Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
  • 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

Hoist/? claimform - Santander overdraft 'debt'


G78
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2932 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 151
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hoist have come back with signatory of bank account in 1997,

that had no overdraft and statement staying a few payments in 2009.

but Santander have confirmed in writing that I did not credit account after dec 2008.

 

Morning Ford,

 

well in July 2008, official off September 2008.

 

bank stated that there were arrangements in place, but statements show different.

 

they...

 

sent notice the reduction from 1900.00 to 1000.00 by 1st of September 2008, but took it all by end of August with no notice. I appealed but got no response.

 

dx,

 

I have had sars from Bank and just last week Hoist, when requested in June/July 2015.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a bit confused. (it is early morning :) )

you say they say payments in 09. when in 09. in mind claim issue is 7/15.

then you say they say no credit after dec 08?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so sorry,

 

they gave me notice of reduction in07/08.

 

I finally stooped using account in 12/08

 

however bank statements shows payments in 2009.

 

from 3rd parties and one direct debt and two payment paid into account. last payment on the 11/09

Link to post
Share on other sites

bank stated the I stopped crediting money in 12/08. I agree because I did

 

however, they state arrangement in place,

but I never paid a penny into the account

 

 

further in 2009, how could an arrangement paid be paid in and allowed to be cashed out?

when account would be in collections...

.most defo a banking error and statements supporting this.

 

I hope it is clearer

 

oh dear, what can I do? anything at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites

in your witness statement

you need to put the claimant to strict proof

upon who made the payments.

 

 

end of

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

some were credit from 3rd refunding money into the account.

 

I cancelled all DD payments by 12/08. there was money paid in at the local branch, which they are claiming was the arrangement payment but it was also taken out a few days later...How? if for arrangement paid and no funds in since 12/08/.

Link to post
Share on other sites

soz, am not up to speed with your thread. am more confused now, too late or early for me. even with the jimi chill :)

 

perhaps dx can shed on it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

shall I explain the background to the courts in my w/s and then provide all documents that I have?

 

no worries ford... to be honest..it sounds crazy. that they are chasing this now. so no worries. thank you for you help

Link to post
Share on other sites

shall I explain the background to the courts in my w/s and then provide all documents that I have?

a wit statement is what you will say in court, with any exhibits. so yes, what is relevant and material to your defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:help::help:

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

some were credit from 3rd refunding money into the account.

 

I cancelled all DD payments by 12/08. there was money paid in at the local branch, which they are claiming was the arrangement payment but it was also taken out a few days later...How? if for arrangement paid and no funds in since 12/08/.

so you drew money out last ...when...?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

where they have stated that there was an arrangement in place, banks statements show otherwise, I was paying in money as per usual but nothing was being taken out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no I drew no funds out.

 

the bank statement states arrangement of 100.00 was put in place from sept 2009 and but 100.00 paid in in 10/09 and taken out 10/2009, surely that is not right.

 

Money would have to taken by overdraft arrangement and not allowed to be withdrawn????

Link to post
Share on other sites

can you not simply talk English and answer the questions you are asked with out creating more confusion?

 

 

what they hell does this mean??????????

 

 

they statement money was down in 2010, but bank statements do not lie.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

g78

answer these q's as simplest as can with your swipey :)

when did you last make/deposit/DD etc a payment to the account.

when did they call in the overdraft facility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you are going with a barred defence, then they wld need to show that there was a payment by you within 6 years. otherwise, they might go by when the o/d facility was called in (notice).

another poss (remote) option is re paperwork, depending on when the o/d was taken out. before 2011, the oft determination re o/d's. after, subject to the revised con credit act re o/d's.

also any unfairness/charges

i'm out :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...