Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • 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

Very/NDR catalogue PENALTY charges reclaim - filing for court **WON***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3644 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

huh

 

what has the DCA got to do with a reclaim.....the OC!!

 

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

:frusty: yes

 

do keep up at the back...

 

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

  • 3 weeks later...

I sent off the letter requesting repayment of charges by recorded delivery which they signed for on the 27/09/12 and have not had any response from them yet, the letter said they had 14 days to comply so just wondering what I should do next being as they are over the 14 days? Cheers!

sorry DX I got there in the end :madgrin:
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you plant to take this to the end and go to court on this then your next step would be a 14 day lba.

 

Same as your preliminary but headed "Letter Before Action" and with the final paragraph amended to tell them if they do not refund within 14 days you will issue in court without further recourse to them.

 

Send an updated spreadsheet with it and remember to amend the figures in the lba.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for reply ims21 I will do that thank you

Why dO i have to amend the figures sent in the previous letter? Thank you for ur help!

 

If you plant to take this to the end and go to court on this then your next step would be a 14 day lba.

 

Same as your preliminary but headed "Letter Before Action" and with the final paragraph amended to tell them if they do not refund within 14 days you will issue in court without further recourse to them.

 

Send an updated spreadsheet with it and remember to amend the figures in the lba.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ims, Ive looked at my most recent statement from NDR and they have charged another £12.00 'Late payment fee' and also £14.65 Account Interest - so do I just enter this into the spreadhseet or should I be including court costs, sorry im confused :???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Add the £12 to your spreadsheet.

 

Make sure the "Claim To" date is set to today.

 

Use the resultant figures from the spreadsheet in your lba.

 

There are no court costs yet.

thanks ims21, had a reply to my LBA today which says;

 

'I have investigated your complaint and from looking at your account I can see that the charges have been applied correctly, in accordance with the stated terms and conditions of the account and as a result of payments not being made as requested in account statements issued every 28 days. I am therefore unable to uphold your complaint however, on this occasion as a gesture of goodwill I have decided to remove three of these charges. In total £35.00 has been credited to your account which you will see reflected on your next or following statement. I trust our explantion meets with your staisfaction etc etc If you are not happy contact the FOS etc etc.'

 

Am i right in sayng my next step is small claim online?

 

Thanks ims21!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks ims - Im going ahead with MCOL as advised in one of your other posts and just wondering about the details i enter into the POC section. Do I basically just put 'unlaw charges' or do I have to explain that the whole sityuation in quite a lot of detail. Cheers again!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi IMs ive had a read through the forums and the only thing i cant seemt o clarify is what i should be entering into POC section, not sure if I just basically put 'unlawful administration charges/excessive charges' or if i have to list all the payments taken etc. If you could point in right diorection would be massively thankfull :) :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

:madgrin:Hi Ims, Ive been reading and have information overload! Im reading Shelley181146 POC and thinking right i need to amend this to my case but then her one mentions a credit card and seems to have the terms and conditions of the creditor copied in and all of a sudden reading more through her POC Im feeling well out of my depth, she seems pretty clued up and I feel like i dont know where to start -can I just check am I reading the right thing - im looking at #62 which shows a copy of Shelley181146 POC ?

Thnaks ims!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Sorry...not sure why the "bump".

 

Have you drafted a PoC yet? If so post it up for review. If not then the next step is get a draft done.

 

You can use Shelley's as a base.

 

If I've missed something please let me know.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thnaks ims - ok heres my shot at the POC!

New POC Shop Direct Group / Very /NDR (N1)

Claim No [ ]

 

IN THE [ENTER YOUR LOCAL] countycourt

 

 

BETWEEN

 

[YOUR FULL NAME]

Claimant

 

and

 

 

-Shop Direct Group

 

 

Defendant

 

 

 

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

 

1. The Claimant entered into an agreement (“The Agreement”) with the Defendanton or around 10/11/2007, whereby the Defendant was to advance credit facilitiesto the Claimant under a running credit account, Account no xxxxxxxxxx("The Account").

