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

Grace & anr -v- Black Horse ltd - major headache for CRAs???????


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3288 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

  • Replies 94
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

When will it be available, Paul ?

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

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we see the industry changing its registration systems !

 

38.As for the second submission, I have not been persuaded that the shortcomings in the CRAs' registration systems can excuse a registration which is in substance inaccurate because of an omission (namely that the 'default' related to an unenforceable agreement). If an accurate registration cannot be accommodated, then the answer is for the industry to change its registration systems, and in the meantime for inaccurate registrations not to be made.

 

 

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

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be a major problem for Halifax who have openly admitted in letters to customers that "whilst the debt might be unenforceable" they will continue to pursue by foul means or fair.. short of issuing a claim.

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

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be a major problem for Halifax who have openly admitted in letters to customers that "whilst the debt might be unenforceable" they will continue to pursue by foul means or fair.. short of issuing a claim.

 

Sure could.

 

Me thinks a claim for breach of the fourth principle could be pursued and compensation in line with Durkin may be awarded if loss is proved.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an interesting judgment.

 

In itself it does not challenge McGuffic, as the case is about irredeemably enforceable agreements(127) as opposed to section 78 etc.

 

The judge decided that a default should not be recorded on an irredeemably unenforceable agreement unless there was some notice along side the default which indicated the status.

 

He did however hint that the same logic may be applicable to the temporary unenforceability applied to copy requirement breaches(section 77 etc.) But left that decision to "another day"

 

A couple of other helpful tit-bits contained, one of which was the judges comment that unenforceability should not be regarded as a technical breach.

 

There will I suppose be a spate of claims for damages, personally I cannot see them being effective.

 

The cause would be that the CRA should have placed a marker on the default stating that the defaulted account was unenforceable, if this is the case then the losses suffered by the debtor would be slight as most potential creditors would regard the D with the notice in the same light as one without, this is only my opinion of course.

 

It may be that the court would decide that there should have been any record at all(if inaccurate) if the agreement was unenforcdable in which a claim may be viable.

 

A note of caution however in that the judge did say that a reason for the decision was that Mr grace's default was not registered until after the agreement was found to be unenforceable, I am not sure if the same logic would apply if someone stopped paying and then after the event the agreement was proven to be so.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dodgeball,

I must disagree with your interpretation that the Judges found "Mr Grace didnot default before the agrement was declared unenforceable"

The default occurred some 12 months before the agreement was deemed ......"iredeemably unenforceable" and I am sorry it nullifies McGuffick......its in the bin............

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dodgeball,

I must disagree with your interpretation that the Judges found "Mr Grace didnot default before the agrement was declared unenforceable"

The default occurred some 12 months before the agreement was deemed ......"iredeemably unenforceable" and I am sorry it nullifies McGuffick......its in the bin............

 

 

I most certainly agree with catchthemonkey this judgement changes much.

 

 

No doubt we will see a raft of pointless discussion on this now!

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

32. In one sense Mr Brennan is clearly right. Flaux J was clearly not laying down a single

rule for all cases of unenforceability, and he clearly did not regard his decision as

applicable to irremediable unenforceability, at least without further analysis, which

Judge Halbert did not provide. But I consider that his assumption to that effect was

nonetheless correct. My reasons follow.

 

I would re- read the jusgement

 

 

33. The conclusion that even irremediable unenforceability leaves the underlying

agreement, and its rights and obligations, in place seems to me to flow inexorably

from the authorities about other forms of statutory unenforceability and, in particular,

from the Orakpo case which, as I have noted, was about irremediable

unenforceability. I agree with Flaux J that this conclusion is not displaced by the

obiter dicta in the Wilson case. Further, the CCA makes an apparently careful

distinction between unenforceability and voidness as the sanction for different kinds

of non- compliance by creditors: see ss. 59(1) and 173(1) which provide for voidness,

and ss. 65(1), 77(4)(a) and 90(1) which provide for various forms of unenforceability.

S.91(b) provides in terms for a release of the debtor from liability under the

agreement in the stated circumstances.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dodgeball,

I must disagree with your interpretation that the Judges found "Mr Grace didnot default before the agrement was declared unenforceable"

The default occurred some 12 months before the agreement was deemed ......"iredeemably unenforceable" and I am sorry it nullifies McGuffick......its in the bin............

 

39. Thirdly, there is nothing in Miss Urell’s point that Mr Grace defaulted before his

agreement had been declared unenforceable (and that on the court’s own motion).

The default registration was not made until after the judgment declaring

unenforceability,

 

As said it would be helpful if the judgement was read before comment are made.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

I most certainly agree with catchthemonkey this judgement changes much.

 

 

No doubt we will see a raft of pointless discussion on this now!

