Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Halifax One Credit card CCA response


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3709 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 all,

 

On the 18/3/2014 I wrote to the Halifax BOS with a CCA request for an account I have been paying via Payplan for the last 6 years.

 

This was on the advice of someone else on this forum - same person advised I post here when I had a response.

 

On the 15/4/2014 they wrote back to me enclosing a copy of the original signed form and the signature is mine and does relate to my account.

 

This is one of 6 accounts Payplan were distributing payments to on my behalf and to date, is the only one to respond.

 

My question is, what do I do now?

 

I cannot restart the payments with Payplan as I've not had a response from the other creditors

and I think I'm correct in saying that the account is no longer "in dispute" as they have responded?

 

The estimated total owing on my Payplan account is considerably less than the amount Halifax claim I owe on the account.

 

I'm desperate to clear up my credit file (the original default has dropped off my file, but I don't want anything new registered on my file).

 

Any advice anyone has at this point would be hugely appreciated.

 

Thanks,

JJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

More info on this -

 

Sorry if I'm appearing a dumbass on this, but having read through everything again, it appears that they have only sent me a copy of the Credit Agreement I signed for the account. It appears genuine, having my address at the time the agreement was taken out, address and direct debit details at the time and my signature.

 

They haven't included any statements or breakdown of what I owe though. They say in their letter than they have fulfilled their obligations to s.78 by sending my a copy of the signed credit agreement. My interpretation of s.78 is that they need to provide me with a breakdown of what I owe though - is this correct? Can I dispute this and should I continue to pay them in the mean time?

 

I'm really not trying to escape my obligations here, I just have no idea how they've arrived at the figure they say I owe them, I think a large chunk of it will be charges and interest applied to the account after I entered into the agreement with Payplan.... I just don't know how to proceed from here. Payplan can no longer help me - I really want to avoid any more adverse information on my file, I got into trouble through redundancy nearly 8 years ago now and really don't want to continue to be punished indefinitely for it!

 

Any advice anyone can give at this point would be hugely appreciated - reading a lot of confusing information and I'm new to this.

 

Thanks in advance

JJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

good well done.

 

it is typical that debts still with the original creditors

that they are able to produce the original documents.

 

so now, you could do an I&E or just directly pay them the figure PP were sending them

via your internet web banking portal.

 

the debt cannot re-appear on your file as its already dropped off.

 

however they ofcourse could go for a CCJ

but I doubt it.

 

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 for the quick reply dx.

 

I don't have a breakdown from them on how they've arrived at the figure they say I owe. It's close to double what Payplan estimate. My guess is it consists of charges and interest. I thought they would provide this as part of s78 of the CCA request??

 

Should I send a SAR request to get clarification?

Can I get any of the interest or charges removed?

Should I continue to pay if this is the right thing to do while I wait for them to come back (is my account still technically in dispute)?

 

Apologies for all the questions and thanks again for your help.

 

JJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey no sweat

 

your account if you think the CCA is compliant

is no longer in despute.

 

yes send an sar

 

PP should have negotiated no charges & freeze of interest.

 

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...