks!

 

I'm in the lovely predicament of being able to only try & open a new account with LLoyds, Co-Op and IF as I am banned from the rest....

Lloyds Current A/C DPA sent 7th May 2009 Closed and charges wiped Summer 2010.

 

Barclays A/C DPA sent 4th June 2009: no reply, no correspondence as of 2011.

 

Littlewoods Data Protection Act Section 10 sent 09/06/2006 - Fraudulent A/C closed and CRA data removed November 2006.

 

HSBC Default & Debt wiped March 2009 (6 yr Statute barred reached)

 

RBS - Claim 1 - Settled in FULL £766.00 20/06/2006.

RBS - Claim 2 - Settled in FULL £777.95 08/09/2006

 

 

BOS A/C No. 1 & 2

Amount - £586.39 claim plus 8% interest

SETTLED IN FULL 08/09/2006 - CHEQUE FOR £625.25

 

Halifax Visa Data Protection Act Disclosure Received

 

First Direct Data Protection Act Disclosure received

Link to post
Share on other sites
mechs

mechs

Posted
Posted
:lol: they lose a few customers for taking action against them and they gain a few from other banks for the same reason ... hey guys we're all swapping banks! :lol:

:) Go on ... you know you want to click me :)

:lol:don't be like the banks - give a little back :lol:

:D There was a time before CAG but now CAG is here we are the empowered! :D

In progress:

Mechs and Mother (deceased) V Halifax - N1 form filed at Court 9 Aug 06

Advice & opinions of mechs, The Consumer Action Group and The Bank Action Group are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Guest Alison82

Guest Alison82

Posted
Posted

What about this?

 

PART TWO

 

SCHEDULE 2

 

INDICATIVE AND NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF TERMS WHICH MAY BE REGARDED AS UNFAIR

 

1. Terms which have the object or effect of-

(q) excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, particularly by requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions, unduly restricting the evidence available to him or imposing on him a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites
thecornflake

thecornflake

Posted
Posted

 

2. Suppose 100 Nationwide customers take legal action to reclaim unlawful charges, and all 100 have their accounts closed by the bank, won't that look odd to the press, OFT, and the Banking Ombudsman? Surely it would then be plain intimidation/bullying (choose your own phrase) and obvious as such to all concerned? When dealing with individuals, the banks can always claim their discretion in closing an account for "commercial reasons" however the steadily increasing number of people claiming (and having their accounts closed because of this) will create a very obvious trend.

 

Martin

 

I find this scarily intuitive since A&L just publicy announced they would close accounts of all people who instigated court proceedings against them to reclaim charges.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites
goldiea

goldiea

Posted
Posted

I have been reading this thread and although not super experienced I was interested in Bankfodders and others discussion about defamation - Surely defamation relates to the way in which others view you, i.e with a default from the bank after closing your account? therefore may mean other banks would think less of a good bet and think or you as a bad risk

 

As the default was permanent record (well six years anyway!) which would obviously be concidered and available for other institutions to view not mean that it could possibly fit the criteria for libel? Not sure but I cant think of why it could not be concidered as applicable.... it would also be there to see and therefore surely does that not mean no further proof is needed to bring an action?

 

Just a thought.....be nice if that really was the case

 

xx

 

Just thought I would add that I am just entering into conversation, not giving professional advise - if I am required to put a disclaimer or something on the end of posts? I will happily do this.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
joneshousehold

joneshousehold

Posted
Posted
My Nationwide account is due to be closed on 28th June, following my court action against them.

 

Is there nothing i can do?

 

Did anything happen about this. I have just had a letter threatening to close our account and I don't want to give in without a fight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1877 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.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...