Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • it's 85k of turnover (well, now £90k). However, you're digging yourself into another hole here. That ship has probably long since sailed. Is it worth pursuing this? You're not going to get anything back from it either way.
    • Hi,   A few pointers from yesterday to take note of evris cpr 27.9 failed again so we should really make issue of this also their WX fail to comply with CPR so again we should take issue with their statement of truth  you cant get tort if you get damages under subsection 7 of CRA because its double recovery  - not sure what we think of this? however its the first time i saw the judges make reference to your non automatic rights from s49 which s54 and 57 assist with. We should start stating this specifically for claims as I think its much better than just 49 and 57 as we need to make it clear where our non automatic rights come from as 54 automatic frankly dont help  I have sent the claim form and defences to the admin email because I can’t upload them for some reason as it wont let me but thought this may help as its the first time we’ve taken tort to trial. although i think the DDJ was honestly struggling to understand some parts of the law because he was asking me about them and how he should interpret them, especially for the automatic. Will apply for transcript if you want it?
    • I decided on confrontation - which I hate.  Omg the arrogance of the driver.  They refused to say who had given them the alleged permission to park on the private land - unless I proved ownership.  I couldn't believe they could be so objectionable.   They advised they couldn't take public transport to work as they lived too far away.  They couldn't rent a local garage as none were available. I simply said that's their issue not mine. It was infuriating that this person had such misplaced entitlement.  However I decided to humour them and show them the title deeds.   They couldn't respond.  Although at this point they alleged some guy in a city up north - whose name they couldn't remember - gave permission!!    They then asked if they could buy the garages and land!! Yet can't afford to park on a meter !! They seemed to back down and agree to now park elsewhere.  I hope so. 
    • I've worked out the contractor invoiced apx 250k - Without adding vat to the invoices.  So based on above he should have added vat to all invoices once he reached 85k?  Obviously he had to pay his labourers - would those payments get taken off what he received?  Or it doesn't matter cos he invoiced for the high sum?
  • 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

Co-Op Credit Card debt


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4085 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

Hi,

 

This is a bit complicated but bear with me. I had a Co-op bank credit card for many years with a £500 limit. Whenever i used the card I always paid in full each time a statement arrived.

 

I have for some years been on ESA. Last summer, due to being on £71 assessment for over a year awaiting an appeal i had to use my card for living expenses. I withdrew up to the £500 limit. I intended repaying the minimum payment each month by making a payment then withdrawing £10 for the following month. I realise the balance would not go down much but I would be making payments. However the card expired and they refused to send a new card. The insisted I repay them first.

 

Is this legal? They entered into a contract to renew my card and operate my account. I needed a new card to be able to withdraw £10 each month to cover the minimum payment. By refusing to renew they effectively closed the account.

 

Am I within my rights therefore to say they broke the contract and not pay them back? I lost my appeal and am living on limited savings so cannot repay them anyway. Also I moved abroad, outside the EU. Are they likely, or even able to pursue this debt in a foreign court? Surely it would cost them far more than £500 to do so.

 

Any help or advice would be very welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

am i reading thisright

 

you are withdrawing £10 to pay back £10 to the same account.??

 

and no co-op have not done anything wrong

 

read the T&C's

 

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

yes, the minimum payment was slightly under £10 so I was paying a very little off each month, until they refused to issue a new card. So why haven't they done anything wrong? I was making payments, so i wasn't doing anything wrong, but why are they allowed to withhold a new card?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi,

 

I am at the limit of £500 on my credit card. I was paying the minimum each month, then drawing out enough to do the same again the next month. However the bank refused to renew my card. I was receiving ESA but this stopped when I lost my appeal. I am now living on savings and had to give up my flat and stay with different friends.

 

One friend was kind enough to act as a mail drop and she emails me when anything comes. I have missed about 3 payments now and they have threatened to send in the bailiffs, despite both me and her writing and telling them I don't live there and never have. They have backed down for now but can they take action against her, even though she was only collecting my mail?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Threatening bailiffs or doorstep collectors? There is a big difference! Bailiffs won't get involved with a cc debt, more likely some tin pot debt collection agency!

 

Let me guess, your credit card Is with Vanquis? And it's impact that are giving you grief?

It never rains but it pours...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should we be worried?

 

Not about the bailiffs, you are trying (and succeeding) to frighten you into doing something foolish.

 

Whilst waiting for one of the 'big guns' to reply I suggest reading some of the threads on this forum and I think you will soon see how these bottom feeders work.

 

You should also be reassured that there is along way to go before anything serious can happen to you, if it ever comes to that, which is most unlikely.

 

One thing I am reasonably certain of is that Bailiffs must have a court order and can only confiscate items that can be reasonably shown to be yours, not your friends, families or anyone else's. Only yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd put money on it being threats from a tin pot Dca.

 

You really need not worry at all.

 

As the previous poster has stated, they're doing a good job at worrying you over this very low priority debt.

 

I bet the letter they've sent is full of "if payment isn't made within the next 7 days we MAY Instruct our legal department to start proceedings and COULD turn up at your property" bla bla bla rubbish.

 

If you can find out who sent the letter, it would be helpful.

 

Please, don't worry about this. Nobody is gonna turn up at your friends house! On the off chance that they do, they can be told as politely or unpolitely as you wish to foxtrot Oscar!

It never rains but it pours...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn’t it a bit rum letting your friend take all the flak? Far better for you to contact the creditor and sort out the situation – CAG can’t condone legging it from debts. Are there any charges on the account you could reclaim? PPI?

 

Any unfair treatment? For example, have they refused ato freeze interest and accept a token payment of, say, £1 per month? That’s what you should be trying to negotiate. It’s best to deal with it somehow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And if the letters really do suggest that bailiffs can call without first mentioning they have to get a CCJ first, that is against OFT guidelines. Use it in negotiations.

 

Get a copy of the letters and tell us what they actually say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

\i'm not asking anyone to condone legging it and that is not what I've done, if you read my post. I

 

 

was paying back the minimum monthly payment until they refused to renew the card.

 

 

I cannot now afford to pay and I have told them this.

 

 

I have written to them, i am not allowing my friend to take the flak.

 

 

I have informed the bank 3 times that my friend is no longer handling my mail but they still keep writing.

 

 

They ignored a change of address I gave them.

 

 

Now they are threatening to send in bailiffs.

 

 

I just want to know if they can legally do this,

 

 

just because my friend was acting as a post office box for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they can’t do that.

 

You must complain directly to Trading Standards and the OFT about this.

 

But be realistic – not renewing the card will never be accepted as a valid reason for not paying!

 

But as you have tried to negotiate, you are heading in to the realms of unfair treatment. The simple fact is that you are a ‘can’t pay’, not a ‘won’t pay’, and OFT guidelines suggest lenders must take this kind of situation into account.

 

You need to make them aware that you know they are treating you unfairly by not directing mail to you, and by threatening a third party.

 

Try composing a letter, post it here and we’ll help you get the tone right. Sory if it all sounds a bit nuanced, but it is – CAG can help you keep them at arms’ length while you try and sort things out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...