Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks again for the advice Andyorch - will do as you say - radio silence
    • thers no point the UK gov doing anything but is there?   Once the UK 's singapore on Thames financial antics and rights and regs bonfire gets more obviously underway, the UK will lose anything they already have that isn't in the EU's benefit. The EU is seeing very small problems compared to the UK's loss of financial access and 3rd country customs regs.   Scottish independence and Irish reunification; all in the EU; coming down the tracks like the flying Scotsman on a full head of steam  SNP expected to increase their MPs, Johnson starting to get his pheasents revolting (like Patels recent critiques) ... Putin and the extreme right American billionaire club in a two pronged attack has effectively ended the UK without firing a missile.  
    • Okay.....alleged debt chasing with no reference numbers or agreement numbers...they really do still work in the dark ages. So wait now until Ambulance chasers Global Debt write.....then come back here for further advice....in the meantime radio silence.
    • Its states so when they do a Land Registry search...... " Co-owner in listed property.. "   If you do not wish to fight this and want to simply resolve it then you could consider submitting an N245 and make a monthly proposed affordable payment. The Judgment will remain for 6 years on the credit files and the Charge until the debt has been paid off.   The fee is £50...but once its in place there is nothing else they can do to execute the  judgment.     Regards   Andy  
    • Thanks for your reply Andyorch - Unfortunately there are no credit card account numbers quoted in the letter to identify which credit card company is involved. It just states the outstanding balance and that the original lender is SAV Credit. It only has the Cabot/Global Debt Recovery reference numbers for this debt.  Did a quick internet search and SAV credit was also known as Newday Cards Ltd - neither of which I recognise.   Thanks Paul
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1397 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Claimed against RBS which took a long time to get answers after an initial refusal, so I could make an appeal to the Ombudsman. In effect it timed out beyond the 6 months due to the delay getting what I wanted from RBS.

 

I then asked RBS to look at the claim again a couple of years later as I know the claim was good. So many things that weren't done that should have been. They rejected it.

 

I have just seen the Plevin result in the Supreme Court about non disclosure of commissions.

As this wasn't covered in my original claim is it possible to construct a new claim based on Plevin as well.

 

Failing that can I make a court claim. I am still within the 6 years but I have no idea how to make a cliam where thw amount is unknown.

I have seen some previous posts which shows how to do it from a SAR and release of all documents but this is too heavy for me.

Could I make a claim for an ad-hoc amount such as "for an amount to be calculated by RBS in-line with their standard amortisation should a court find my claim to be substantiated.

 

In any event, a Plevin based new appeal for non disclosure would be nice if it were possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

for ref/info (plevin mentioned)

'...The FCA has also made final rules and guidance related to how firms should handle complaints in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd (Plevin). The Plevin decision means that consumers may have new grounds to complain about PPI regarding the amount of money that the providers received for the sale if the failure to disclose that commission made the relationship unfair...'

https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/fca-finalise-plans-place-deadline-ppi-complaints

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

As above, the recent Plevin ruling by the FCA does allow for previously rejected complaints to be reviewed, so I don't believe you need to take this through the courts just yet. Although I wouldn't rely on RBS to contact you about a new investigation. I would write to them again and ask in light of Plevin will they kindly reconsider their previous decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...