Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No, reading the guidance online it says to wait for a letter from the court. Should I wait or submit the directions? BTW, I assume that the directions are a longer version of the particular of claim accompanied by evidence, correct?
    • Thanks for opening, it's been another rough year for my family and I've procastinated a little.. Due to the age of my defaults on this and other accounts (circa 2021), I really need to avoid a CCJ as that will be another 6 years of credit issues. Mediation failed as I played the 'not enough info to make a decision' however during the call for some reason they did offer settlement at 80%, I refused. this has been allocated to small claims track, court date is June 3 and I've received their WS. I'm starting on my WS. They do appear to have provided everything required of them (even if docs could be reconstructions). Not really sure what my argument is anymore but I do want to attend court and see this through. Should a judgement be made against me then I will clear the balance within 30 days and have the CCJ removed - this is still possible isn't it? I'm going to be reading up today and tomorrow and hope you can provide me some guidance in the meantime. Wonder what your advice would be given the documents they have provided? I am now in a position to clear the debt either by lump sum or a few large installments - Is this something i should look into at this late stage? Thanks as always in advance
    • I have now received my SAR. It includes a great deal of information! Is there a time limit on how long account information is kept and/or can be provided to debtors? I have received many account statements which were not previously sent to me. I remember that the creditor should provide explanations of any acronyms and abbreviations that maybe used in the documents. Is this still the case? Also what, if any, are the regulations in regard to adding fees to a debt? Can fees be added to a debt after the court has approved a charge on a property. Perhaps due to the numerous owners of the debt, many payments I made were not properly recorded on the account, some were entered over a year after the payment was made! Following the Legal Charge, I paid every month until my payments were refused. I am trying to compute the over payments, but the addition of fees etc. is confusing me. Any comments and/or help would be appreciated.
    • did you submit your directions
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

BlackHorse Car HP Finince hell


paulwlton
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4147 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

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 years later...

Just to update last post.

 

DJ granted set-aside for the amount of charges applied.

 

Subsequently I entered a defence which prompted an out of court settlement.

 

After recently going through documentation it seems that Black Horse Ltd have been receiving my payments without legal entitlement and furthermore, Black Horse have made inaccurate statements both to me and the court.

 

Below is the Compliance & Amin Exec stating that a deed of assignment does not exist and that Black Horse Ltd is the new name of Lloyds Bowmaker.

 

Paul

 

BlackHorseassignmentlie.jpg

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send the SAR off today....see what comes back

 

Paul

 

Lloyds Bowmaker Ltd

116 Cockfosters Road

Barnet

EN4 ODY

 

FTAO - The Data Controller or Data Compliance Officer

 

Dear Sir or Madam

 

Re: Lloyds Bowmaker Hire Purchase Agreement Reference *******(previously) *******

 

 

DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998 SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST

 

This Subject Data Access Request is made under sections 7, 8 & 9 of the Data Protection Act 1998, and by virtue of the Data Protection (Subject Access) (Fees and Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 2000 ( S.I.No 191).

 

I hereby request that you supply me with all data that you hold relating to my account. This includes in particular, but is not limited to, the following: -

 

1 The original signed, executed Consumer Credit Act agreement and any terms and conditions that applied at the time the account was opened.

 

2 Transcripts of all telephone conversations recorded and any notes made in relation to telephone conversations by your company, to and from or by any previous creditor.

 

3 True copies of any assignment and/or default notice or enforcement notice that may have been issued including a copy of proof of postage that you hold.

 

4 A genuine copy of any notice of fair use of my data as required by the Data Protection Act 1998 and any consent that I/we may have given to those uses

 

5 A list of third parties to whom you have disclosed my/our personal data including Credit Reference Agencies and, a summary of the nature of the information you have disclosed, the reason for this disclosure, including any defaults registered date they were registered and date of removal.

 

6 Full copies of transcripts of any correspondence in postal, e-mail or any other format which you have entered into with any individual, organisation or third party which contains my personal or financial, or which pertains to me.

 

7 Full Details of any third party with an interest in the account.

 

8 Full details of any securitisation(s) that my account(s) has been or is involved in

 

9 Full details of any assignment(s) Legal or equitable copies of proof of posting of any notification allegedly given, if given

 

10 Any other information that you hold with regards to me/us and/or our account.

 

 

Enclosed is the statutory maximum fee for this request of £10.

You have 40 days in which to comply. If there is specific information which you require in order to satisfy yourself as to my identity please let me know by return.

 

However please note that the above address is the one which has been used to make any and all communications with me/us with regards to my/our account information from you which has been hitherto found acceptable.

 

IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO DEAL WITH THIS REQUEST, YOU SHOULD IMMEDIATELY FORWARD IT TO THE PERSON WITHIN YOUR ORGANISTAION REPONSIBLE FOR DATA PROTECTION COMPLIANCE.

 

Yours Faithfully

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

1998 Original agreement was taken out with Lloyds Bowmaker Limited

 

1998 Default notice sent by Lloyds Bowmaker.

 

2000 Lloyds UDT Limited obtain suspended possession order.

 

2000 I hand the vehicle back.

 

2007 Granted set-aside for penalty charges. - Black Horse Limited submit Witness Statement.

 

2010 Black Horse Limited are receiving my payments.

 

1 Did Lloyds UDT Limited have the legal right to sue me.

 

2 Did Black Horse Limited have the legal right to defend my set-aside application.

 

2 Has Black Horse Limited the legal right to receive my payments.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again another one trying to bluff their way out of making false claims and statements

If Black Horse Ltd was the New name of Lloyds Bowmaker it would be shown as a name change or prvious name on th register it isnt.

