Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • 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

Barclaycard PPI claim following SAR


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4094 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

i think you should go for non compliance of data rather first

 

the link / details are in that thread you listed.

 

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'm having exactly the same issues as well. Been fobbed off twice asking for calculations - my offer very similar. Spreadsheet suggests I should have £26k owed back - offer of just over 6k. no idea how they are arriving at that figure and no idea where to go to next either. I'll watch this with interest and follow suit!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies.

 

Dx100uk. Non compliance is what I meant by submitting the N1form to county court to get Barclays to release the requested statements and basis of calculations. I may send a letter before action and then wait to see if ICO get back to me before proceeding. Unless you advise differently?.

 

Wilco 999. I know its frustrating to say the least. Have you got a link to your own thread as I would be interested to see the similarities.

 

Hi Anney63. I’ve been following your thread with interest and I will take your advice to contact the CEO in order to make my intentions clear. Have you had any response in this regard?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not yet but my case is with the Star Chamber which is the top and was sent there on 18th December . Barclays are slow thats why I maile CEO . I sent copy of the maile by post and faxe so there are plenty of copies in B/card to hopefully get something done

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

After a lot of pressure on Barclays to provide more information regarding their refund offer, I have now received statement figures to January 2001.

That pressure included a letter and email to David Chan (CEO of Barclaycard) threatening court action citing non compliance under the data protection act, A written complaint including all correspondence to ICO and more letters to data protection and customer relations. Firstly I received statements to 2004 and after complaining further, a letter and statement figures to 2001.

 

In the letter they still confirm that their offer is correct and state the following (abridged)

 

“ The refund is made up of the insurance premium you paid plus the interest. The payment also includes an extra amount of 8% interest per year as compensation.

 

Premiums

The premium refund is calculated by adding all premiums paid since inception of PPI policy. Your policy was active from 24th Jan 1995 until 3rd Feb 2010.

The value of payments made since Jan 2001 has been taken directly from statement records we still hold.

 

We use details from first available statements on our records and work back to the point at which the policy was sold. This is based on the assumption that your PPI charges and balance would have reduced at a steady rate to zero for the period dating back to when the policy was sold.

 

If the first two statements available for your account show a value of Zero then we have assumed that the balance on your account was also zero for the period dating back to when the policy was sold

 

This averaging method has been used to calculate the period from 24th Jan 1995 until Jan 2001

 

Compound interest

When a PPI premium is charged it is added to the balance of the account and attracts interest charges at the purchase rate applicable at the time. Interest is also added to the balance and the following month any outstanding balance will incur interest charges.

We have calculated the interest charged on the PPI premiums throughout the term, taking into account the effect of compounding and using purchase interest rate.

 

8% interest (simple interest calculation)

We calculate 8% interest on the individual figure concerned for the number of days from the date of the charge until the date of calculation.

We will pay a simple interest amount if the calculated cumulative total refund amount is greater than the original card balance in any month. If this occurs we will pay 8% on the difference between the two, and if there is a time difference between when the PPI policy was cancelled and when we made the offer.

The 8% interest amount is in line with the recommendations from FOS.”

 

Ok, I don’t really understand a lot of this and hoping someone with more knowledge than I can explain.

 

I have now added the new figures to the spreadsheet (figures now to Jan 2001) and have calculated (from what they state in the letter) the following figures for the remaining dates from Jan 2001 to Jan 1995 -

 

The first two figures from Jan and Feb 2001 were £23.63 and £23. 49 (average £23.56) I then reduced the amount in monthly increments until zero (Jan 1995).

 

I have put the interest rate at 19.9% (purchase rate) and the total , although less than original calculations, is still 2½ times more than offer.

How would this spreadsheet stand up with regard to an FOS investigation?. Any other

advice or comments would be welcome?

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the first two statements available for your account show a value of Zero then we have assumed that the balance on your account was also zero for the period dating back to when the policy was sold

 

This averaging method has been used to calculate the period from 24th Jan 1995 until Jan 2001

 

 

how the hell can they assume that you did not use the card for all that time!!

 

what was the point in having it!!

 

utter bowlarks...

