Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
    • Read these 6 things you can do to be empathetic to other people’s views and perspectives.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

Milo19 Vs Argos


Milo19
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6308 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 there, I sent off the Prelim letter requesting repayment of £121.18. This was ignored, so I sent LBA. I sent that on the 13/10/06 via spec delivery. I got a letter from on the saturday 14/10/06 decling the repayment because all but 1 of my charges have been £10, below the threshold of the OFT. Any ideas for a response.???

Barclays Bank - SETTLED - £4225.00

First National - SETTLED - £125.00

Lloyds TSB - SETTLED - £994.87

Capital 1 - SETTLED - £827.95

Online Finance - SETTLED - £349.60

Argos - SETTLED - £121.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump!

Barclays Bank - SETTLED - £4225.00

First National - SETTLED - £125.00

Lloyds TSB - SETTLED - £994.87

Capital 1 - SETTLED - £827.95

Online Finance - SETTLED - £349.60

Argos - SETTLED - £121.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

still awaiting an answer to my above question! Any ideas!?

Barclays Bank - SETTLED - £4225.00

First National - SETTLED - £125.00

Lloyds TSB - SETTLED - £994.87

Capital 1 - SETTLED - £827.95

Online Finance - SETTLED - £349.60

Argos - SETTLED - £121.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be interested if anyone has anything to say about this. I have included those smaller charges in my claim to Argos.

 

It does seem that they accept that the larger charges might be too much if they maintian that £10 is reasonable.

 

Anyone been through a case with Argos that can offer any help here?

 

Chris

--

NatWest Bank

£394 refunded after an exchange of letter and the threat of court action.

Argos card services

Initial request for £XXX sent 05.11.06

No reply

LBA sent 20.11.06

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know much about Argos in particular, but as far as I understand it the OFT have given guidelines for what they consider to be reasonable charges on credit cards. This does not make the charges lawful or fair as they are merely guidelines, not law. Even though most credit card companies have lowered their charges to be within these guidlines, they have also increased their interest rates in a bid to claw back the money they are losing from reduced charge rates.

~

:p I'm a lover, not a fighter... well, most of the time :razz: ~

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree, still unlawful and unfair, I would write again, at the timescale I would still start a claim, It will only cost £30 on the MCOL site.

Kingliam

:!:

 

On behalf of the Ginger one

Lloyds TSB - 1ST 12/07/06-LBA 26/07/06-MC-14/08/06-Court-31/01/2007

Halifax - D P A 02/10/06

On behalf of MumKing

Barclays Bank D P A 29/08/06

 

On behalf of DJ Sunny

Alliance & Leicester D P A 29/08/06

 

On behalf of GrandmaKing

GE Capital D P A 30/10/06

Barclays Bank D P A 30/10/06 - 1ST 15/11/06 *Microfiche [problem]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Hi there, sorry I have replied before now. Last letter was ignored. going to write again say, doesn't matter, if its not a true cost to you, then its unlawful. Or words to that effect!

Barclays Bank - SETTLED - £4225.00

First National - SETTLED - £125.00

Lloyds TSB - SETTLED - £994.87

Capital 1 - SETTLED - £827.95

Online Finance - SETTLED - £349.60

Argos - SETTLED - £121.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

We are having a similar story with Argos, we sent the SAR on 15/12/2006, and received a letter this morning from them.

 

Dear Mrs ...........

Thank you for your letter dated 15 December 2006.

Argos Limited does not operate credit account for customers and we are therefore unable to identify the account number you have quoted.

 

In order to identify the specific information that you require, and validate your identity, please would you complete the enclosed form DP2 and return it for my attention.

 

Well if you don't operate credit accounts, why do you send me goods and chase me for money? :confused:

Lloyds TSB (C.Acc) **WON - Fully Settled**

NatWest - £1367.96 - N1 Filed - AQ Compl

Lloyds TSB - Select Loan PPI - £4629.52 - N1 Filed - Settlement rejected

Lloyds TSB Credit Card - £373.48 - N1 Filed

MBNA Credit Card - £791.52 - N1 Filed

Capital One - £746.67 - N1 Filed -** Settlement awaited **

Halifax Credit Card - £836.12 - N1 Filed

Paragon Personal Finance - S.A.R 15/12/2006

Littlewoods - £834.43 - N1 Filed

Barclaycard - £1145.00 - N1 Filed

My Wife:

Natwest Current Account - £1197.98 - N1 Filed at Court

Capital One - £1150.94 - N1 Filed - **Settlement offer rejected **

Littlewoods - £1405.48 - N1 Filed

8-) PROUD TO BE DEALING WITH MY DEBTS! 8-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

An update..

 

We have managed to get a response from Argos Additions.

It is actually a company called:

Shop Direct Financial Services Ltd T/A Additions

 

This is where the S.A.R needs to be sent to.

Lloyds TSB (C.Acc) **WON - Fully Settled**

NatWest - £1367.96 - N1 Filed - AQ Compl

Lloyds TSB - Select Loan PPI - £4629.52 - N1 Filed - Settlement rejected

Lloyds TSB Credit Card - £373.48 - N1 Filed

MBNA Credit Card - £791.52 - N1 Filed

Capital One - £746.67 - N1 Filed -** Settlement awaited **

Halifax Credit Card - £836.12 - N1 Filed

Paragon Personal Finance - S.A.R 15/12/2006

Littlewoods - £834.43 - N1 Filed

Barclaycard - £1145.00 - N1 Filed

My Wife:

Natwest Current Account - £1197.98 - N1 Filed at Court

Capital One - £1150.94 - N1 Filed - **Settlement offer rejected **

Littlewoods - £1405.48 - N1 Filed

8-) PROUD TO BE DEALING WITH MY DEBTS! 8-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi Milo19,

 

I'd be interested to hear if you've got any further with this?

 

Maangov

__________________

HSBC A/C - WON! - £1,575 Charges, Stat Interest and default removed before court!

HSBC CC - WON! - £1,025 Charges, and Stat Interest refunded

ARGOS - WON! - £250 Charges & Contractual Interest

CREATION WON! - £180 Charges & Contractual Interest

BARCLAYCARD- Court Date Set - 09/10/2007

EGG - SAR Sent 22/12/06, ID Sent 05/01/07. No progress yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...