Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

Natwest Loan***Resolved***


Wandsworth2015
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2721 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 had a natwest loan which I defaulted on,

I missed the first payment Nov 2009,

it's now stating settled on my credit file

and no debt collectors are chasing me.

 

It took Natwest 24 months from Nov 2009 to issue the default notice

and therefore, the account that should now be removed from Equifax,

but because of the delayed DN, it's not due to be removed until Nov 2017.

 

I sent a CCA request nearly three weeks ago and have yet to have a response.

 

What action could I take in order to have the default date changed and the account deleted from my file?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you missed the first payment but did you thus pay the debt off?

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

what does the credit file say re last payment?

 

If its 2 yrs before the DN was issued then you can write to complain to the ICO.

 

I have had success with this in the past where a default was placed yrs later than it should, the ICO ordered it to be removed and it was removed, account gone forever

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your certain nothing else has been paid since jan 2010 then it should already be gone from your credit file.

In addition to writng to ICO, place a complaint with each of the cra's. They probably wont do anything but it will help in your complaint to ICO if you can show youve tried to have it corrected.

The complaint will be along the lines of extending the Limitation period by delaying issuing DN and thus harming your credit worthiness for longer than the 6 years

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is a tactic that some companies are using, they dont default on the debt until waaay after monies actually become due and they claim that they need up to 6 years to exhaust their own processes, making the debt appear on your files for up to 12 years. genuine attempt to seek a resolution or abuse of process? The ICO is looking into it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I defaulted on the debt and contacted the creditor to state this was happening, the loan was provided to a business but secured in my name, Natwest would not have provided it otherwise.

 

The business went into administration and the administrators suggested this course of action, my contacting them made it clear this was the course of action being taken and the agreement would be immediately breached.

 

I agree, it's a tactic to keep them on file for 12 years, the guidelines need to be much clearer

Link to post
Share on other sites

This link was posted to your other thread WW but i think has great relevance here

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/Misc/2011/23.html

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A response from Natwest and equifax.... now I can raise a complaint with the ICO

 

Thank you for getting in touch.

 

Natwest Personal Loans has investigated your query and has told Equifax the information you were disputing is correct and will remain unchanged. This information is supplied by the company and Equifax cannot change it or remove it without their authorisation.

 

The lender has stated the following:

Having checked the credit files this account defaulted in October 2011 so the account will not be removed until October 2017.

 

If you want to query this information further you will need to contact the company directly.

 

The note that we added, stating that your information was in dispute will be removed within 24 hours.

 

You’ll find more information about your credit report at: http://www.equifax.co.uk/help . If you have a question, you should find the answer in our FAQ section. If not, you can send us an online query, and attach your documents to it – no need to worry about them getting lost or delayed in the post.

 

I hope you find this useful. If there’s anything else we can do for you, please let us know.

 

Kind regards

 

Equifax Customer Services

 

The European Commission operates an “online-dispute resolution platform” to assist with resolving consumer complaints. A link to the platform, including more information about how it works, can be found here http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr.

 

However we think that our own complaints handling procedure (including your statutory right to complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service) will resolve your complaint faster, for more information please see https://equifaxuk.custhelp.com.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Thanks for that information Andy,

 

I've now had feedback from the ICO, after 8 weeks of waiting. Their response is as follows:

 

Unfortunately without a copy of your correspondence raising your concerns about the accuracy of the entry specifically with NatWest I would be unable to consider this matter further.

 

If you are concerned with NatWest's compliance with the Consumer Credit Act (CCA) you should contact the Financial Conduct Authority on 0800 111 6768 (freephone) or 0300 500 8082.

 

I sent a CCA request by registered and recorded post, including the required postal order to Natwest requesting a copy of the default notice and the agreement, I received no response from them.

 

 

I escalated this to Equifax to have them contact Natwest to change the information and see if I could get a response, they did response to Equifax stating nothing will change.

 

I'm therefore in a statemate position, I have a default notice raised 24 months after the cause of action, and I want it changed, any idea how I escalate this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

" Unfortunately without a copy of your correspondence raising your concerns about the accuracy of the entry specifically with Natwest I would be unable to consider this matter further."

 

Why does he not have copies ?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

They do, what they are stating is that I've not explicitly challenged Natwest directly with regards the default time in the letters they have.

 

My issue is that I have, I've sent correspondence and that last was a CCA request because they ignore my correspondence, they ignored the CCA request as well.

 

So I went to Equifax, who contacted Natwest, Natwest responded to Equifax stating there is nothing wrong and won't change anything or contact me directly.

 

So I'm somewhat perplexed with the ICO isn't interested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand that...they are all in it together anyway...I would just respond to that letter and restate that he appears to not understand...and that all correspondence with NW has been enclosed.State that you are rather disappointed at his reply and understood that the ICO office were impartial and in place to ensure all data reporting was correct...see how he responds to that.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw their response to be:

 

Dear Sir,

 

 

It's clear you aren't going away and don't like to give in, the ICO will therefore contact our client to ensure you don't cause a public nuisance and if needed, do as you ask to protect our relationship with the banks and future clients.

 

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

The ICO has found in my favour and NATWEST have now updated the default date to be two years earlier, in short the default and settlement date are now 8 years old and it's therefore been deleted from all credit files and my credit rating is excellent and just short of maximum for the first time in 7 years, thank you very much to the CAG community, another victory for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ICO has found in my favour and NATWEST have now updated the default date to be two years earlier, in short the default and settlement date are now 8 years old and it's therefore been deleted from all credit files and my credit rating is excellent and just short of maximum for the first time in 7 years, thank you very much to the CAG community, another victory for me.

 

:wink: Amazing what you can achieve when you word the bullet correctly.

 

Well done I will mark your thread as resolved.

 

Regards

 

Andy

  • Confused 1

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic 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...