Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all   Firstly, thanks for all the helpful threads on here. Whilst there's a lot to read and get through, it's both helpful and reassuring to see so much great advice and support to others in similar situations.   I've received a letter and a Claim Form from Moriarty for an ADCB CC debt. I'm presently in a DMP for existing UK debts and (probably like many others) I truly don't know the best way forward, as time is clearly of the essence - but I don't feel I've 'up to speed' yet on all the other threads, advice, lingo etc. to respond accordingly.   I'm looking at drafting the PAP and getting it of tomorrow, but just want to get into the other threads to see if it's the right thing (and get more info on similar cases).   Please feel free to comment with any advice - all gratefully received of course. Thanks again for anyone that's posted in other threads and great to see so many kind and generous respondents helping others.   PS. Haven't posted/scanned details onto the thread yet as still to read up on the rules/tips, but Claim Form filed in Northampton on 20 Nov.
    • nothing you can do can product against the very rare judge lottery syndrome.
    • not sure why you added the blue line I've highlighted? that's no in the we gave you.   as for your question... PRAC's roboclaim computer knows when the account was taken out, after all it raised the claim and checked everything carefully first before issuing the request via northants bulk courts equally inept roboclaim computer... 
    • I've been researching in preparation of compiling my particularised defence/WS.    I'm none too happy that some judges still seem to be siding with DCAs and seemingly brushing aside anything that we have assumed to be "necessary" for DCAs to have a winning case.    Reading a recent "summary" from another poster (another thread with case similar to mine - very old, illegible application form, no default notice, reliance on their own software to prove it was ever sent) and the judgment made in favour of the DCA and even suggesting that there was no "agreement with the DCA, they simply owned the debt, not the agreement"  Makes me very nervous.    Especially if cases like this will be judged on "probability" - the probability that if I signed the original application form, then I must have taken out the credit card and racked up the alleged debt as shown in statements enclosed in their WS (and dated some ten years later).   Is it ok to post some "evidence" I've found from elsewhere?    This is in line with my fears that regardless of how hard one tries to rebut the "lack of evidence" produced by DCAs for chasing these very old "alleged" debts, it does appear to come down to the luck of what judge you get on the day and how much they can be swayed by the DCA solicitor.    A quick Google search produced the following - from one case - this related to a credit agreement - which resulted in someone being made bankrupt - that person appealed the bankruptcy order on the grounds of defective credit agreement and default notice and this was the appeal judge's decision:   The necessary formalities for the entry into the regulated consumer credit agreement (which related to the debt in issue) were not complied with; The default notice served in respect of that credit agreement was defective.   The First Ground The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.   Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make.   Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.   The Second Ground The Appellant also argued that the default notice upon which the Respondent relied did not comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice) Regulations 1989 because it stated the full balance of the account rather than the total of the missed payments. The Respondent argued that, as a result of the missed payments, it was contractually entitled to the entire balance subject to the service of the appropriate notice, a requirement which was fulfilled by the default notice itself and, consequently, the sum required to remedy the breach was the entire amount.   Mr Justice Mann agreed with the Respondent and the District Judge, holding that: “If by the time the default notice is served circumstances have arisen which entitle the lender to recover not merely sums which might be regarded as arrears, by which I assume is meant accumulated minimum payments, but also the whole of the sum, then they are entitled to claim that sum, and the sum to require to remedy the breach for non-payment of that sum is the payment of the whole sum due. The bank is not confined, at that stage, to claiming merely the amount of arrears if it has an accrued contractual right to have the whole of the sum.”   Do judgments like these not mean that a lot of what you guys do on here (and for which I and many others are VERY grateful) somewhat redundant. What is happening to judges just accepting "well, the terms must have been there if you signed it" -    Feeling quite nervous now.
    • we know it wasn't done to avoid enforcement we understand completely. but that doesn't take from away the fact that it happened   you can't appeal the pcn's on the basis that 'it was not his vehicle to levy upon'. the law clearly states otherwise.          
  • Our picks

poor-boy

Motor Trader Issues on vehicle functions. Small Court Claim now issued ** Full Refund Given **

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1583 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Nothing wrong in getting a bit aggressive when they continue to fob you off. I like it, lets see what they come back with.

 

Cheers buddy.

 

They think I am going to go away but I have no intentions too lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right an update for all -

 

The court papers were delivered to the Motor trader and they have filed a defence stating:

The faults were all mentioned to me (even though their emails state there were no faults)

 

I bought the car even though they stated faults to me prior to purchase (If £5600 of faults were mentioned then I doubt I would have bought the car for £5300 that is only worth around £5500).

 

They alleged that I called a mechanic on my mobile whilst I was viewing the car (I cannot recall this as I had not called a mechanic).

 

They alleged that I was aware and they ensured I was aware the Sat Nav system was jamming and not operable (Yes they did make me aware on 22nd Oct 2014 although the vehicle was bought on 18th Oct 2014).

 

They have alleged the BHP was not written on the V5 or service history so it was only a guide in their advert and should be dismissed (I have found it on the V5 and service history that it states 103KW which is 140BHP)

 

They also state the advert was generic and not specific to the vehicle sold to me (Did I mention that they have just admitted to not complying with the Consumer Regs 2008?)

