Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good evening, so not a good weekend reviewing paperwork -- I have lost some proofs of postage.. also, although not provided at CCA, they have now supplied a DN in their WS, please see scan of claimants WS (without statements) Document with tick boxes as signatures doesn't look like an agreement and is split across pages. Documents have been stapled and copied multiple times looking at the top left of them. Aside from that, having read other threads, I suspect they have everything? appreciate your input please Sorry for heavy redactions, I noticed the paperwork was see-through LinkHalifaxCC1.compressed.pdf
    • Received a final demand today Final demand.pdf
    • Here is my final draft: I, XXXXXX, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in the claim and further to my set aside application dated 1 November 2022. The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts in person in the opening paragraph. It is my understanding they must serve notice to any hearsay evidence pursuant to CPR 33.2(1)(B) (notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence) and Section 2 (1) (A) of the Civil Evidence Act.   1.        The claimant failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis on the 2 February 2024 'The Claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents.' None of these documents were received by the court nor the defendant by that date.   2.        I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment.   As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights.  This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information).  The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.   3.        The alleged letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address.  I have attached a copy of my tenancy agreement which is marked ‘Appendix 1’ and shows I was residing at a difference address as of 11 December 2018 and was therefore not at the service address at the time the proceedings were served.  I have also attached an email from my solicitors to the Claimants solicitors dated 14 July 2022 which was sent to them requesting that they disclose the trace of evidence they utilised prior to issuing the proceedings against me.  This is marked ‘Appendix 2’.  The claimants solicitors did not provide me with these documents.   4.        Under The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 a Debt Buyer must undertake all reasonable enquiries to ensure the correct address of a debtor, this can be as simple as a credit file search. The Claimant failed to carry out such basic checks. Subsequently all letters prior to and including ,The Pre action Protocol letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 and the claim form dated 14th February 2020 were all served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018.   5.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020.   6.        Upon the discovery of the Judgement debt, I made immediate contact with the Court and the Claimant Solicitors, putting them on notice that I was making investigations in relation to the Judgement debt as it was not familiar to me.  I asked them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.   The correspondence to the Claimant Solicotors is attached and marked ‘Appendix 3’   7.        I then sent a Data Subject Access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided. Details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 4’and the copies of correspondence between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 5’.   8.        The claimant relies upon and exhibits a reconstituted version of the alleged agreement.   It is again denied that I have ever entered into an agreement with Barclaycard on or around 2000.  It is admitted that I did hold other credit agreements with other creditors and as such should this be a debt that was assigned to Barclaycard from another brand therefore the reconstituted agreement disclosed is invalid being pre April 2007 and not legally enforceable pursuant to HH Judge Waksman in Carey v HSBC 2009 EWHC3417.  Details of this are attached and marked ‘Appendix 6’.   The original credit agreement must be provided along with any reconstituted version on a modified credit agreement and must contain the names and address of debtor and creditor, agreement number and cancelation clause.   9.        Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to disclose a true executed legible agreement on which its claim relies upon and not try to mislead the court.   10.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the original assigned agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. Signed                 ………………………………………………….. Name                  XXXX Date                     30 April 2024
    • Only trying to help.  Ain't being nasty.  Some
    • Hi folks, I've just found previous documentation. I thought it had gone missing. I'd forgotten that I did appeal it through POPLA but I can't find the thread on here that, I assume, I posted for help. Appeal letter is dated 27/10/2020 with a rejection. I genuinely had forgotten about this so apologies for misleading you. A lot has happened in the years since the ticket was issued. We closed down a couple of businesses and moved to the opposite end of the country to retire. The documents I have are scanned copies. I no longer have the originals. The NTK is also in there. If there's anything you'd like to see, please let me know and I'll post them, although it probably won't be until tomorrow now, but I'll be looking in on this page tonight. Thank you for the responses so far
  • 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
      • 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

Zurich Life Ins - increased PCM £36 to £166!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3315 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 just got my husbands yearly statement for his life insurance

 

UNBELIEVABLE !!!

 

Its an adaptable term plan and most its ever gone up is a couple of pound every year WE have had this policy for 20 years

 

This year they have uped payment from £36 pcm to :mad2: £166 how does that work?

 

Surely they cannot increase premium this much £214,000 cover (which I think is less than last years cover have to check) for £166 pcm

 

Gob Smacked ! and to make matters worse their letter dated 1st March was received today which now gives me 10 days to deal with this.

 

 

HELP HELP HELP :!:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has your husband phoned them to ask whether they have made a mistake ? Perhaps the amount per month is wrong. Or there may be an explanation. Some companies are open on a Saturday, so it may be working calling them.

