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


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Reapstar
      SAR distress claim against Parking Eye

      By Reapstar · Posted

      What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • lookinforinfo
      EPC ANPR PCN - St Nicholas Street, Weymouth DT4 8AD

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • dx100uk
      One Parking Solutions Windscreen PCN - private flat bays, share of freehold . - Durrington, West Sussex.

      By dx100uk · Posted

      please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • lookinforinfo
      G24 anpr PCN - Double Dipping - Wigan Robin Retail Park

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • FTMDave
      One Parking Solutions Windscreen PCN - private flat bays, share of freehold . - Durrington, West Sussex.

      By FTMDave · Posted

      Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.

  • Recommended Topics

  • 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 
        • Like
      • 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

  • Recommended Topics

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.

HBOS Help Needed

gchads
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4081 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

gchads

gchads

Posted
Posted

Hi all,

recieved a reply from HBOS regarding ouyr SAR and CCA request. They state that they want our signatures. So my wife and i have returned with printed names. i know HBOS can be funny with printed names as well. posted below for you to see

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41052[/ATTACH]

Link to post
Share on other sites
BRIGADIER2JCS

BRIGADIER2JCS

Posted
Posted

Why this is a lawful request for personal data made under an Act of Parliament there is NO point in not signing for it.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
gchads

gchads

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi Brigadier,

I know its a time wasting excercise from what i have read about. I was kicking myself cause i read up another thread. And i should of sent one of your letters you had written up for another memeber. Ahh well its done now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BRIGADIER2JCS

BRIGADIER2JCS

Posted
Posted
Hi Brigadier,

I know its a time wasting excercise from what i have read about. I was kicking myself cause i read up another thread. And i should of sent one of your letters you had written up for another memeber. Ahh well its done now.

 

Hi this is one of the very old myths that just wont go away, with holding a sig. just delays the production of the data you probably need quite urgently.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let Them Knock

Let Them Knock

Posted
Posted
Hi Brigadier,

I know its a time wasting excercise from what i have read about. I was kicking myself cause i read up another thread. And i should of sent one of your letters you had written up for another memeber. Ahh well its done now.

 

Some people have a genuine fear of providing a signature because they are worried it will be lifted and used elsewhere. As Brig says, this is a bit of a myth where banks are concerned. However, you could always sign and then make a slight alteration to your signature. Enough so that you would spot any attempt at forgery but not so much that anyone else would notice it.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
gchads

gchads

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi LTK,

yes i know it worries me when i heard about it. Better safe than sorry though. Got a feeling they will bounce the returned signatures as they are totally different to our originals.But will wait and see

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let Them Knock

Let Them Knock

Posted
Posted

My personal opinion is that many lenders have a number of 'hoops' they will make you jump through. These hoops get progressively smaller as you get nearer to your target.

 

There are thousands, if not millions, of people out there who are making payments on non-existent or unenforceable agreements. If all these people were clued-up it would cost the banks billions. We know it and the banks know it.

 

Lenders who have kept their houses in order should have no problem providing copies of agreements and would happily do so at the first request - because they have nothing to fear. They can say, "Here it is, we have done it right, pay us the money". Such lenders are few and far between.

 

The vast majority have NOT kept their houses in order. They have used unlawful agreements, lost (misfiled) agreements, and generally paid too much attention to grabbing the profits without doing things properly.

 

These lenders build-in 'processes' to make it difficult for us to get to the truth. They employ well paid legal experts to make things as difficult as possible for debtors to get to the facts whilst staying within the letter of the law. They find new delaying tactics continually and the demand for a 'check-able' signature is just one of them. They site 'data protection' as being the reason for it BUT strangely enough, don't apply such rules to the issuing of other paperwork which is also sensitive. I have never heard of a lender writing to a debtor and saying, "Just send us confirmation of your signature so we can set a debt collector on you".

 

So, the signature trick is just an early 'hoop'. Once we get our heads around how they work we can counter it. These tricks and tactics only work with the people who give up. Ultimately, the law is on our side. If it wasn't there would be no need for such tactics.

 

Thanks for reading my rant and good luck.

 

 

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

gchads

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi Everyone,

Finally recieved my CCa from HBOS. They have sent me a reconstituted version without a signature. They were keen to point out that this reconstitued one is regulation 3(2)(b) "providedes that a copy can omit any signature box, signature or date of signature. In summary we are not required to produce a copy wqith your signature on it." Also that they have requested a copy of the original from the relevant department to comply with your section 60/61 request. Could someone please have a read of letter they wrote and give me there opinion.

 

gchads

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41357[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]41358[/ATTACH]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let Them Knock

Let Them Knock

Posted
Posted

OK. The have sent you a reconstituted copy of the agreement that they say complies with S.78 so this must be a credit card. It seems that they are going to send you a copy of the original as well - very good of them.

 

Let's wait and see what you end up with and then we can have a proper look.

 

How old is the debt?

When did you last make a payment on it?

Is it defaulted?

Is it on your Credit Reference Agency files?

