Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

capquest - old sky/monument/BC credit card


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3826 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 am a long time reader of these forums and have gained some very help full advice from them.

I have looked for an answer to my query all over the forums but not got a definite answer,

so here it goes. I also hope I am posting in the right place.:oops:

 

I have been paying cap-quest for a credit card debt on and off for almost 6 years and regularly £5.00 every month for over 2 years.

It dropped off my credit file last year.

 

I have not received a single letter off them or account status/statement in over 18 months.

 

The last I heard from them was when they turned down an offer I made as a full and final settlement

(I came into a small amount of money and managed to pay off all but two debts)

 

they told me It did not matter if the default dropped off my file they would just keep it on my file

(I know this was incorrect from reading other forums)

and I had to keep paying them for ever or until the debt was paid.

 

so what I am basically asking is

 

1. Do I have to keep paying them for ever or can I just stop and ignore there threats and hot air?

2. are they suppose to send me an account statement on regular basis if so are they in breach of any thing I can use against them?

3. If I do stop paying are they likely to apply for a CCJ? as if this is the case i would rather keep paying them as only got 18 months till all my defaults are off my file.

 

I know some of this is in other forums I just need to clarify things on my situation so it clear in my head.

 

Hope some one can help.:???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. If you dont pay they could still apply for a CCJ. If the debt is statute barred then you don't have to pay.

2. IIRC guidance says they must send you a statement of account at least once a year. You can ask at any time for one, and they should give you one. You can also send a SAR which will give you all info they hold on you.

3. Most do, but not all do. It's the luck of the draw, but saying that, many DCA's and creditors are taking debtors to court more often now.

 

In short, if the debt is legit and not filled with bogus charges or it isn't Statute barred, then you should continue paying. It sucks, but thats one of the downfalls of being in debt. You could ask them to consider a settlement offer though, although if they accept, you have to get certain conditions agreed in writing.

 

If a DCA owns the debt, they are much more likely to accept, but if a DCA owns the debt, you have to be hunting down the reason why they own it. Never pay a DCA unless the debt is 100% legit.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have claimed PPI back from one loan(only one I had it for). not sure if there are any charges on my cap-quest account will this show in the SAR? am I entitled to refund of charges or is it just a speculative request? is it worth sending SAR to all paid off debts or can I just write to them?

 

Think i might stop paying see what happens can always start paying £5 month again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just re-read the thread.

 

I have been paying cap-quest for a credit card debt on and off for almost 6 years and regularly £5.00 every month for over 2 years

 

It REALLY sounds like you are being cash cowed. Capquest are well known for doing so, and wont accept £5 a month for almost 6 years unless the debt was a lemon debt.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

CCA Request to Capquest?

 

Think I may have done that already but done so many with debts and lost all paper work in flood. worth another try.

 

Is it still £1.00 p/o for a CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

First step is to CCA them. Capquest rarely have the full paperwork needed to enforce any judgement. Since yours is a Credit card debt, it is probably full of penalty charges which is why crapquest have been happy to keep you paying for 6 years.

  • Confused 1

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay I will get onto it after feeding the hungry brood. If my memory serves me correctly I am sure they were the ones that just sent me a blank CCA and asked me to sign it with a copy of my t&cs ( I did not) and quoting some court case or other.

 

Will up date if and when I get a reply.

 

Thanks again for all the help so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If my memory serves me correctly I am sure they were the ones that just sent me a blank CCA and asked me to sign it with a copy of my t&cs ( I did not) and quoting some court case or other.

 

You've been cash cowed. For the last 6 years.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have been making payments, then the Statute of Limitations will not apply.

 

It starts from the first missed payment

 

 

Many DCAs will argue that limitation accrues from the time when the "default notice" is issued. It does not.

 

Limitation clock starts ticking from when the payment is due and not paid not when they send a default notice.

 

We see often that CRA entries will date 5 or 6 months ahead of when the payment was missed.

 

People need to be sure that they aren’t being hoodwinked and that the DCA isextending limitation so they can sue when they are not allowed to.