 

2.The Agreement essentially consisted of the Defendant providing the Claimantwith a credit account which would allow the Claimant to make purchases from theShop Direct Group. In return the Defendant was entitled to charge interestat the published rate.

 

3.The Agreement was a Regulated Agreement for the purposes of the ConsumerCredit Act 1974.

 

4.At all material times the contract was subject to the Defendant’s standardterms and conditions which could be varied from time to time.

 

 

Summary

 

5. Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerousdefault charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimumpayment on the due date and or for exceeding the credit limit and or if apayment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in schedule 2).

 

6.The defaultcharges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreementwhich were:

a). A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable:and

b) An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999(“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant.

 

7. The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly addedto the Account.

 

The Charges

 

 

8. The standard Terms of the Agreement in substance provided as follows:

(a) The Defendant would provide the Claimant with the Card. The Claimant wasentitled to use the Card to make purchases and receive cash advances up to acredit limit (“the Limit”) set by the Defendant. The Defendant couldunilaterally change the Limit by giving the Claimant notice in writing.

(b) The Defendant was entitled to charge interest on the purchases at thepublished rate.

© The Claimant was to pay the minimum payment of £25 by the due date asnotified in the monthly statements.

(d) In addition the Defendant was entitled to charge administration fees (“theCharges”) where the Claimant did not pay on the due date or had a paymentreturned. The Chargesare currently £12 for each transgression.

Penalty

 

9. The Charges were payable on breach of contract by the Claimant.

 

10.The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damagewhich would have been suffered by the company in relation to the Claimant’stransgressions.

 

11. In the premises the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thusunenforceable at common law.

 

The Regulations

 

 

12.At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations.

 

13. At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Chargeswere unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to therequirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties'rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant.

 

14. without prejudice to the burden of proof,the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contentionthat the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion ofthe Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms.

(1)The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not beindividually negotiated.

(2)The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract.

(3)The Charges exceeded the costs which the Bank could have expected to incurin dealing with the exceeding of the credit limit, late payment or returnedpayment.

(4)Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimantfor their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within theambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfairterm.

(5) As the Bankknew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the contextof the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of theAgreement.

(6) As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairnessof the Charges.

(7) In the premises, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to thecustomer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of theparties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those ofthe Defendant in a way which was inequitable.

 

15.without prejudice to the burden of proof,the Claimant will contend that the terms imposing the Charges are not core terms underregulation 6 of the Regulations and relies on the following matters.

(1) The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms which define the mainor core subject matter of the Agreement.

(2) The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price orremuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in otherwords, whether or not the relevant services were value for money).

(3) TheCharges are correctly described as default charges by the Defendant in the keyinformation provided to new customers.

16. By reasonof the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the Regulations.

17.The Defendant wrongly applied Charges to the Account totaling some £576.00between 10/11/2007 and 08/09/2012 Particulars appear from Schedule 2.

 

18. On 25/09/2012 the Claimant demanded repayment of the sums wrongly applied.

 

19. The Defendant has not repaid them or any of them.

 

And the Claimant claims

 

(1) A declaration that the sums totaling £576.00 have wrongly been applied tothe Account

 

(2) Payment of the said sum of £576.00 and interest of £1462.19 applied by theDefendant thereon.

 

(3) Interestunder section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum fromthe date of payment of the Charge to date in the sum of £163.06 and at thedaily rate of [ xx ] until judgment or sooner payment.

(4) Court costs of £80.00

I believe that the facts stated in these particulars, comprising of x pages,are true.

 

Dated

 

 

 

Signed

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi ims - just wondered if you might be able to check my POC that ive attempted! I think there might be a few errors as Im not quite sure what im doing :o/

thank you for your help :)

Sorry...not sure why the "bump".

 

Have you drafted a PoC yet? If so post it up for review. If not then the next step is get a draft done.

 

You can use Shelley's as a base.

 

If I've missed something please let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

(5) As the Bank knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement.

Is this correct ? Surely if you believed they would slap charges on whether you were one hour, one day or one month late.. it would influence your decision to enter into an agreement.. wouldnt it ?

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...