Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. 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 written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s 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. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be 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 it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
    • Read these 6 things you can do to be empathetic to other people’s views and perspectives.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

Pyramidhair Vs. Natwest


pyramidhair
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6567 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

Sent DPA disclosure request on the 9th March, received all bank statements for the last 6 years within a week.

 

I then (taking contact number from this site) called and spoke to John Cunnane, Customer Relations Manager, regarding the manual intervention issue, and told him I would need confirmation in writing that there was no manual intervention as i requested in my letter. He sounded as if he deals with this every day, he sounded exhausted and ready to just give up, bless him (heh heh heh), and said it would be with me very soon. I told him at that point what it was I was doing and that my second letter would be with him soon. Again he was courteous and very helpful.

 

Having trawled through six years of statements, I worked out the money owed to be £965. I sent my second letter, the Request for Payment of Charges on 13th April, taking the template from this site, and included photocopies of the statement pages that carried the charges concerned. I sent the letter directly to John Cunnane, and started it with a thankyou for his assistance on the phone, and further to our conversaion.. I am hoping to give him the impression I'll not be letting go until this is resolved.

 

Wish me luck as I wait for his response to my second letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't want luck, you want your MONEY!!!! :D

 

Ahhhh, I would feel sorry for them, I really would... Except that these are the same censor.gif who made my life a misery for so long when I needed them the most...

 

As far as I can tell, NWB will hold out as long as they possibly can... But like all the others, they'll give it back, one way or the other! (and by that, I do NOT mean with a stick of dynamite and a hankie over my face! lol)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bookworm you truly are an inspiration as my saga continues! Without reading your success story today I would give up right now, having received the following letter, Dated 20th April:

 

 

 

Dear Mr XXXXXX

 

Thank you for your letter of April 13th 2006, although I am sorry to learn that we have given you cause for concern. John Cunnane is not in the office until next week but I wanted to acknowledge receipt of your letter in his absence and outline our outlook on bank charges.

 

I have also noted the extent of your claim, net £965, but I haven't detacted any charges that were improperly taken because in every instance cleared covering funds weren't available by the close of business on the preceding working day. Overdrafts are not permitted on the Step account and this removes any flexibility that might be available to us when the amounts of items presented are relatively modest.

 

We believe that our charges are fair, reasonable and transparent. We consider that the amounts debited to your account have been applied strictly in accordance with your agreement with us and our published tariff, which we are satisfied complies with all laws and regulations. We are also committed to ensuring the transparency of the information that we give to our customers about the operation of our products.

 

Against that background, we must differ to the views expressed in your letter.

 

You have raised a question about "manual intervention" and I want to ensure that I am responding to your meaning of this phrase. Can I please ask you to let me know precisely what is meant and I will arrange for an immediate response to be sent to you. I enclose a prepaid envelope for you to use.

 

Thankyou again and apologies that I must ask for further information.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Stuart Higley

Customer Relations.

 

 

 

At this point guys I'm stuck and a little intimidated by how big this task now appears.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update, not sure what to do next right now, but will be checking it out this afternoon. Meanwhile, new letter, in response to my Letter Before Action (above).

 

There is little I can constructively add to my letter of April 20 except that I am sorry to learn that you are proceeding with your claim. The OFT statement of 5 April 2006 relates only to credit card charges and we have until 31 May to respond to them in this regard.

 

May I please remind you that any papers are serviced on our Registered Office address, which appears below.

 

Yours Sincerely.

 

Now. Am I out of options now, but to take it to court?

 

Any assistance from successful claimants would be greatly appreciated as I prepare. Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in the same position, just received a letter from Natwest in reply to my final letter of warning, they replied:

 

"I note what you say, in particular your next move. I am dissapointed that you propose to commence proceedings against the bank and hope, even at this late stage, that you feel able to reconsider."

 

I will be issuing a county court action as soon as i have the money to do so, probably next week.

 

Good luck with your action, keep us updated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in the same position, just received a letter from Natwest in reply to my final letter of warning, they replied:

 

"I note what you say, in particular your next move. I am dissapointed that you propose to commence proceedings against the bank and hope, even at this late stage, that you feel able to reconsider."

 

I will be issuing a county court action as soon as i have the money to do so, probably next week.

 

Good luck with your action, keep us updated.

 

Good luck to you too mate and thanks.