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

One important point still to remember if no party has already started a court claim the Limitations Act 1980 is clear that no such action can be taken after 6 years have elapsed since the cause of action i.e. the default.

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

Brig the above is incorrect if you are referring to Tort..Tort is not a credit agreement , in common law jurisdictions, it is a civil wrong which unfairly causes someone else to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act, called a tortfeasor.

 

Although crimes may be torts, the cause of legal action is not necessarily a crime as the harm may be due to negligence which does not amount to criminal negligence. The victim of the harm can recover their loss as damages. In order to prevail, the Claimant must show that the actions or lack of action was the legally recognizable cause of the harm. The equivalent of tort in civil law jurisdictions is delict.

 

So I think you are confusing it with the 6 year period since default/incident...which applies in other Torts once that period has expired...which is not the same under Credit Consumer Law

 

You are correct on your other point but there is no judgment here and therefore nothing to execute.As hes been making payments without a 6 year gap its not statute barred either.

 

Regards

 

Andy

  • Haha 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brig the above is incorrect if you iare referring to Tort..Tort is not a credit agreement , in common law jurisdictions, it is a civil wrong which unfairly causes someone else to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act, called a tortfeasor.

 

Although crimes may be torts, the cause of legal action is not necessarily a crime as the harm may be due to negligence which does not amount to criminal negligence. The victim of the harm can recover their loss as damages. In order to prevail, the Claimant must show that the actions or lack of action was the legally recognizable cause of the harm. The equivalent of tort in civil law jurisdictions is delict.

 

So I think you are confusing it with the 6 year period since default/incident...which applies in other Torts once that period has expired...which is not the same under Credit Consumer Law

 

You are correct on your other point but there is no judgment here and therefore nothing to execute.As hes been making payments without a 6 year gap its not statute barred either.

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Indeed so LA 1980 Part 1 (5) is what I should have quoted.

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

Indeed so LA 1980 Part 1 (5) is what I should have quoted.

 

Well lets look at LoP 1980 PT1 (5)

 

:- 5 Time limit for actions founded on simple contract.

 

An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

 

But you must also consider PT1 (6)

 

:- 6 Special time limit for actions in respect of certain loans.

 

(1)Subject to subsection (3) below, section 5 of this Act shall not bar the right of action on a contract of loan to which this section applies.

(2)This section applies to any contract of loan which—

(a)does not provide for repayment of the debt on or before a fixed or determinable date; and

(b)does not effectively (whether or not it purports to do so) make the obligation to repay the debt conditional on a demand for repayment made by or on behalf of the creditor or on any other matter;except where in connection with taking the loan the debtor enters into any collateral obligation to pay the amount of the debt or any part of it (as, for example, by delivering a promissory note as security for the debt) on terms which would exclude the application of this section to the contract of loan if they applied directly to repayment of the debt.

(3)Where a demand in writing for repayment of the debt under a contract of loan to which this section applies is made by or on behalf of the creditor (or, where there are joint creditors, by or on behalf of any one of them) section 5 of this Act shall thereupon apply as if the cause of action to recover the debt had accrued on the date on which the demand was made.

(4)In this section “promissory note” has the same meaning as in the Bills of Exchange Act 1882.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

got the CCA back today with letter.

 

They provided the correct signed CCA.

 

Letter states account still in default and the full balance is payable.

 

then gives me a balance of £3804.86 which is I think at least a couple of hundred more than when I offered them a payment as full settlement 2 years ago,

which they turned down point blank they claim I have paid £207.00 to them.

 

What would you recommend now.

 

Are they in breach as not had an account statement for at least two years?

 

What is the outcome of the discussion that took place above about court action needing to take place within 6 years?

 

The legal bit lost me a bit?

 

Any help would be gratefuly recieved.:???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may find that the debt is loaded with charges which you can claim back that will reduce the debt,if you are in financial difficulty tell them you will only pay what you can,if pound a month so be it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

who is the original creditor please

 

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

So do i send them a sar to find out how much charges they have put on?

 

yes but to the OC.

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...