 

The defence was filed on 21st January 2015.

 

The retailer called myself on 26th January 2015 advising the management will refund me for the vehicle but the onus is on me to return the vehicle (this offer was rejected as they must collect the vehicle)

 

The retailer called myself today 28th January 2015 advising they will get the vehicle collected and then send me a cheque for the vehicles price paid, I have stated to the retailer that expenses would need covering inc court costs etc (total £558.32) and also I would prefer BACS payment or cash on collection but the retailer has advised this not acceptable to them.

 

The court have asked if I would like to meditate with the retailer but as they have constantly lied, not responded and have provided fictional events I would prefer to just go straight to court.

 

HSBC

 

They have failed to respond to my letter asking for strict proof to their alleged wear and tear and I will writing to them again to escalate the matter.

 

VISA EUROPE

 

They are still trying to investigate and overdue on the response by 4 days so will chase them up too.

 

Overall I could take the offer from the retailer and suffer the loss of £558.32 but this is a matter of principle now and I will no longer tolerate any losses due to the negligence of the retailer.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The claim that you phoned a mechanic on your mobile - do you have access to your call log for that period of time to check if a call was made to anyone ?


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

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I have checked the log and I had called the Mrs to say that I had arrived to the garage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update:

 

As the retailer that vehicle was purchased from reads the comments on here, they may find it useful to know that I am not giving up and their own emails, invoice and the vehicle is evidence against their own defence (AJ and ALI hope you are both well and keeping my refund including all my additional costs/ interest nice and warm J )

 

Central Motor Company

I have decided to mediate with the retailer first of all and let them present their defence and evidence. The paperwork has been posted back to the courts.

 

HSBC

 

HSBC complaints department have been in touch and after all the gibberish they have finally admitted that they have NOT used the Visa rules and regulations to decline my claim but it is based on an individual’s opinion as they cannot understand the “the claim” and has no knowledge about Visa. The constant repeat I get is “Sold as seen” and the vehicle matches “The description as advertised” and they state that the BHP is fair wear and tear even though it was advertised as 170BHP and the vehicle was manufactured as 140BHP.

 

But then all of a sudden I was advised by Apurva the complaints investigator that they used: Reason Code 53 to decline the claim (please Google search the code and you will laugh)

 

HSBC complaints manager Veren has also advised that staff are not trained to deal with these issues and it is far too simple to decline the claim and not respond to the customer if they ask for information or evidence.

 

I have advised the Complaints manager that his response will be forwarded onto Stuart Gulliver and ask for his views regarding these training issues and providing false information to customers / consumers (email prepped to send).

 

VISA EUROPE

 

They have been updated with the lack of information from HSBC and they are appalled as the bank are not responding to them either.

 

Visa have tried to contact the people whom have made the decisions within HSBC but they have to date not received a response but this has now been escalated within Visa Europe.

 

Claims Court

 

This is still ongoing and we are at early stages but will keep you updated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today the mediation service has taken place.

 

The vehicle retailer has stated that they will refund ONLY for the vehicle as long as I get the car to them and then they will send a company cheque within 14 days, this was declined as they are refusing to cover all other costs that have incurred.

 

So the matter is now going to court and just waiting on the dates from the court etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The final straw.

 

Statement of truth including all Exhibits of communication have been logged with the court.

 

A hearing date has been set and I am just waiting for the defendants statement of truth and exhibits which should be here by 4pm today (I will not be holding my breath)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they fail to comply with the directions...then inform the court and ask that they impose sanctions on the defendants (strike out their defence)

 

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 OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted on behalf of poor-boy.

 

They have made me an offer to not to go to the hearing but it is short of £355 (my losses) so I have rejected it.

 

The reason for rejection is that they have no evidence to support themselves and neither have they sent the paperwork to the court. The ball is currently in my court and I have asked them to add the £355 so the dispute can be resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we can expect some good news on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we can expect some good news on this.

 

Lets hope so :)


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

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right guys,

 

1st of all the claim has been settled out of court and the trader has refunded me in full including my expenses.

 

There had been a battle to get there but I finally settled with their third offer as going to court would have cost them dearly due to the District Judge accepting an interest rate of £88.88 per day :)

 

All I can say is I am very thank full to the support and information on this forum and without it I would have never achieved what I have, I have learnt a lot from this and although a novice at any kind of law the District Judge thanked me for the preparation of my documents and exhibits.

 

The defendants did not send a bundle to the court as the only evidence they had to back themselves up was the invoice that they wrote 'sold as seen, customer aware of engine faults'.

 

I will over time add my statements to the forum as they are a very interesting read.

 

Thanks all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is absolutely cracking news and I'm so pleased for you. I just wish others would go down this route when all else fails. The only reason car dealers get away with breaking the law is because any threats against them are very rarely carried out so they are confident that selling rubbish will make them a nice profit with no comeback.

 

I'll look forward to the statements and once again congratulations.

Edited by Conniff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't mind poor-boy I will move this back into the motoring section so hopefully it will give encouragement to others.

 

The subject heading has now been amended to 'Motor Trader Issues on vehicle functions. Small Court Claim now issued ** Full Refund Given ** '.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine if you wish to move it back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...