 

If you want to post your agreement on here (anonymously of course) we can have a look at it. There are much cleverer people than me on here who can help.

 

Just a word to the wise on your last posted documents: It is important that you don't actually alter or block-out on the originals in case you need them as evidence later. Scan them and use Microsoft Paint to hide your personal info before you post them. Keep the original ones unmarked.

 

This nonsense about claims management companies is because they recognised your CCA request letter as a template. They don't like the idea of people getting clued-up on their rights. :wink: :wink:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
BRIGADIER2JCS

BRIGADIER2JCS

Posted
Posted

Why must this be a credit card because of a section 78 CCA '74 request????

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
gchads

gchads

Posted
  • Author
Posted

hi LTK,

The debt defaulted in 2006.

 

I joined Payplan and they took over the runnning of my debts.

have been paying them pro rota ever since.

 

The defaults have dropped off my CRA file due to 6 years rule.

 

The orginals are all intact i only scan and then paint them afterwards like you suggested.

 

The debt is credit card around £15k.

 

have posted the agreement they have sent me below:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41377[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41378[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41379[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41380[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41381[/ATTACH]

 

gchads

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let Them Knock

Let Them Knock

Posted
Posted
hi LTK,

The debt defaulted in 2006. I joined Payplan and they took over the runnning of my debts. have been paying them pro rota ever since. The defaults have dropped off my CRA file due to 6 years rule. The orginals are all intact i only scan and then paint them afterwards like you suggested. The debt is credit card around £15k. have posted the agreement they have sent me below:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41377[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]41378[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]41379[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]41380[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]41381[/ATTACH]

 

gchads

 

Right, received some and lots more still to come.

 

Presumably you had a plan when you sent these requests so what are you hoping to achieve?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
gchads

gchads

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi there,

recieved my SAR request returned because i would not sign it. I have printed my name. They are citing DPA 1998 Section 7.1sub section (2), (1), (3). They are asking me to write in confirming a local branch where i confirm my identity and collect SAR. What should i do?? I have posted letter below.

 

gchads

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41406[/ATTACH]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let Them Knock

Let Them Knock

Posted
Posted
Hi there,

recieved my SAR request returned because i would not sign it. I have printed my name. They are citing DPA 1998 Section 7.1sub section (2), (1), (3). They are asking me to write in confirming a local branch where i confirm my identity and collect SAR. What should i do?? I have posted letter below.

 

gchads

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41406[/ATTACH]

 

I think you will find my answer to that in post number 5 (above)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let Them Knock

Let Them Knock

Posted
Posted

No danger at all in my opinion. You are just collecting information as is your right under statute. If they ask for as signature at the branch, in your place, I would sign. If you still don't feel comfortable with this, do a slightly different signature to your normal one.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
BRIGADIER2JCS

BRIGADIER2JCS

Posted
Posted

What is all this about ''Danger'' you are making a lawful request for information under an Act of Parliament, sign the SAR if you want the information or go to the branch and collect it.

 

In all my year dealing with SARs and CCAs I have NEVER seen any proof of ''lifting of signatures'' carrying on this way is wasting yours and everyone elses time.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
gchads

gchads

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi there,

i understand what you mean Brigadier. I have sent letter back stating i will pick SAR up at local branch. as to the reconsituted CCA they have sent me, what is my next course of action? shall i stop the pro rota payment to them?

 

gchads

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

gchads

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi Everyone,

We have received 3 replies to CCA requests from HBOS so far. They are stating they have sent copies of original documents not originals. Couple of things that stand out, one signature is totally different to mine. Also there are no dates signed on the agreement, dont know if that will make a difference. On the back of agreement they have photocopied 1 side of the T&C. Seems a bit small and out of keeping with the other side. Dont know whether this is a doctored copy of CCA or original. I have scanned and posted below for everyone too see and make up their own minds. Your advice is really appreciated.

 

gchads

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41824[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41825[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41826[/ATTACH]

Link to post
Share on other sites
BRIGADIER2JCS

BRIGADIER2JCS

Posted
Posted
Hi Everyone,

We have received 3 replies to CCA requests from HBOS so far. They are stating they have sent copies of original documents not originals. Couple of things that stand out, one signature is totally different to mine. Also there are no dates signed on the agreement, dont know if that will make a difference. On the back of agreement they have photocopied 1 side of the T&C. Seems a bit small and out of keeping with the other side. Dont know whether this is a doctored copy of CCA or original. I have scanned and posted below for everyone too see and make up their own minds. Your advice is really appreciated.

 

gchads

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41824[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41825[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41826[/ATTACH]

 

Are Ts & Cs supplied with the documents complete and easily readable, the creditor is NOT going to send you any original documents btw.

 

This looks like an attempt to produce a reconstituted agreement, and not agood one if the Ts & Cs are not complete and the signature is not easily recognised as yours then this fails to meet section 77/78 CCA '74 requirements.

 

Would you like me to draft a lettee for you to rebut the banks claim??

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
 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...