Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Late payments from EON and can not get a mortgage


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3544 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

I have red trough the forums and hope to find a solution.

In summer 2012 I had a major surgery and was in an out hospital. Being alone I missed some payments to EON.

 

I have tried to ask them as a gesture of good will and was prepared to send them proof of my surgery. They replied politely that the snwer is now they will not remove the 2 late markers from the equifax file.

 

I am however confused as the account was in order prior to June 2012 there were no records from EON on equifax at all. The moment the payment was late they placed the red mark. Also I remember seeing a letter when I was out of hospital in the autumn advising that a default was going to be recorded and by than the debt was settled.

 

So all the months before June 2012 when payments were made were not recorded in green and than they start with a red mark?

 

That does not seem right to me.

 

From my understanding I will have to cancel my contract with them in writing, move to a different supplier and than argue with equifax to remove the late markers?

 

Any advise much appreciated. EON has made it clear they will not remove them and I am now getting declined for mortgages I apply for. Anything else on my file is good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but the energy supply won't help you and the credit reference agency won't help you either. Not only that, the ombudsman probably won't help you.

 

They would rather cut the legs off their grannies and eat them than remove entries from your credit file.

 

It is a scandalously unfair because whether you have deliberately tried to get away with a £10,000 debt or you have simply made a mistake or had a heart attack and missed a 1 pound payment, the penalty is exactly the same – six years on the credit reference agency file – six years of your life smashed up – six years of being unable to get mortgage – six years of being refused credit – six years of only getting credit on very much more expensive terms.

 

The whole system should be properly regulated and controlled but unfortunately the credit reference agencies are too powerful and they will never submit to it until we get a few members of Parliament who have to suffer the same thing. Then maybe we will get somewhere.

 

By all means complain to the ombudsman. He is meant to produce a fair result and of course common sense dictates that fairness in this circumstance should be that your credit file should be cleaned up. However, in practice the ombudsman defers to businesses and in particular defers to the credit reference agencies and the tendency is that the fair result means that it is fair to the business and only fair to the consumer if that fits in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi,

 

Can I take a company to court for not keeping accurate data on the account on equifax?

 

Also the information on the account is misleading. The start date of the account is wrong.

 

I was late 6 payments a few years back.

They marked the first late payment as 4 in red which means I was 4 payments late.

Than I had a green up to date followed by a red 6.

 

Surely if I had a green after the 4 it meant I paid?

 

And I believe I did and than the next month they add another record as red with more missed payments?

 

Even worst after that

even though I settled the account they marked the rest in grey with a cross U.

 

From what I can tell this company is obliged to keep up to date accurate data.

 

Can I argue that they dont keep it accurate and some information is missleading and is causing me problems.

 

This is the only late payment on my account now and I cant get a mortgage because of it.

 

I sent the company letters of good will and they were quite rude back.

 

Thanks for any advice

 

.[ATTACH=CONFIG]52692[/ATTACH]

Link to post
Share on other sites

ha the debt a defaulted date in its summary details?

 

and who is this 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

Hi DX there is no default. I was really sick and no family so made an arrangement with them to pay it an cleared it up when I got better. Is EON

 

But they are ruining my report because now I m in credit with them but they are not updating that

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

threads merged

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

I have alerted the EON rep

 

I feel there might be room for a GOGW here in the removal

 

its a bit unfair

that a couple of silly marks

prevents a family progressing .

 

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

gesture of good will.

 

hopefully marc will pop in soon. from E.ON

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

no hope with eon DX I sent them GOGW and the reply was short and is a No. I am just extremly annoyed that now being in credit is not reported so they only report late payments and than dont update the report for months. How is that fair?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi surreynick

 

I hope you've recovered from the surgery and do understand how frustrating it can be not being able to take care of everyday tasks whilst out of action.

 

Thought it might help if I give you a bit of information about how we deal with Credit Reference Agencies.

 

When we share information, we give a true reflection of the status of an account at the time of the share. At this time, if there's a debit balance on an account and no formal payment arrangement, we'll share this.

 

We started sharing information with Equifax during the second half of 2012. The period prior to June 12 you mention will have been before we began sharing. This will be why Equifax won't have records for this period.

 

Green months are where there's a payment arrangement in place and payments are received on time. Red months indicate an outstanding balance with no or a failed payment arrangement.

 

The 6 shows the balance is at least 6 months old at the time of the share. The number refers to the age of the debt and not to the number of missed payments. The maximum number of months we'll share is 6. Where the debt is older and after a series of 6s have been shared, we'll then share a 'D' or default notice.

 

'U' doesn't really mean anything. It's just that there's been no bill released, so nothing to report on.

 

Once settled in full, we'll share an 'S.'

 

To speculate from the detail provided, it looks as though you set up a payment arrangement after the red 4 but missed or was late with a payment and this led to the red 6. Sorry if I'm wrong here. As I say, I'm speculating.

 

If the information shared was right at the time, this won't be changed as it'll have been a true reflection of the account at the time of the share.

 

I know this isn't what you want to hear surreynick but would rather be clear than give you false hope.

 

Malc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Eon,

 

Thank you for the info I think I might need to see citizens advice or a solicitor about it to be honest because the way you report is utterly inaccurate and not up to date! In such causing me problems.

Is not even the 6 mark or the 4 which is now more than 2 years old is the fact that an S has not been recorded even though I settled the bill in full as soon as I was back home and also there is no payment arrangement in place. Everything is on direct debit and I m paying in advance now.

 

So true reality is EON if you want to report do it by all means but dont report just the bad! Well there s no choice but to give up the ideea or buying a place for the moment.

Edited by surreynick
added a few sent
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right this is now getting serious. Because of this inaccurate data keeping I ve been turned down by a mortgage broker.

 

Guys I seen a lot of posts RE Section 10/12 of Data Protection. I never signed an agreement with Eon or they have not informed me in writting about registering this late payments?

 

Also as I said the data is truly inaccurate. The date of the start of contract is wrong, now is showing I m on an arrangement to pay but I m not and no settled S were placed when I paid in full. Anyone knows a solicitor or someone who can help me remove Eon from my credit file? I am now looking to move suppliers and send them the letter forbiding them to share any more information.

 

Thanks for any help or links to letters I can send

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...