Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • dca please.?   Barclays would have marked the A/c Defaulted on or before sale, and issued a default notice a dca debt buyer cannot issue a default notice    send Barclays an sar.   the A/c was opened whilst resident in Scotland that means the debt is statute barred and extinguished,, dead gone parrot. though that has no relevance to a credit file.    
    • scan it all up to one multipage PDF read upload carefully   I suspect its the usual stuff they troll out for vanquis card debt those  application forms are not a credit agreement    lots of previous Lowell claimform threads here to read that explains why.   dx  
    • In late 2014, I received correspondence from a DCA acting on behalf of Barclays, pursuing a student overdraft of around £1k from 2003. I hadn't used this account in many years, well over six, and it is my belief (though, in full honesty,   I can't actually remember, and can't prove anything) that it was closed a couple of years later in around 2004/2005/2006 (and it wasn't on my credit file in 2014), and the overdraft transferred to RBS (an account also closed so long ago that it is long since gone from my credit file. I certainly don't recall using it after 2004, and it was quite common then to transfer student accounts/overdrafts between banks.   I emailed the DCA, stating that I didn't acknowledge the debt, that it would be statute-barred in any case, and requested an original credit agreement. None was forthcoming,   after some back and forth, I invited them to issue proceedings if they felt they had an enforceable credit agreement. They did not respond.   I am currently looking at applying for a mortgage, and have noticed that whilst this account doesn't appear on Equifax or Experian, it is on my TransUnion file, showing as set up in 2003 and defaulted in 2015.   Does anyone have any advice as to what I should do? The 2019 Doyle case might make my contention that it was statute-barred somewhat shakier, though, equally, I haven't heard anything about it in over five years,   I cannot believe that, if the account was not closed/settled in the mid-2000s as I believe, that Barclays would not have issued a default notice before 2015. Does anyone have any advice as to what I should do?   I want this off my credit file, even if the account wasn't closed in 2004, I believe that Barclays/its DCA are trying to pull a fast one by recording a default in January 2015, but given that neither party has any records with which to validate their belief/position, it hardly seems fair that I pay out for something that either doesn't exist or ought to be statute barred? A further point is that whilst it is Barclays, the account was opened at a branch in Scotland (where I lived/studied), where I believe that the Limitation period is five years, so, even if it transpired that the default was legitimately in 2015, would the matter now be statute barred anyway? Or would it be six years given that I now live in England?
    • Hi.   Quick update. I have contacted the FOS and asked for written confirmation of the decision made so that I can take court action.   I have had my Cifas report today. It states.   Barclays Bank registered a 1st party fraud report against me on the 30th May 2019. This is the date they closed my account.   Case Type: Misuse of facility. Reasons: Multiple encashment fraud. Cifas Filing: First party fraud - (Opening an account or other facility for a fraudulent purpose or the fraudulent misuse of an account or facility; or taking out and insurance policy for a fraudulent purpose or the fraudulent misuse of an insurance policy and/or insurance policy documentation)   So, they told the FOS early December that my credit file would be amended and any negative reports would be removed, but as of today the account is still in default with Equifax and I still have the Cifas registered against my name.
  • Our picks

jan2002

PPI Ticket and McDonalds response

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2798 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

My daughter visited McD's in Rotherham, She stayed longer than the specified time

and because the vehicle is a company vehicle I received the parking "fine"

which of course I will not be paying. I emailed their customer relations and I think

You may be interested in the response I have received so here it is.

If this is not allowed on here please remove it thanks

 

Dear Mrs ********

I am writing further to your e-mail regarding your daughter's visit to our Tankersley restaurant. I have noted your comments and welcome the opportunity to confirm our policy on this matter.

 

As a company, putting in place enforcements within our car parks is only done after careful consideration and very much as a last resort. Primarily, we use parking measures to ensure there are spaces available for our customers’ vehicles, as well as to deter unwarranted or unreasonably prolonged usage of the facility.

 

I can confirm this parking area is managed by an independent company who are responsible for monitoring the car park and taking details of registration numbers. The regulations and signs at the restaurant clearly state our policy and the relevant charges.

 

I trust you will appreciate that in order to maintain a consistent approach; we have to adhere to the guidelines in place. As such, in a situation such as a clear contravention of parking regulations, we are unable to deal with any specifics or cases on an individual basis.

 

Suffice to say, if a customer contravenes the clearly displayed parking regulations, they will receive a ticket.

 

Thank you for contacting us and again for the opportunity to comment.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

 

Senior Customer Services Manager

 

McDonald's Customer Services Department

11 - 59 High Road

East Finchley

London

N2 8AW

 

Tel: 08705 244622

 

So now we know !! no more visits to McD's for us and all my staff of Drivers are backing me so........

BYE BYE McD's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no more visits to McD's for us and all my staff of Drivers are backing me so........

BYE BYE McD's

 

Da-da-da-da-da - I'm loving it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we use parking measures to ensure there are spaces available for our customers’ vehicles, as well as to deter unwarranted or unreasonably prolonged usage of the facility.

How long is too long? Don't McD's do kids parties? Not any more apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would anyone want to put that **** in their bodies anyway?


Ash.

 

If you think I have helped you, please add to my reputation by clicking the star button to the left.