 

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

they charged you compounded int so you are entitled to it back at that rate too

 

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 assume fos is the route you are now following anney63. Have they given you any idea of timescale?

 

Does anyone know how fos would view this with regard to the interest rate in the calculations and are there any similar cases that have set a precedent ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am preparing another FosCISheet v101.xls to send to Barclaycard after receiving more statement figures to 2001 and just wanted to clarify the “CLAIM TO” date. The card ran from 1995 and I cancelled the PPI in February 2010. The card is still running and I was made an offer in September 2012.

Link to post
Share on other sites

today as int is still being charged at the compounded rate

 

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

Thanks for that.

2 other questions if i may

1) the compound spreadsheet shows PPI paid plus compound interest to date, Do I add 8% redress or is that pushing it

2) Can i use the running credit accounts spreadsheet, which calculates payments, compound int and 8% redress, if I don't have all of the statements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. no you cant have both.

2. try if you wish

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...

I spoke to FOS to find out their views on compound interest relating to PPI refunds. They emailed me a compensation fact sheet which states

 

If the card account is still open but the PPI has been cancelled (as in my case) The Financial Business should -

 

a) Work out what the balance of the account would be if the consumer had not the PPI policy but had still made the same monthly payments (taking into account any interest and charges related to the PPI policy)

 

b) If this calculation puts the account into credit for any period, pay interest (simple, not compound) on the balance for that period at the rate of 8% a year

 

c) Pay the consumer the difference between the revised balance and the current balance

 

d) Write to the consumer and tell them how the revised balance, the interest and the difference were calculated

 

This is impossible to work out because I do not have balance figures from 1995 to 2001. It also seems that FOS will not look at compound interest for the PPI payments made since inception and prefer to use a simple 8% calculator.

 

Not sure at the moment whether getting FOS to investigate will get me any further.

 

Any ideas

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the FOS list the a) effectively includes compound interest at the card rate.

 

Tricky to explain but it means each month one has to reconstruct the account as if it had never had PPI. This is done by removing the PPI premiums, and then removing the interest due to PPI. Interest due to PPI is not only the interest on the premiums in that month but also the interest on the interest due to PPI in the previous months.

 

The "interest on the interest" part is what effectively gives you compound interest included in the reconstructed balance in a)

 

It's just how FOS explains it.

 

You could estimate your average balance on the account for missing periods - that's what the banks SHOULD do if they have missing data.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Calcutta, Thanks for the reply

 

Yes I’m in three minds which way to go with this at the moment.

a) Accept the offer

b) Go down the FOS route

c) Go the court route and claim compound interest in restitution

 

I have prepared 2 spreadsheets at the moment using the figures I have available. The missing figures are from Jan 95 to Jan 2001. It is accepted that the first PPI payment shown on record (£23.63) from Jan 2001 is then reduced in equal amounts to the inception of the account (Jan 95)

 

The first Spreadsheet is the compound interest calculator which shows a total figure in excess of 20k

 

The second spreadsheet is the FOS running PPI sheet. This has been tricky to reconstruct because I do not have the statements for the missing years. The way I did this was to fill in all the sections with the available statements and then add in the missing PPI payments (reducing back to zero) in the correct column. I then worked out the likely monthly balance on the account using the PPI figures (PPI charged at approx 79p per £100). I then put in approx minimum monthly payment figures and this gave me a rough idea of what I spent per month. This gave me an approximate idea of the account throughout its history. Unfortunately the total figure is very close to the offer of refund (7k).

 

If I go down the FOS route I may be waiting a very long time for a result and I cannot be sure that they would just agree with the banks offer.

 

Having looked around this forum I have noticed that those who have been successful with the court route have been claiming quite a bit less than 20k and the banks have always relented at the 11th hour. It may be different given the amount in question. I have looked at previous court cases (eg Sempra metals) but this was not specifically banks or PPI claims.

 

So there it is. My heart feels that the unnecessary PPI payments I made since 1995 should attract compound interest at the purchase rate of the credit card in restitution.

 

My head feels that I should accept the offer on the table and get on with my life.

 

Decisions, Decisions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...