 

Is that correct, the statement above? Or is he being sneaky with half truths or what? Am I barking up the wrong tree by claiming returned DD charges?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is true that the OFT have approached the Banks and Credit Card Companies relating to Credit Cards specifically, but if this can be seen as a penalty then Direct Debit charges most certainly are too.

I was a little unsure about the Direct Debit thing too, but the argument in law, as far as i can make out from reading threads here and other websites is that these charges are a profit making scheme, £38 a time i get charged for Unpaid Direct debits and this in no way reflects the loss the bank has for not paying this. It costs about 50p for them to send you an automated letter (if that) and so the argument is that if they are making huge profits from these charges (which is obvious) then they are in fact penalties and unlawful.

I think the idea is let the bank prove that it costs them £38 every time they cannot pay a direct debit. I would like to see how they could possibly justify it.

 

Take em to court!!

 

Best of luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read Henry's thread on the front page I must say I am now extremely unnerved by the idea of going to court.

 

My case is based solely on instances where I have gone into an overdraft thanks to a DD being paid when it was not in the account (usually only by 2 days maximum and never once more than 20 pounds.) This would appear to be identical to Henry's case, which he lost.

 

If any moderator would be able to assist in this area at all I would be more than happy to go to court if I had enough information to feel more confident about doing so. I can't afford £2oo court costs I know that much, but from my previous workings out, they have over £900 of mine thanks to these charges.

 

What IS a mother to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly good luck. You've a lot more to claim than me - I have only £45. You're about a week ahead of me, so I'm very interested in this thread and sincerely hope you keep us updated.

 

You seem to be going along all the right tracks as far as I'm aware, and I'm sure that if you have to raise your claim in court and win (even be it by default) that you get your costs returned.

 

Let's keep up the pressure on the banks. Hopefully policies will change for the future.

 

Good luck again. x

[

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again

 

I am "bumping" this thread instead of starting a new one (as advised) as the 14 days is now up and I'm about to start my claim through the courts.

 

PLEASE can I ask for a few thoughts from a moderator regarding my charges and claim. As stated above, they are almost entirely charges issued in instances where I have, with a DD, gone overdrawn, without having an overdraft. In EVERY instance this has been no more than £20 overdrawn, and immediately rectified every time as I have been paid into this account every month, almost £2k per month going in the account.

 

Natwest are arguing that these are NOT instances where the charges incurred are unfair or profiteering, as I went into an unauthorised overdraft. This one point is the only thing stopping me right now, from leaping in and getting my court action confidently underway.

 

I have a sneaking suspicion I'm being given "carefully selected" information (rather than "lies") to deter me, but I am very, very nervous at this time that I may have simply jumped onboard a bandwagon where all the successful people who have managed their way through this impossible organisation and come out successful, have had a more legitimate claim than I do.

 

Any help would be greatly, greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks

 

Ph

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not certain by any means but i think in Henry's case, the fact that he had a barrister with him may have forced the bank to send a barrister to challenge.

I'm not certain as i do not know if Natwest would have been aware that he was being represented by a barrister but it seems likely.

I realise your concerns because Natwest have actually fulfilled a service by paying the Direct Debits, which is very unusual as mine are always unpaid items. However, I still do not believe that the £38 charges would be accountable for if the DD's were for £20 or less.

Hopefully a moderator will put you straight as to what argument to use.

 

Good Luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not be nervous, your chances of success, based on others (including mine) experience are very high indeed. All of the charges you mention are unlawful, regardless of the amount you were overdrawn. If you're unsure of the legal argument I STRONGLY recommend you read the FAQ pages carefully. Do not be intimidated by Natwest, they are in exactly the same position as all the other banks, and if you look in the 'Litigation concluded' dection you'll see plenty of instances where people have got their money back from them.

 

Please keep the forum posted on your progress.

 

Good luck!

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

True. try this

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=5571

 

Also, there seem to be quite a few in progress.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes, I'm well aware of that one! :) I've just filed my Moneyclaim at the weekend, so...

 

Anyway, I meant I couldn't see any re NatWest on the, "Litigation Concluded" thread (now I'm at this stage, I want to know what to expect!).

 

Anyway, sorry p'head - I'm not hijacking! :)

But then again, what do I know?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 2019-03-08.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6567 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...