Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Capital assessments are based on the:   amount or value of the asset at the time of the application outcome of checks carried out to protect against fraud As with income assessments the partner's share of the equity is included in these calculations - unless there is contrary interest. Just found the above in the law society website.  So am I screwed.  So confused.   
    • I am bound to say that their alleged contract is probably the weirdest I have seen. Considering it is supposed to be a serious legal contract to set out the conditions under which CEL manage the parking on land that does not belong to them it leaves a lot to be desired. For a start it does not comply with the BPA Code of Practice which is   7.3 a the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined b any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation c any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement d who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs e the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.   Sono  mention of hours: no mention of types of vehicle restrictions: no mention of who is responsible for the erection and maintenance of signage and much more serious -no mention that CEL have to comply with the BPA Code of conduct-that one is listed on 7.1.  All it states is that the operator can pursue outstanding PCs in accordance with the COP but that is not the same as saying that CEL will abide by the CoP which it must say. Also AFAIK the only entity that can pursue for trespass is the land owner regardless of what this quasi agreement says. There is also no mention of the financial aspect of the arrangement nor how the long it lasts and what notice is required for either side to terminate.     It might be worth writing [not emailing ]to Medburn Estates asking them to confirm if this is the only agreement with CEL and whether they think it right that CEL have not received planning permission for their signs from the Council rendering their signs illegal which is more serious than unlawful and therefore all PCNs issued are worthless and should not have been issued as it is impossible to form a contract with motorists when the signs are illegal. Also that as CEL are their agents Medburn Estates LTD are responsible for the actions of their agents. You could also ask them to cofirm that the signature on the paper is that of their Director, Anthony Brown and whether their copy has a counter signature of a CEL representative. Carry on that CEL are taking you to Court and as another Judge has asked a Landowner to appear in front of him to explain their contract, whether it might be in the best interest of Medway to have a serious conversation with CEL to avoid any possible  embarrassments in your  [ie Laluna] Court appearance.        
    • UncleB - where you write "This could lead you to facing the Bank in Court..."   1stly -  would that mean now?  by remote hearing?  Or when the courts open after the summer?   2ndly - Does the application for set aside automatically prevent the B hearing going ahead?   3rdly - Will sending in an application to have the B petition set aside mean that I have to disclose an address for service?   I can only give a mailing address   4thly - Could having an early (remote) set aside hearing potentially quicken up the process for the bank if I am obliged to give them a suitable place for service?  At the moment I assume the hearing was adjourned for lack of physical service.   I want/ need to get a set aside.  But don't want to shoot myself in the foot.  
    • Where I have sight of a letter which states the following: "a) the case is removed from scheduled date and time on the court list forthwith    b) the case will be re-listed on the 1st open date after x few months, a date to be advised" Is there any way a hearing would be any earlier than suggested?  Lockdown closed courts but may they open early?    Could the bank ask it to be brought forward even with lockdown still in place officially til end July?    Would that depend on them physically serving a b petition?   Could the 1st open date be any time up to Christmas with such a potential back log of cases?  
    • How a fast-growing baby food firm saw investors pull out because of the Covid-19 crisis. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • View this quiz Employment status during COVID-19
      What do you do if you’ve been told not to come to work due to the current crisis.  Watch the video here or on the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page.

      Did you learn anything? Do the quiz
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 8 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 0 replies
    • One Parking Solutions - Damning judgement. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421148-one-parking-solutions-damning-judgement/
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 63 replies
    • View this quiz Coping with extreme hardship
      Life can be tough when you're entering the world of work and in the present virus crisis, things are even more difficult.

      Watch the video below or go to the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page . Afterwards, you can see if you've understood the points which are being made by taking the quiz.
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 8 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 1 reply
    • View this quiz: Pre-pay meters
      An explanation of how some gas and electric companies offer emergency quarantine support.

       
      Watch the video here – or go to the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page and watch it there. Then come back here and do the quiz
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 6 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 1 reply
Wolvesboys

YES CAR/DAFS .. You will pay PPI - Underwriters were Uk Insurance now Churchill

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 912 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

Please could you help

 

i have been pursuing a claim for mis sold PPI against YES car credit/DAFS for a number of years,

 

i bought the car in 2001,

I'm not covered by either FOS or associated bodies.

I have got to the stage whereby i have advised them i will be continuing my fight through the courts,

 

on Saturday i received letter From Irwin Mitchell stating amonghts other things.

I quote

" It is our clients primary contention that any claim brought in respect of the agreement will fail as it will have been brought outside the statutory time limits for starting court proceedings.

 

The agreement was entered into by you on 20th November 2001,

almost 16 years ago,

and therefore,

according to the limitation periods set out in the Limitation act 1980,

any claim arising out of this agreement is now out of time.

 

There is other gumpth with, that I'm not to concerned about and this will be their scaremongering in an attempt to put me off.

 

Would just like to understand a bit more about Limitation act 1980,

I've had a look through, to which it states "6 years",

however my complaint is not against the Loan per say,

it focussed around the mis selling of PPI.

 

I would be grateful if you could give me a direction i can take with this,

as do not want the bastards to get away with it any longer.

 

Once I'm successful, would be more than happy to share my finding on your site, as I'm aware I'm one of thousands in the the same boat with DAFS crooks.

 

I believe they scan your site looking for such information in getting themselves ahead against claimants like myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mrs Hobbit

I read the Act as you have six years from the 'date of discovery' of the mis-sold PPI.

 

I would tell Irwin Mitchell to re-read the Act ,and draw their attention the DATE of DISCOVERY OF MIS_SOLD PPI, not the date of the loan. They are trying to scare you off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that you are being misled here.