 

I thought that these were plans over say 25 years, with payments going up a bit each year and there would not be a sudden jump in premium when a certain age was reached.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered if it had something to do with age but 4.6 times increase because he's a year older???

 

Fact of the matter is if premium required is correct then no way can we continue with cover (how can this be legal)

 

Letter says something about administration charges but out so haven't hot the letter with me

 

I thought it was a 25 year term but we are talking about paperwork that's 20 years old I know I'm a hoarder of paperwork but wouldn't have the faintest idea where to find it

 

Can't phone today so have to do it Monday - surely it has to be wrong

 

Anyone else had such a jump on premium

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is a long shot... but if the increase is correct and there are guaranteed premiums offered in 2006, maybe it would be possible to claim back from 2006 as policy was mis-sold? a long shot i know, just suggesting incase it is possible

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

As well as the other comments on here, I think it would be worth checking the policy document. I hope it would explain the basis of how premiums might increase.

 

If you would like to post up what it says [minus personal details], we might be able to give more advice.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reputable and Zurich, really.

 

They do this all the time, mine went up hundreds and I did a quick online comparison. What was funny was Zurich was lowest for new customers.

 

Phoned them up and questioned the increase. The advisor and I quote, told me to **** off and get it cheaper then. As you can imagine, I did :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I can read, that's not a renewal, it's an illustration.

 

We need to see the whole letter and a lot clearer if poss.

 

The advice cost refers to what an IFA would be paid.

 

The only thing I would say is beware of cancelling it without getting more cover in force because if this was from 20 years ago, you won't get the same cover because of age or any possible health issues.

 

You could also speak to an Independent financial adviser, I'm sure you will find one that will give an initial free chat.

 

If I were you havinastella I would put a complaint in, because calls are usually recorded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dotty

 

Thats the document received only other page is acceptance form with questions does he smoke

 

What IFA would be paid ??? so the premium includes payment for IFA ?

 

No health issues

 

Filled online comparison with all details age smoking etc and cover for same amount over 25 years @ £50 ?

 

 

We have Zurich joint policy too god help me if they change that premium think we have spoken about this before Dotty ? Did ask them at that time for copy of original Docs but they never sent it really need to know if that covered critical illness !

 

Zurich has sent me 2/3 letters saying I hadn't paid monthly premium on this one and that they wouldn't cover me anymore however after sending them bank records of payment so they could access payment easily (my bankers gave me a code) they sent letter saying that cover still running - no apology though

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way you will find out what is going on is to phone Zurich on Monday. These large Insurance companies are not very good at doing the admin on policies over a long period of time. They make mistakes and I think this may be the case here.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the start date it says 1st April 15 so this doesn't relate to your existing plan.

 

I think it may have come to the end of the original term?

 

They are giving you options to retain cover, without underwriting or take out a new plan which would be subject to acceptance, hence the illustration and options.

 

The advice costs are also an example.

 

The last paragraph advises you to seek advice, yes gets idea's on comparison sites but they can vary so much in the cover provided, especially with critical illness being included.

 

Do you need that amount of cover now and another 24 year plan? Presumably it was to cover your mortgage, what sort of balance do you have now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is a long shot... but if the increase is correct and there are guaranteed premiums offered in 2006, maybe it would be possible to claim back from 2006 as policy was mis-sold? a long shot i know, just suggesting incase it is possible

 

How could it have been mis-sold?

 

The guaranteed premiums option wasn't available when the plan was taken out 10 approx years earlier

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Dotty

 

 

I'll make sure he phones tomorrow to check all details but its strange I am almost sure we took policy out in 1997 so that would make a plan that lasted 18 years :| and I definitely didn't take it out in 1995.

 

 

On these figures yes I will definitely have to look for another policy - insurance taken out to give the kids something

 

Our other policy covers mortgage and this cover was for me to have a pot for kids and to keep us afloat funeral expenses etc...

 

Oh my sounds terrible when its written down

 

On price comparison sites like for like cover is as I said @ £50

 

Figures don't add up - term of policy doesn't seem right

 

There is no way they will take new premium by existing direct debit is there ? I best call the bank

Link to post
Share on other sites

I might have read some information related to a different product, but I think I read that this particular life product has a value at the end of the period you pay into it. i.e you pay in for 20 or 25 years, if you die during the period or suffer a terminal illness it pays out or if you survive for the whole period you get a cash payment at the end of it. There is discussion on forums about this Zurich product where people have been advised that surrendering the policy early, means that you get a small surrender value paid out and because it was so small, people have decided to continuing paying into it.

 

I have never dealt with life products, so you will have to speak to Zurich about this. There are few people on the Moneysavingexpert Insurance forum who are life Insurance specialists and there is some quite good info on that site.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...