Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.View the full article
  • 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

Challenge accepted! **WON**


keithp
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6413 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 calculate that the Halifax have imposed charges on my account totalling around £250.00 over the past 6 years. I have followed the guidance on this forum and after my initial claim letter was offered £90 as a full and final settlement. Following the guidance I found on this site I then sent an LBA again requesting the full amount be refunded. I have today received another 'full and final' repayment offer of £188.00 within one week of sending my LBA.

 

My question is as the title suggests do I accept still being around £60.00 short of the full amount and consider myself to have avoided the need to go through litigation procedures? Or, do I again write back stating that I want the full amount or else serve a court order?

 

I appreciate your help - would also appreciate some help with my other query titled ' unauthorised direct debit' (relating to both the Halifax and Npower)posted in the general consumer issues forum (shameless plug I know but it seems everyone is reading it but no-one has any suggestions!! Come on guys gizza clue!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I have taken the advice offered and again gone back to the Halifax stating I am only prepared to accept their offer as part payment. I have again re-iterated my intention to submit a claim against them. I have since received a response stating that they are unwilling to increase their offer (the tone is quite terse and doesn't even make clear if the offer still stands!). They have also kindly enclosed a financial ombudsman leaflet. I now intend to go ahead with Moneyclaim submission. It has now been around 21 days since my LBA - is the delay in my submission likely to affect my prospects of winning and obtaining a full refund?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has now been around 21 days since my LBA - is the delay in my submission likely to affect my prospects of winning and obtaining a full refund?

 

No.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in the process of completing a claim via Moneyclaim having been offered almost £100.00 less than the amount owed to me by Halifax Plc (a paltry amount I know compared with many other cases on this site - but MY money nonetheless!!)

 

My claim amounts to £283.00. With interest the amount becomes £350. I note that the costs for applying for the claim rise to £50.00 with any amount over £300. My question is if as appears most likely they agree to settle having received the claim will they also refund my costs or would I only get this back if I have my day in court! Also does the same apply to the amount in interest I am claiming i.e. if they settle out of court can I would not get this either?

 

Any help is greatly appreciated.:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have gone through all processes as outlined on this very useful site. After my initial LBA I was offered an initial £90.00 of the almost £300.00 I calculated was owed to me. As advised I agreed to accept as part payment only. They then offered me £188.00 again I accepted as part payment only and notified my intentions to take court action.

 

I have now done this and my claim with interest and costs amounts to around £400.00. Comparing this relatively paltry amount with other claims on this site I was somewhat suprised to receive confirmation from the court that they intend to defend the case in full. Are they bluffing and trying to prevent me from sticking to my guns or are we really likely to meet in court? If so is there a definitive guide that may help me prepare my case?

 

Apart from the usual info re the OFT ruling etc I have one or two 'aces up my sleeve' re the Halifax's mis-management of my account. Should I write to them threatening to expose these in court in the hope that they may rethink and settle or simply wait for the 'big day' - any advice would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont worry you are doing everything correctly so far, my guess is they will settle soon, halifax seem to be a bit quicker than most at settling but please be aware they it always might go to court, you need to prepare for that, read up on the next stage of the process should you need it which is filling in an Allocation Questionaire, (all details are in the templates section)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the 'heads up' guys. Has now been 10 days since I filed my MCOL application and around 5 days since Howard and his gang took up the challenge - would prefer a settlement without the need to knock his glasses off in court but we'll wait and see. Will keep you posted and will also get revising via the templates section.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:grin: :grin: :grin:

Received letter over the weekend. Something along the lines of 'Halifax wishes to defend your claim. However it is not considered financially viable to defend this..... Therefore without admitting liability Halifax agrees to repay all charges plus interest and refund court fees - Woo Hoo!!

 

Perseverance pays off.

 

They simply want to hold out a long as possible to see if you if you lose your nerve and accept their offer of settlement. Don't do it guys - follow the excellent advice on this site and take them all the way!!

 

Let's all give'em Extra until they clean up their act and stop charging!!

 

Now off to make a donation - thsnks all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:grin: :grin: :grin:

Received letter over the weekend. Something along the lines of 'Halifax wishes to defend your claim. However it is not considered financially viable to defend this..... Therefore without admitting liability Halifax agrees to repay all charges plus interest and refund court fees - Woo Hoo!!

 

Perseverance pays off.

 

They simply want to hold out a long as possible to see if you if you lose your nerve and accept their offer of settlement. Don't do it guys - follow the excellent advice on this site and take them all the way!!

 

Let's all give'em Extra until they clean up their act and stop charging!!

 

Now off to make a donation - thsnks all.

 

Nobody honestly believes banks will ever stop charging, they are businesses afterall and provide a service. All we want is for them to stop disproportionately charging and to stop taking advantage of vunerable people in financial difficulty. How many people would be in this situation and would this site even exist if say Banks charged £2.50 for being Overdrawn, Unpaid DD's. etc etc.

Regards

 

 

S

 

 

Halifax PLC - £607 - SETTLED IN FULL

Halifax Card Services - £1142 - SETTLED IN FULL

 

MBNA Europe - £842 - SETTLED IN FULL + INTEREST!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I am new to all of this and have just read all about your charges from halifax.

I am in a similar situation and was hoping for advice.

About 4 months ago I was £12 pounds over drawn and due to this they charged me £30. To cut along story short, due to them charging me for being over drawn they were then adding on more charges for me being over drawn because of their charges. Everytime I thought I had cleared the charges there would be more. In total I have paid them £600 in charges alone over 4 months.

Any advice would be very much appreciated.

Rand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...