 

Lloyds UDT Finance is the new name of Lloyds Bowmaker...If you want to try and tell lies ...you have to have some sort of story to back you up even if its just a story.;):D:D

 

sparkie

 

Name & Registered Office:

BLACK HORSE LIMITED

25 GRESHAM STREET

LONDON

EC2V 7HN

Company No. 00661204

 

 

spacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifStatus: Active

Date of Incorporation: 01/06/1960

 

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

Company Type: Private Limited Company

Nature of Business (SIC(03)):

6523 - Other financial intermediation

Accounting Reference Date: 31/12

Last Accounts Made Up To: 31/12/2008 (FULL)

Next Accounts Due: 30/09/2010

Last Return Made Up To: 30/04/2009

Next Return Due: 28/05/2010

Last Members List: 30/04/2009

Previous Names:Date of changePrevious Name05/07/2001CHARTERED TRUST PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY31/12/1979JULIAN S. HODGE & COMPANY LIMITED

Link to post
Share on other sites

this may help or might not but well worth a read....

Term: proper law of the contract

1.

Every contract must be governed by a system of law. In the absence of any express or implied choice of law to be applied to interpret an agreement between contracting parties, English common law developed a test to determine which system of private law would be used to construe the contract. This test determines what is known the proper law of the contract.

In the case that the contract does not contain an express selection of law to be applied to the contract, the court may take into consideration the text within the four corners of the contract to determine whether the parties may be said to impliedly agreed the system of private law that would apply to disputes. Selection of jurisdiction of court within which proceedings would be brought (known as a jurisdiction clause), arbitration clauses, references to regulations or by-laws of a particular country, the currency in which sums are to be paid under the contract, the form of the documents, the language used in the contractual document give guidance as to whether the parties have impliedly agreed to a system of law to govern the contract.

In the absence such express or implied agreements, English common law will determine the proper law of the contract to be the system of private law which “the transaction has the closest and most real connection”. This is an objective test to be ascertained by all the circumstances of the case. Amongst the factors that a court will consider in determining the system of law that has the closest and most real connection are:

 

  1. where the contract was made,
  2. the place of performance of the obligations arising under the contract,
  3. the place of incorporation of the incorporated entities to the contract,
  4. place where any security to taken, and
  5. whether the contract is associated with another contract that does contain a choice of law.

That system of law is known as the lex contractus, namely the law used to resolve substantive disputes between the parties in respect to the particular contract, and will apply from the time that the contract was formed. Having said that, in rare cases, it may be appropriate for a court to order that more than one system of law applies to a contract, where the nature and type of obligations are distinct and severable from the remainder of the obligations.

Under the applicable common law principles, choice of law clauses would not at liberty to arbitrarily select systems of law that bore no connection to the contract or its performance; further courts would not apply a foreign system of law if it were contrary to public policy.

Integration with the European Union has encroached upon these traditional rules where the contract has some nexus between England and another state of the European Union. English common law has been superseded since 1991 by the Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990 to determine the proper law of the contract. These traditional rules were reformulated after the passage of the Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990, which implemented the Rome (EC) Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations 1990 (the “Rome Convention”). The Rome Convention is due to be replaced by Regulation (EC) 593/2008 (the “Rome I Regulation”).

The Rome Convention applies to contracts entered into after 1 April 1991 and before 17 December 2009. Thereafter, Rome I Regulation applies to resolve choice of law issues in contracts to which it applies.

 

Usage: The proper law of the contract to ruled to be the laws of England.

 

Related Words: choice of law clause; jurisdiction clause; Rome Convention; Rome I Convention; lex fori; conflict of laws; lex causae; lex situs; lex domicilii; jurisdiction; anti-suit injunctions; lex contractus; lex solutionis; contract; lex posterior derogate priori; lex scripta; lex non scripta.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again another one trying to bluff their way out of making false claims and statements

If Black Horse Ltd was the New name of Lloyds Bowmaker it would be shown as a name change or prvious name on th register it isnt.

 

Lloyds UDT Finance is the new name of Lloyds Bowmaker...If you want to try and tell lies ...you have to have some sort of story to back you up even if its just a story.;):D:D

 

sparkie

 

Name & Registered Office:

BLACK HORSE LIMITED

25 GRESHAM STREET

LONDON

EC2V 7HN

Company No. 00661204

 

 

spacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifStatus: Active

Date of Incorporation: 01/06/1960

 

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

Company Type: Private Limited Company

Nature of Business (SIC(03)):

6523 - Other financial intermediation

Accounting Reference Date: 31/12

Last Accounts Made Up To: 31/12/2008 (FULL)

Next Accounts Due: 30/09/2010

Last Return Made Up To: 30/04/2009

Next Return Due: 28/05/2010

Last Members List: 30/04/2009

Previous Names:Date of changePrevious Name05/07/2001CHARTERED TRUST PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY31/12/1979JULIAN S. HODGE & COMPANY LIMITED

yes charter trust and julian hodge i had a lease from them in the 70's for a 508 merc van when i was a tool dealer .....then somewhere along those lines wagon finance got involved

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 years later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...