Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • 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.   
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2347 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

I have just read a post with a very similar story to mine about a company called myjar. I have just checked my noddle report and see that this company have listed a default in 2014, I have never heard of this company but from the other thread on them it seems they may be txtloan who I did at one time have a loan from.

 

 

I don't remember the specifics of the mess I got into with payday loans in 2009, mostly because the names seem to constantly change making it hard to keep up with them but I am fairly confident I paid this one off as it was taken from my bank. Even if its not paid, it originates from 2009 and should not be defaulted last year.

 

 

Does anyone know anything about this company so I can put in a complaint? I have been working so hard to repair my credit file and next year all the bad info will be gone so I am really quite upset about this. It only shows on noddle and I have disputed it with them but experience tells me that they wont do much about it and will reply in a few months telling me to contact myjar directly.

 

 

If it helps the details from noddle are:

Account start date

08/12/2009

Opening balance

£ 246

 

Regular payment £

£ 100

 

Repayment frequency

Periodically

 

Date of default

15/07/2014

 

Default balance

£ 246

 

 

There is no monthly data before November 2014 and this is the first month it has shown up on noddle which I check every month.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Used to be

 

TXTLOAN LIMITED

ACRE HOUSE

11/15 WILLIAM ROAD

LONDON

NW1 3ER

 

 

Registrant's address:

2nd Floor

145-157 St. John Street

London

London

EC1V 4PY

United Kingdom

 

 

Now

 

 

Name & Registered Office:

MYJAR LIMITED

ACRE HOUSE

11-15 WILLIAM ROAD

LONDON

NW1 3ER

 

Unfortunately they are one of many of this type of companies that use an anonymous domain registration service so you can't actually see who they are or who registered their website.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, I will have a look in the library for an appropriate letter to send them. Is there anyone else I should complain to? Can I send the stat barred letter (I am in Scotland so its stat barred now even if it does still exist) and a letter of complaint about the incorrect date on the default at the same time, or should I deal with the two issues separately?

 

 

I have never heard anything from these myjar people, but I have moved house since 2009 so that is likely why.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send two letters, in the same envelope. This company seems to be breaching DPA regulation and ICO guidance with their reporting of defaults. It's likely they think it will go undetected, as people who use PDL's rarely touch their credit file.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats PDL's for you. The whole 'industry' is barely regulated and the companies are ran by less than normal people. I would go on about self regulation and one of the reasons there is little regulation surrounding them, but thats for another thread.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The guys at MyJar are doing this to start complying with FCAs new rules and regs on the PDL industry,

 

What surprised me with your case... Technically this could have been Stat Barred at the end of this year (Pos Mid Jun 2016), but it now wont move till July 2020...

This is brutally unfair.... In my case, the debt was fraudulent. However same rules still apply to thew default and fair treatment.

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

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

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in Scotland so it is already stat barred. I don't see how changing the default date to five years after the original one helps them to comply with any new rules. Surely the new rules are trying to make them be more honest, not less. I will be getting a letter off to them tomorrow about this, and the stat barred letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have to follow the rules back when you took out the loan. They cannot pick and choose which ones to follow and when to follow it. The orioginal default date was 5 years ago, so the default should have been placed within 6 months. 5 YEARS after is hugely unfair and you should be challenging it with the ICO and FCA.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have gotten nowhere with the ICO with another matter but I will absolutely complain to them again as well as the FCA.

 

 

I am going to view my old credit reports to see if it was perhaps there before but under a different company, I know there was nothing from txtloan before but it might have been another dca or something like that. If I can find it then I will have the original default date and I can put that in my letter asking them why they have moved it from the original date to five years later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

fkoffilee- i cant see how restropsective entries like this make myjar comply with the new regs. most of the pdls did not report to the CRA's in the past and prob do have to now but in this case this is either just vindicative

 

def get a complaint on this

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone give me ideas of what to include in my letter? I have had a look at my other credit files and nothing else shows with this amount. Unfortunately noddle doesn't let you view previous reports so I cant see if it previously appeared there under a different name or not.

 

 

So far I have just written that I don't acknowledge a debt to them and that the start date and default date are five years apart which cant be accurate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I am so angry right now! This has now appeared on my Equifax file! It was taken off noddle but is now back on there too (with a different default date that would make more sense), according to myjar its an accurate representation of the debt. I haven't bothered disputing whether the debt exists since I am in Scotland and its already stat barred but I did dispute them reporting the default five years after it allegedly occurred and it was taken off noddle. Its now reappeared on noddle and appeared on Equifax. I queried it with Equifax and they don't seem to even understand my complaint they seem to think I'm complaining that its over six years old and shouldn't be there which isn't what I am complaining about.

 

Can anyone point me to the guidelines that say they are supposed to put defaults on within six months or so? Have done loads of searching and cant seem to find it, going to get more letters off about this asap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, i was in another thread on this dealing with this lot and had the issue of not being defaulted at all and having late markers placed each month for over 3 years.I emailed to say please default me within 6 months of the debt.The next day emailed me to say i'd be defaulted if not all paid before the required but would be backdated.

 

Well i gladly didn't pay and over 2 months later still not defaulted me and CRA's still monthly late reporting.So even when you contact after years and beg to get defaulted on the debt they don't.So i'm about to chase them up again and look at FOS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

I'm having an issue with this company too. I defaulted on my loan in January 2015. I have not made any payments to them since and have just finished a DRO this week which included this debt. Ony my credit report all my other debts shoed as default except this one they keep posting late payment every month and every 6 months or so they post payment made even though I have not made one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to make your own thread klavar. This one has been over for 2 years.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...