Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just an update on Celticheart37 versus Barclaycard.   On the claim for my late Husband's PPI, Barclaycard have responded saying they have been unable to locate a PPI Policy . They say he held his card since 1979 ( not the late 1980's as I had believed) which means that PPI did not exist and that is fair enough. I accept that PPI did not exist in 1979 so couldn't have been included. So that is the end of that one.They could have told me that at the beginning rather than let me search for proof that would not exist , but never mind.   On my own Barclaycard claim for which they have offered me a refund  "based on averages", I have sent a SAR requesting my statements back to 1993 when the account opened,so hello 12345 I will post an update when I get a response and let you know how far back  they were able to go !   Celticheart37
    • ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5  
    • stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return   dx  
    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  Regards  Andy    
  • Our picks

Lannister1234

Arnold Clark's Error Leading To Reposession

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1573 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

Hello,

last month we purchased a vehicle from Arnold Clark and part ex'd our own vehicle.

 

 

Prior to agreeing to buy we made the salesman aware that I only had a provisional license and asked would that be a problem with the finance

(my wife would be the main driver until I pass my test with me driving it provisionally.).

The salesman said that wont be a problem, the vehicle just has to be comprehensively insured.

 

We submitted all information for a credit check and we received a call the next day from the salesman that the finance had been accepted

and asked if we could come in to sign the agreement and pay the deposit.

 

 

We did so and the salesman said everything was fine, the car was signed over to us and we supplied all the documents that we were asked for.

We collected the car a couple of days later and left our vehicle with them.

 

A couple of weeks later AC called me to say they needed proof of comprehensive insurance where I was the main policy holder.

I said I dont have that because my wife is the main policy holder and I am a named driver.

 

 

AC said that the finance company wont release the money to them until they have proof that I am a main policy holder

and that the car would have to be repossessed if we cannot.

 

 

I informed him that on my copy of the finance agreement it only states that the vehicle has to be comprehensively insured,

it doesn't say that the owner has the be the main policy holder.

He said "yes but that doesnt matter because on the new document from the finance company it says you need to be the main policy holder".

 

They are threatening repossession if I dont pay for comprehensive insurance in my name

which firstly we cannot afford to do that and secondly out of principal of the agreement.

 

 

The funny thing is they said the finance company are threatening repossession and I said

"so a finance company who has currently made no investment in this vehicle has the right to take my car away."

to which AC said that

"well not it would need to be returned to us"

to which I replied

"so AC will repossess the vehicle?"

 

 

and after umm and arring they would not give me a straight answer as to who would be repossessing the car.

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated and if they can repossess where do I stand with my deposit and part ex'd car?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can bet your life the finance company 'aren't' threatening repossession, that is a bit they tagged on to frighten you because they made a cock up.

 

Ring the finance company and tell them exactly what was agreed with AC and ask their advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have you spoke direct with the finance company.


:???: what me. never heard of you never had a debt with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I haven't but on speaking with Arnold Clark on the phone they have used two different names for the finance company that they are dealing with which is odd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No I haven't but on speaking with Arnold Clark on the phone they have used two different names for the finance company that they are dealing with which is odd

 

Stay off the phone unless you can record the calls in writing only


If i have helped in any way hit my star.

any advice given is based on experience and learnt from this site :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They seem to refuse to email us as we have emailed them a number of times but with no response

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They seem to refuse to email us as we have emailed them a number of times but with no response

 

Send it in the post


If i have helped in any way hit my star.

any advice given is based on experience and learnt from this site :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that's not right. I was informed in no uncertain manner that their salesmen are fully trained, so an error could not be of their making. LOL LOL

Have you considered telling them that you will return the car once your deposit, in full, has been returned, along with your old car.

This way you would be completely clear of that dire outfit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, that's not right. I was informed in no uncertain manner that their salesmen are fully trained,.

 

 

You come up with some cracking jokes Scania ;)

 

 

Plus, if they haven't paid AC yet, how can they repossess something that doesn't belong to them ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had been promised a call from the sales manager today but despite calling for her twice I'd not been able to speak with her directly,

only a receptionist telling me that she is trying her best to deal with it and will call as soon as she has sorted it.

 

 

From the moment we signed those papers AC have been absolutely useless and fobbing us off at every turn.

And now they won't speak to us because they have to admit that they messed up.

 

 

We're not demanding money back or after compensation we just want to be able to pay our monthly payments and keep the car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah good old Arnold Clark make a maladministration error but its the customers fault and they only discuss things on the phone in the hope the customer doesnt record calls so will therefore have no proof of what was discussed.

 

STOP talking to these people on the phone (unless you can record the call) you want a good paper trail as it seems that you are only dealing with the dealership you purchased the car from so are more than likely trying to keep their maladministration error in house so Head Office is unaware of this problem.

 

Make a Formal Complaint in writing to the Arnold Clark Dealership and send copies of the letter to Arnold Clarks Head Office and the Finance Company, also ask the dealership to confirm the full details of the Finance Company and to confirm that they still have your Part Exchange vehicle.

 

Ensure to keep copies of all letters and get free proof of posting from the post office you need to keep a good paper trail


How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update from AC.

They have found a new finance company and they want me to go in to sign the documents. They explicitly said on the phone (which I have recorded) "you do not own this car". I will go into to look at the papers but as far as I'm concerned I do own this car. Have they just dropped a ball and realised they've given me a car for free and they can't actually take the direct debit payments without backing from a finance company? They want me to come in tonight and I've said I can't as im busy but will try tomorrow, the guy sounded very frustrated. I'm not trying to get this car for free, I am happy for the payments to go out my bank based on the agreement already signed, I just don't know if i have to sign a NEW finance agreement with another finance company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check the interest rate and the terms and conditions before you sign

 

 

It could be this one has a much higher interest rate so AC gets a bigger commission. The whole thing could've been a set up from the beginning.

Of course he's frustrated, he don't get his sales bonus until you sign.

 

 

Ring the original finance company now and see what they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they just walked into my place of work, with a new finance agreement, they demanded I signed, I took the document but said I will read it first and the guy went away. Another person called and said it will be reposessed if it's not signed by tonight. I just need to know can it be reposessed at this point without written warning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's up to you mate, but I know what I would be doing in your circumstances. If you sign this it will mean your signature is on two legally enforceable documents!!!!!!!! Do yourself a favour and get rid. If this is how they treat you just now, imagine if you have a complaint with the car----what chance would you have with them????? Get out whilst you can.

 

 

PS. If you do decide to stay in this deal, make ABSOLUTELY SURE the finance is straight HP---not a personal loan or a "Car Loan" by Santander.

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...