 

The issue of PPI is about money being paid under a mistake. The mistake being either that you believed that you were required to purchase the PPI, or that you were purchasing it without being informed, or that you were purchasing it believing that it was relevant to you when in fact it was not applicable, or that you weren't informed that a commission payment was being paid and so therefore you weren't fully informed and not in a position to make a proper decision as to whether or not it was suitable for you or if it was the best deal.

 

The limitation period which applies to actions for the recovery of money paid under a mistake is six years – but this means six years from the date that you knew of the mis-selling or could reasonably have done so.

 

It is up to you to decide when you knew about the mis-selling or when you should reasonably have known about it and then you start counting the six years from there.

 

The information which you are receiving from Irwin Mitchell is basically the pure contractual limitation period – but even that, is wrong because it is not six years from the date of the contract. It is six years from the date of the contractual breach – or the date upon which you could reasonably have known of the breach.

 

I'm afraid that we have lots of instances of solicitors or legal representatives providing this kind of incomplete information and in this way they are effectively misrepresenting the true situation – particularly to litigants in person – and I can imagine that you're not the only person who has received this kind of information in respect of a loan from Yes Car Credit.

 

Presumably these people are now covered by the FOS and so I would write back and inform them that their information is misleading because it is incomplete and is calculated to deceive a litigant in person and because of that you are proposing to make an immediate formal complaint to the FOS simply in respect of this unfair treatment of you.

 

Tell them that additionally, you are fully aware that you are well within the time. Because you only became aware of the PPI mis-selling within the last X years and therefore you will be starting a legal action if they're not prepared to change their position.

 

If you're not prepared to make the complaint which I have outlined above to the FOS, then don't make the threat to do so. However, a complaint about this to the FOS is a simple matter. It is free of charge. And it will help others if you do so.

 

Incidentally, you are talking about PPI going back an awful long time here. Have you any idea of the value of a possible claim? Although you are highly likely to win, there is a niggling thought in my mind that the value of your claim will put you onto the fast track which would mean that you could be at risk of costs if you lost the action.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you

 

Great information and the reassurances i was looking for.

Im a man of action not threats, so yes will be complaint to the FOS about the solicitors response.

Its in the region of 3500-3900 i have calculated, so fingers crossed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Mrs Hobbit

 

Im in the process of constructing my response to them now, your help has been invaluable.

 

Thank you again, will keep you all updated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that is well within the small claims limit and so that gives you a big advantage immediately because they will know that you have nothing to be frightened about in terms of bringing the legal action.

 

However, have you really calculated it correctly because if you're talking about PPI which was sold to you 16 years ago, I would have expected it to be an awful lot more – and of course don't forget the 8% interest.

 

I suggest that you begin a complaint to the FOS immediately but in terms of a legal action, I suggest that you start making your calculations very carefully.

 

Also of course, give Irwin Mitchell an opportunity to reconsider their position in view of this approach that you are deciding to take. It will be better all round if they simply face up to their obligation.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I utilised a spreadsheet for PPI reclaiming, just imputted the info i had to hand and that was the outcome.

 

As you state positively it falls within MCOL stipulations, which i believe is £5000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small claims limit is £10k


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

Does anybody have a PPI claiming spreadsheet i could utilise please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

Will have a play and see if i can utilise them. Thanks for all your help and i will keep you informed of updates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

statint sheet

 

 

just read that ukdarren thread

its all there

go after the underwriters


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive read that, all 18 pages and she pursued DAFS through the courts, couldn't see any mention of going after the underwriters.

I have previously, it was declined and FOS were pretty poor in any support given, basically agreed with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh must be my brain playing tricks...sorry.

 

yes PPI can be statute barred sadly people need to read the FCA CCL guidelines...

 

but what surprises me is they haven't pulled the 'well we weren't regulated then anyway string ' as they wernt and just say sod off.

 

well you've got all the data

so who were the insurance co?


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you

 

Great information and the reassurances i was looking for.

Im a man of action not threats, so yes will be complaint to the FOS about the solicitors response.

Its in the region of 3500-3900 i have calculated, so fingers crossed.

 

Solicitors don't fall within the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service I'm afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who would i complain to about his actions in place of FOS please?

 

They have attempted that strategy, supported by FOS and FCA, unfortunately, hence why i have decided the MCOL route. Email was sent today, sit back and await the reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody really. The Legal Ombudsman only deals with complaints about your own solicitor and the Solicitor's Regulation Authority only accepts reports about conduct issues, which this isn't. To be honest I can't see you have cause to complain as they seem to be simply stating what grounds they would rely on to defend, the merits of which could only be decided by a court.

 

I would also be wary of issuing a PPI claim that would be defended on statute barred grounds. It's been tried before and failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thank you for your input.

Are there any case studies/reference to the failed attempt against PPI for statue barred you could point me to please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have re attempted the underwriter recently, however they have come back say " The product/Policy referred to in your correspondence was sold by a company which is not part of the royal bank of scotland group"

 

Any advice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what lead you to HBOS?

 

this is where a recent claim was sent too

though I believe provident now own them?

 

Direct Auto Financial Services

2nd Floor

Afon Building

Worthing Road

Horsham

RH12 1TL


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Underwriters were Uk Insurance who are associated with Churchill who are associated with Direct line who are associated with RBOS.

 

DAFS are the company who purchased Yes car credit ( yes owned by Provident), i have emailed the CEO of provident, hence the letter from Irwin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Irwin their Acting Solicitor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

says so in post 1


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...