Thankyou.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to read МакДональдс response to -

 

- the 'ticket' is nothing more than a Speculative Invoice with no authority or binding force, albeit 'dressed up' and in language designed to deceive people into thinking it is a legal document .

- there are no 'Regulations'. The term is intended to deceive. There could only possibly be 'Terms and Conditions'.

- there is no 'Contravention'. The term is intended to deceive. There could only possibly be 'Breach of Terms and Conditions'.

- the only possible claim a Court might entertain in the circumstances could be for Trespass or (more dubiously) Breach of Contract. For either of which they can only possibly win their actual monetry loss. And for being in a Free Car Park their loss is?

- the only possible claim can be against the Driver and there is no legal obligation for the RK to identify the Driver, other than to Police or Councils.

- possibly only the land owner can take such action (subject to a recent case being clarified).

- notwithstanding any or all of the above, the PPC will apply 'unreasonable pressure' tantamount to harrassment, with a series of increasing threats, often incorrectly misrepresenting the Law, to attempt to coerce the RK to make payment of legally unsustainable amounts which are never the RKs responsibility in the first place.

 

Do they, as a global brand that projects and protects it's wholesome image, feel happy to be associated with and support such deceptions and dubious business practices ?

Edited by Tony P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they, as a global brand that projects and protects it's wholesome image, feel happy to be associated with and support such deceptions and dubious business practices ?

 

Are you serious? Read up on the points they lost in the Mclibel case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony P.... I have included your points in the email I have sent to McD's in response to their email

I am not very impressed that any service supplier would treat the very people who spend their

hard earned money with them with such contempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would love to read МакДональдс response to -

 

- the 'ticket' is nothing more than a Speculative Invoice with no authority or binding force, albeit 'dressed up' and in language designed to deceive people into thinking it is a legal document .

- there are no 'Regulations'. The term is intended to deceive. There could only possibly be 'Terms and Conditions'.

- there is no 'Contravention'. The term is intended to deceive. There could only possibly be 'Breach of Terms and Conditions'.

- the only possible claim a Court might entertain in the circumstances could be for Trespass or (more dubiously) Breach of Contract. For either of which they can only possibly win their actual monetry loss. And for being in a Free Car Park their loss is?

- the only possible claim can be against the Driver and there is no legal obligation for the RK to identify the Driver, other than to Police or Councils.

- possibly only the land owner can take such action (subject to a recent case being clarified).

- notwithstanding any or all of the above, the PPC will apply 'unreasonable pressure' tantamount to harrassment, with a series of increasing threats, often incorrectly misrepresenting the Law, to attempt to coerce the RK to make payment of legally unsustainable amounts which are never the RKs responsibility in the first place.

 

Do they, as a global brand that projects and protects it's wholesome image, feel happy to be associated with and support such deceptions and dubious business practices ?

 

Heres the response from McD

 

Dear Mrs Jennings

 

Thank you for your further contact regarding your visit to our Tankerley restaurant. I am very sorry to learn that you were disappointed with my response.

 

 

 

I regret that in a situation such as a contravention of parking regulations, we are unable to deal with any specifics or cases on an individual basis. Suffice to say, if a customer contravenes the clearly displayed parking regulations, they will receive a ticket.

 

 

 

I have once again reviewed all the information gained and I do appreciate your further comments, our position on this matter has not changed.

 

 

 

Thank you for contacting us again and I am sorry that we can be of no further assistance to you.

 

 

Regards

 

 

 

Rhonda Floyd

Senior Customer Services Manager

 

McDonald's Customer Services Department

11 - 59 High Road

East Finchley

London

N2 8AW

 

08705 244622

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they are not proper "regulations", they are a set of rules made up by the parking company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember this being in watchdog if I recall correctly ? and the advise was.

 

IGNORE and DO NOT PAY :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is the mclibel site still up?

 

My phones playing up and a second browser wont open.

 

Its worth a read if it is - as is the wikipedia McDs page, ?court action/libel? section.

 

Or search on sewerage store room!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fast response.

Fast food.

 

Not a lot of substance in either!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's plenty about Mclibel on the internet. Wiki has a page on it. Given this widely-reported case it seems absurd to claim that they have a "wholesome image" to protect. These are some of the points on public record from the court case:

 

Bell ruled that McDonald's endangered the health of their workers and customers by "misleading advertising"

 

that they "exploit children",

 

that they were "culpably responsible" in the infliction of unnecessary cruelty to animals,

 

and that they were "antipathetic" to unionisation and paid their workers low wages.

 

Court of Appeal

 

The verdict for the appeal was handed down on 31 March, in Court 1 at the Royal Courts of Justice. The judges ruled that it was fair comment to say that McDonald's employees worldwide 'do badly in terms of pay and conditions' and true that 'if one eats enough McDonald's food, one's diet may well become high in fat etc., with the very real risk of heart disease.'

 

They further stated that this last finding 'must have a serious effect on their trading reputation since it goes to the very business in which they are engaged. In our judgment, it must have a greater impact on the respondents' [McDonald's] reputation than any other of the charges that the trial judge had found to be true'.

 

The Court of Appeal also stated that it had 'considerable sympathy' with the defendants' submissions that the leaflet meant 'that there is a respectable (not cranky) body of medical opinion which links a junk food diet with a risk of cancer and heart disease',

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this branch of McDonald's in a retail park ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this branch of McDonald's in a retail park ?

 

No next to a petrol station

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...