Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are 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. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, 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 credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

VWFS and Equifax


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2662 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 car finance with VWFS,

in 2011 I wanted to sell the car and settle the finance,

I asked for a settlement figure which they provided.

 

 

I paid the settlement figure and obtained a letter stating they had no interest in the vehicle.

 

On Equifax (via clearscore) it shows very oddly that I was a month behind from June 2011 until mid 2012,

I settled with them the day I sold the vehicle.

 

On Noddle it shows that there was a balance of 13 grand still during that period.

 

 

I have raised disputes with both agencies.

 

 

If VWFS fail to respond to the agencies do they have to remove the information?

(20 days in and nothing yet from VWFS)

 

Thanks,

 

Terry

Link to post
Share on other sites

send a copy of the letter to VWFS

give them 14 days to remove the incorrect markers

else you will escalate your complaint to the ICO

and also seek financial compensation for the damage these markers have caused.

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

Thank you for your advice, VWFS have replied to Equifax and have simply confirmed the information is correct with no explanation at all :-(

 

I have replied as you suggested and also sent a copy of the letter/attached it to the dispute on

 

Noddle have come back and VWFS have given them the same one line reply that the information is correct.

 

I have also replied as per your advice to them, lets see what they come back with.

 

I'm going to try and ring VWFS and see how they can justify their claims, there is no way they would write a letter saying they have no financial interest in a vehicle with 13 grand owing on it, grrrrrrr

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just spoken with VWFS, and the finance department who deals with disputes are now off until January!

 

From the notes she can see I had settled,

they say I cancelled my debit after settling but there was a payment due hence showing a month in arrears,

she can't explain the balance of 13 grand.

 

Nowhere on their letter did it say I had to make further payments

nor was I advised of such at the time,

 

 

they admit they have never written to me about this outstanding amount which was £379 a single payment not 13 grand.

According to the notes they decided to write the amount off in 2012 hence ending the account.

 

I guess worst case if they amend it 379 looks better than 13 grand

but I feel its a bit unfair as it's their error really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems strange that when you asked for a settlement figure that any outstanding payments would have been included the figure owed.

 

 

Of course they may have done that at the time and not been picked up by Accounts.

 

You could also ask which payment was missing and then ask your bank for the statement for that month to confirm whether you did pay it at the time.

 

 

But if you still have the letter stating that you no longer owed any money that should settle things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have provided the letter to both equifax and callcredit,

 

in their e-mails to both agencies VWFS admit that the balance on the account is wrong yet they won't amend it,

 

I have pointed this out to both that the minimum that should be done is for them to correct the balance and prove that they have ever asked me for that payment,

 

I think it's a tad unfair that they expect me to be mystic,

I believed at the time that what I was paying was full and final settlement,

they didn't inform me otherwise so that's their mistake surely.

 

The credit agency says I should go to the financial ombudsman,

I have seen the ICO mentioned on here....which one should I go to?

 

Many thanks,

 

Terry

Link to post
Share on other sites

The FOS used to charge £550 back in 2014 to investigate complaints against companies.

I imagine that figure would be higher now.

 

I shouldn't think that VWS would be stupid enough to argue this case when they are obviously in the wrong so would probably amend your report rather than pay up.

 

Should they cave in it is up to you to decide whether to push to get compensation for their error and saying you owe £13000 when the figure at most is less than £400 is a big error.

 

Did you check with your bank to see if they had paid that outstanding amount since if you had that would compound their error.

 

On the other hand the ICO does deal with data protection and while they don't seem to charge companies for their investigations, they are pretty strong in dishing out fines

 

Whether they also suggest possible financial compensation I don't know but perhaps the threat of a large fine may be enough for CWS to settle with you.

 

Perhaps other with more knowledge of both organisations could also advise you.

 

I am bound to say that I am surprised that VWS have not amended your credit report.

 

It may be that Noddle are culpable too.

I don't see how they can just take the word of their client in the face of your evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

My bank didn't make any further payments to them,

it's all a bit odd as finance companies are normally quick to send you a reminder should you be behind,

 

I have put my complaint to the ICO and fingers crossed something might happen soon.

 

It would be interesting to know when they entered this data as maybe they have done this long after the event after realising an error by their accounts team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...