Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

Apex chasing Natwest Account i'm already paying to Natwest £1PCM


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3766 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

Hello all,

 

I have another DCA on my back now,

 

this time with an existing Natwest account.

 

This is my existing student bank account and I already have an arrangement with Natwest to pay token payments of £1 pcm until my circumstances improve.

Unfortunately this has been going on for a number of years due to never having enough cash to settle the debt quicker.

 

I've received from Apex.

 

They wrote to me advising that Natwest had instructed them to "manage my account",

I sent them a "prove it" letter as I was still paying Natwest.

 

They replied with some flimflam about being disapointed with me ignoring their attempts at contact

and they have "external sources" that prove I can pay the debt.

 

So I CCA'd them, they replied with this:

 

"I can confirm that this request needs to be made directly to the Royal Bank of Scotland as they are the principle company with whom the agreement was reached.

Your request will need to made in writing to the address below (RBS address) along with the enclosed applicable fee of £1.00 made payable to the "Royal Bank of Scotland""

 

I replied with this, coupled with the original CCA request

 

 

"I recently requested that you supply me a copy of the alleged Consumer Credit Agreement,

pursuant to Section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA 1974).

 

If it is your view that you are not the creditor, Section 175 of the CCA 1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment,

and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor.

 

In the case of an absolute assignment, you are a creditor as defined by Section 189.

If you contend that you purchased the rights but not the duties of any agreement, you are reminded that Section 189 of the Act

is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties. Your attention is drawn to Sections 5(2), 3(b), 6 and 7

of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR).

 

Attached is a copy of my original request and the original payment in the sum of £1.00, which is the statutory fee

- remember these funds are not to be used for any other purpose."

 

I waited a few days, got a reply and it was the same as their initial reply stating I have to CCA RBS myself.

 

Can anyone shine any light on this?

 

I have been following advice given on this site and it's been great so far.

I am happily paying Natwest. I wish I could legitimately send Apex a letter telling them where to go...

 

Thanks in advance for any advice given

 

Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are only collecting on their behalf hence the debt has not been assigned so they are not at liberty to respond to your section 77 request.Ignore them keep making your payment to RBS.

 

Also you cant use a section 77/78 on a current account ...they are exempt from the CCA1974 except for Part V

 

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

are you saying this is a bank account?

 

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

If i remember rightly a CCA request wont work on a bank account. Its not a Credit Account.

But the overdraft element maybe. Some of the forum guys should beable to help.

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

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

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I am paying back my overdraft with the view to close it once I am in the black again.

 

I do admit to opening a student account to take benefits of a 2 grand interest free overdraft...

 

I just wanted Apex to prove to me in writing that they have been instructed by Natwest to "manage" my account.

 

I already have a payment plan in place with Natwest so can't I just continue to pay them back?

 

Screw Apex?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I am paying back my overdraft with the view to close it once I am in the black again. I do admit to opening a student account to take benefits of a 2 grand interest free overdraft...

 

I just wanted Apex to prove to me in writing that they have been instructed by Natwest to "manage" my account. I already have a payment plan in place with Natwest so can't I just continue to pay them back? Screw Apex?!

 

As per my post#2

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...