Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Law Project are trying to force HMG to release details of how Sunak's hedge fund made large profits from Moderna. Government ordered to disclose Sunak’s hedge fund emails - Good Law Project GOODLAWPROJECT.ORG Good Law Project has won a battle with the Treasury after it tried to suppress emails between Rishi Sunak and the hedge fund he founded.  
    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
  • 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

Link & MBNA


arthur256
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3711 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

In another thread there appears the following statement regarding CCA agreement defaults:

 

"You have not replied to this request within the statutory period and therefore, under s78(6) of the Act, you may not enforce any agreement you may suppose to exist between us. That means, you may not

 

1) request payment on the account

2) add any charges or interestlink3.gif to the account

3) communicate any details regarding the account to any third parties. This inludes but is not limited to Credit Reference Agencies."

 

Is item 3 really true?

 

I have a dispute with Link over an invalidly assigned MBNA debt, which has been in default for several years due to Link persistently failing to send the Consumer Credit Agreement. They eventually sent me somebody else's CCA and I have reported this to the Information Commissioner. So it remains in default.

 

They have continued to supply adverse data to Equifax and Experian, probably CallCredit too. If item 3 above is correct, how can I get the information deleted please? I already have a Notice of Dispute filed with both main CRAs, who said (when I first mentioned the situation) that they cannot remove it without Link's agreement.

 

TIA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly this is incorrect.

 

Even if they are in breach of their s78 obligations then they can write to you / telephone you / update credit files and even issue a claim. What they CANNOT do is obtain a judgment. I know quite bizarre but this is the way it is.

 

Is this an ex MBNA account ? When was the first default marker entered onto the account by MBNA ? Do you know when you defaulted on the account ?

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I thought so!

 

MBNA - yes.

 

Account supposedly defaulted and sold on 30/01/2008.

 

However it was subject to an ongoing repayment plan by agreement with my wife on my behalf, due to health/disability issues.

 

The assignment was invalid because the account was in dispute, and also in breach of what MBNA had agreed with my wife,

namely that if I paid for 3 months they would accept 30% in full and final settlement.

 

Somebody at MBNA said it was sold because I had not paid in January 2008, obviously not aware that January has 31 days.

 

Link have sent me a statement from MBNA which clearly shows a payment on 30/01/2008.

 

I am prepared to take Link to Court for harassing us over the five and a half years, failure to comply with my request under Section 77-79 of the CCA, holding of and transmission of my data to Equifax and Experian when not entitled, and illegally sending a third party's copy agreement to me.

 

I could use my Solicitor but would find the whole business awkward, as they now consider me a HNW client!

 

(I would have been happy to pay 30% to MBNA, who were not unreasonable, just somebody got his dates in a muddle).

 

Regards

 

Arthur

Edited by arthur256
tidy up format
Link to post
Share on other sites

an mbna debt with a discount

 

that means something is WRONG!!

 

sar MBNA and find it , prob ppi/PENALTY charges.

 

I would not be rushing into court for those reasons

 

as for link/mbna you might like to read the durkin thread/judgement.

 

link are quite entitled to mark your cra file if they own the debt.

 

what is the defaulted date as per the cra summary?

 

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.

 

There is no PPI involved.

 

I have never opted in to PPI except on one particular loan, and in that case I ended up putting in a huge claim when hospitalized for six months. I got the maximum benefit in fact and have been disabled ever since. Definitely PPI not applicable here.

 

I think the 30% discount offered was because of my disability.

 

One bank wrote off £2.5K completely due to my health.

 

I don't agree that Link own anything, as the purported assignment was invalid due to MBNA breaching the existing repayment agreement.

 

Link were told this in 2008 and have done nothing at all to prove ownership.

 

They are just relying on the fact that they had posted details with CRAs.

 

Defaulted date as per the CRA summary is 30/01/2008 as previously posted.

 

As far as I can ascertain, Durkin remains unresolved - unless this has changed. I am reluctant to rely on an earlier stage of what is, overall, still unresolved.

 

Arthur

Edited by arthur256
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

then it'll be of your file next jan so i'd ignore them

 

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

Indeed. I have been ignoring them, but am quite keen to have them on the receiving end of some judgment about harassment and dubious practice. I took a fringe bank to court earlier this year, and got a favourable settlement, on a completely unrelated matter, but I consider Link to be a far worse setup causing many people a lot of pain.

 

Arthur

Edited by arthur256
unsigned
Link to post
Share on other sites

arther you have my support

 

anything to nail link is good

 

sadly we see but .0000001% of the 1000'000's of people they must be diddling money out of

through nefarious means, esp on old students loans sold to thesis [link] here on cag.

 

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

Sadly an account being ''in dispute'' does NOT make sale or assignment invalid, a creditor 'considers there is no valid dispute' and so can dispose of the account.

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

But... MBNA admitted that they had made a mistake less than a month after they (purportedly) assigned it

and agreed there was no default as I had paid on time

(and Link have copied to me recently the statement showing this).

MBNA had records of the offer agreed with my wife.

They said they were going to contact Link and get it put right as the assignment was invalid,

but AFAIK never did, or more likely Link were difficult about it.

I have consistently denied the validity of the assignment,

and Link have not proved anything otherwise.

They go quiet for perhaps a year and then start phoning e.g. when we are on holiday.

 

I think I saw a post on CAG from somebody working for a solicitor.

Would that be the sort of person who could take this on for me?

I am able to pay reasonable charges even though disabled and retired.

 

Arthur

Edited by arthur256
dx
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...