Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In my experience (not with car payments) but with many other things, my partner has been ill and signed off in the past and we have been unable to meet various commitments.  Naturally if you ring the call centre they are going to fob you off and tell you you must pay, that's why that never ever works. I would obtain a note from her GP listing all her health issues plus medications plus side effects, then write to the finance company with a copy of it, explaining the situation, as you have here, asking for a payment holiday. Perhaps mention that the car is very much needed for hospital appointments etc. It's likely the finance company would rather you pay till term end than, chase you for money they will never see, and sell the car at auction for a loss,  You can search some of my threads going back years, advising people to do this for Council Tax, Tax Credits, HMRC, Even a solicitors company and it always works, because contrary to popular belief people are reasonable.
    • Sorry, I haven't ever seen one of these agreements. Read it all and look out for anything that says when she can withdraw and when she is committed to go ahead. If it isn't clear she may need to call the housing provider and simply say what you posted here, she doesn't want to go ahead and how does she withdraw her swap application?
    • Thank you! Your head is like a power bank of knowledge.  Her health issues are short term, due to a relationship breakdown she took it pretty hard and has been signed off work on medication for 3 months. She only started her job in February 24 so does not qualify for any occupational sick benefits, which is where the ssp only comes in. (You will see me posting a few things over the coming days, whilst I try and sort some things for her)  I sat with her last night relaying all this back and she does want to work out a plan, she was ready to propose £100 for the next 3 months and then an additional £70 per month onto of her contractual to "catch up" but Money247 rejecting the payment holiday and demanding £200 thew her, which is why I came on here.   
    • I've looked at your case specifically more.   Term 8bii reads " when, in accordance with instructions from the Customer or the Consignee, the Consignment is left in a safe place" Their terms choose to not define safe, so they are put to proof that the location is safe. If your property opens onto a street its a simple thing of putting a google earth image and pointing out that its not a safe place
    • New rules and higher rates resulted in a jump in the number of savers opening accounts at the start of this year's Isa season.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

Hoist/? claimform - old LLoyds Overdraft debt ***Claim Discontinued***


woo14
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2569 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

The debt has been assigned in this thread MB...they can only claim it from the date of ownership..the above is with regards to the OC making a claim.

 

Well it wasn't in my case which you posted on. There can only be one cause of action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?461605-Won-Vs-Marlin-(HSBC)-Claim-Dismissed-no-cca/page3

 

Generally accepted yes.....there is no reference to assigned debts in the above legislation....simply the claimant.There are other factors to consider though MB...date of assignment.. whether interest continued to accrue...type of debt...etc and whether section 69 would or should be restricted....so there is no one case fits all and should be challenged on a case by case.

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

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?461605-Won-Vs-Marlin-(HSBC)-Claim-Dismissed-no-cca/page3

 

Generally accepted yes.....there is no reference to assigned debts in the above legislation....simply the claimant.There are other factors to consider though MB...date of assignment.. whether interest continued to accrue...type of debt...etc and whether section 69 would or should be restricted....so there is no one case fits all and should be challenged on a case by case.

 

Certainly agree with that Andy. Personally I would suggest that s69 interest was envisaged to compensate the claimant for been deprived of the original capital. Clearly if you have bought the debt you cannot have been deprived of any capital quite the opposite in fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will get back to you this evening woo.

 

Andy

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

Particulars of Claim

 

1.This claim is for the sum of £3340.85 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under bank account no. *************

 

2.The debt was legally assigned by MKDP LLP (Ex Lloyds banking group) to the claimant and noticed 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

 

1. the sum of £3340.85

2. Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 6/09/11 to the date hereof 1857 days is the sum of £1359.70

3. future interest accruing at the daily rate of £ .73

4. costs

What is the value of the claim? £4965.55

 

 

 

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 Lloyds Banking Group PLC....who closed the account on 01/09/11. It is denied that I am indebted for the alleged balance claimed.

 

2. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.Therefore their claim to section 69 interest is also denied. Dated 6/9/11 the alleged date of assignment which coincidentally is the same date that LLoyds allege the default/termination date was dated which infers that the account was defaulted and terminated and assigned on the same day and not allowing the statutory period to rectify any breach pursuant to Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974.

 

3. Paragraph 3 is denied. I have never been contacted or requested by Lloyd's Banking Group PLC or the Claimant to pay any alleged overdrawn sums.

 

Any alleged amount claimed could only consist substantially 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 Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.

 

Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:-.

 

(a) Provide a copy of the overdraft facility agreement 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 Deafult/Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.

© 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.

 

4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

5.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.

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

Ah that's fantastic Andy, thank you so much for your help! It's very much appreciated I can assure you!

Shall I just copy and paste it? The 33rd day is Saturday so when should I submit it?

Thanks again!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shall I just copy and paste it? The 33rd day is Saturday so when should I submit it?

Thanks again!

not the red bit. submit the defence.

submit when you're ready, and the guys have ok'd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tomorrow is your deadline...by 4,00pm

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

thought you might have already know this as you've done oodles' of research I see

they have 28 days else it gets stayed

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

  • 5 weeks later...

Hi!

my defence was submitted on the 10/11 and processed on the 11/11.

 

When does the 33 days start?

 

Also if they decide to pursue the claim will this information be available to view on MCOL?

 

Or do I have to wait for the post?

 

Thank you ��

Link to post
Share on other sites

the day you file

 

so its stayed

 

now if they wish to proceed

they will have to pay extra fees.

 

the court will write if they do anything

 

the claimant may willy wave with various letters

post here if you get any before doing anything.

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Do As it says on the pack

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

Hi all and merry Christmas!

 

It appears my issue is not over..

I have received a notice of allocation to the small claims track, dated 16th December.

 

This is obviously after the stayed date?

What do I do now?

Many thanks again

 

You must read and follow the directions when you receive the next part of the process ...Notice of Allocation, as set out by the court and serve the requested (standard disclosure and witness statement) by the dates stated.....post if you are unsure of anything.

 

Andy

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

So do I check the mediation box? Do I need to photocopy the form and send it to the claimants solicitor too?

Thanks

 

The only form I have been given to fill out is the N180

 

Also I just realised the other day, that the account in question was a joint account.. Does this make any difference?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes to mediation

yes send a copy to claimant sols

yes keep a copy too.

 

 

if the other account holder is not named

can you check with them if they've got a claim too?

dx

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

So do I check the mediation box? Do I need to photocopy the form and send it to the claimants solicitor too?

Thanks You can download a spare from our Legal Library and complete on screen and print...looks far more professional.

 

The only form I have been given to fill out is the N180 Thats all you require at this stage....then the Notice of Allocation will follow if the claimants complete their N180

Also I just realised the other day, that the account in question was a joint account.. Does this make any difference? No....creditors can claim against either or both parties subject to a joint and several agreement

Thanks

 

Andy

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

  • 4 weeks later...

twill be allocated to track.

 

 

post 96

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...