 

Discussion is never pointless Brigadier, it is how we learn.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a helpful cmment

 

Nor is there merit in the submission that Mr Grace had escaped enforcement on

technical grounds. The requirements of the CCA for which unenforceability is the

sanction are part of a structure laid down by Parliament for the protection of

consumers and the regulation of the consumer credit market. Although they may be

technical in their application, and the consequences for non-compliance sometimes

draconian, they are not mere technicalities

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to put matters absolutely in perspective Dodgeball.........I know much more about this case than ANYone................I know exactly when the arrears occurred, how they occurred and the default made........... .consider why I have said that..........what is stated in the judgement as alleged facts........ does not mean they are correct.......Sorry to say

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a helpful cmment

 

Nor is there merit in the submission that Mr Grace had escaped enforcement on

technical grounds. The requirements of the CCA for which unenforceability is the

sanction are part of a structure laid down by Parliament for the protection of

consumers and the regulation of the consumer credit market. Although they may be

technical in their application, and the consequences for non-compliance sometimes

draconian, they are not mere technicalities

 

This is very important and I am pleased the Judge emphasised this.

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

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to put matters absolutely in perspective Dodgeball.........I know much more about this case than ANYone................I know exactly when the arrears occurred, how they occurred and the default made........... .consider why I have said that..........what is stated in the judgement as alleged facts........ does not mean they are correct.......Sorry to say

 

I am sure you do. However unless the judgement is challenged the facts stated within it will stand, and it is this that will be used to provide authority on future cases, NOT YOUR KNOWLEDGE SADLY.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very important and I am pleased the Judge emphasised this.

Indeed, lost count of how many times I ahve heard creditors council sneer at theses defenses with the remark that it is just a technical def fence, it is good to hear the judge echo the view which mny of us have had for some years.

 

I am not saying that this is not a useful judgement, it is, however sometimes the importance of these cases are exaggerated for various reasons, and it helps to keep things in perspective.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Discussion is never pointless Brigadier, it is how we learn.

 

Agreed. I for one will be very interested to understand the ramifications of this case. I'm sure many others will too. All too often we see cases being hailed as likely to make hugely significant, when in reality there have been issues specific to the case which render it of little use to others. I hope that this isn't one. Bring on the (polite) discussion. :)

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. I for one will be very interested to understand the ramifications of this case. I'm sure many others will too. All too often we see cases being hailed as likely to make hugely significant, when in reality there have been issues specific to the case which render it of little use to others. I hope that this isn't one. Bring on the (polite) discussion. :)

 

Indeed sadly it seems that the main thrust of this case was lost, it was a section 90 issue (unlawful repossession of protected goods).

The firm of solicitors seem to be quite happy with the result nevertheless, as the associated issue has brought possible claims for default damages into the arena, in the form af a precedent setting authority.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically the judge sid that if the status of the defaulted account cannot be recorded correctly then it should not be recorded at all, so in the cse of an agreement which has been proven to be irredeemably unenforceable there should be some mechanism for indicating the fact that whilst the account is in default the debtor has no obligation to pay in law.

 

The reason that this does not interfere with Mcguffic is because in that case the issue was not regarding irredeemable unenforceablity it was in respect of the temporary unenforceability sanction imposed by the copy regulations.

He does however speculate that the same principle may be applied, but that would be for another court to decide.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically the judge sid that if the status of the defaulted account cannot be recorded correctly then it should not be recorded at all, so in the cse of an agreement which has been proven to be irredeemably unenforceable there should be some mechanism for indicating the fact that whilst the account is in default the debtor has no obligation to pay in law.

 

The reason that this does not interfere with Mcguffic is because in that case the issue was not regarding irredeemable unenforceablity it was in respect of the temporary unenforceability sanction imposed by the copy regulations.

He does however speculate that the same principle may be applied, but that would be for another court to decide.

 

It appears that you are much more knowledgeable than the solicitors ...and Barrister the appellants legal team plus a very eminent QC who has taken extreme interest in the case who all agree that McGuffick is no longer worth much........ as that was a High Court ruling this is case law ......... McGuffick isn't/wasn't.

 

The saga of this case has not ended yet...this is just the beginning.

I will take their view over yours every time

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we please stick to discussing the judgment and cut out the sarcasm, mud slinging and worse.

 

I imagine there will be differences of opinion even within the legal industry and I am pretty certain they aren't being so unpleasant.

 

If you are unable to have a sensible and civil discussion - then please stay away. I am truly tired of the juvenile mutterings that deter others from getting involved in what could be a very important judgment.

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

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we please stick to discussing the judgment and cut out the sarcasm, mud slinging and worse.

 

I imagine there will be differences of opinion even within the legal industry and I am pretty certain they aren't being so unpleasant.

 

If you are unable to have a sensible and civil discussion - then please stay away. I am truly tired of the juvenile mutterings that deter others from getting involved in what could be a very important judgment.

 

I see you are having another good go at me "OLD SPARKIE" so I will stay away as I did when I was attacking SwiftAdvances plc.

 

I leave you with is link.

http://consumercreditlitigationandde...-for-the-case/

CatchTheMonkey........ aka Sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...