Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would if I could tobyjugg  Did the same run today over an hour quicker than yesterday, thats what happens when you know where to go and not just try finding places with the postcode as I was yesterday
    • Thank you, @lookinforinfo. I have updated the VCS v Ward case as below:   VCS v Ward     1.       This case is often quoted by the claimant as assisting their case. However, in this instance it actually assists mine. It is contended that the act of stopping a vehicle does not amount to parking. This predatory operation pays no regard to the byelaws at all. It is likely that this Claimant may try to rely upon two 'trophy case' wins, namely VCS v Crutchley and/or VCS v Ward, neither of which were at an Airport location, which is not 'relevant land'. The airport land is subject to the Airport Byelaws as specified in 'Section 63' of the Airports Act 1986 [EXHIBIT A]. Both cases involve flawed reasoning, and the Courts were wrongly steered by this Claimant's representative; there are worrying errors in law within those cases, such as an irrelevant reliance upon the completely different Supreme Court case. These are certainly not the persuasive decisions that this Claimant may suggest.   63 Airport byelaws. (2) Any such byelaws may, in particular, include byelaws— (d) for regulating vehicular traffic anywhere within the airport, except on roads within the airport to which the road traffic enactments apply, and in particular (with that exception) for imposing speed limits on vehicles within the airport and for restricting or regulating the parking of vehicles or their use for any purpose or in any manner specified in the byelaws;
    • Savers opening its Digital Regular Saver this month and adding between £1 and £50 in April, May and June will qualify. There will be ten prizes of £1,000 each. You can earn 3 per cent on the first £1,000. View the full article
    • Would you want your bank to know how many steps you've walked today or whether you got around to going for your weekly jog? But what if it was promising you vouchers or cash as a reward. View the full article
    • Thank you Andy. A gentleman with your time and advice as always.    I've tidied up my defence below. Is this ok? Or a bit overkill for initial defence?   Many thanks,   MDG   Particulars of Claim    1.The defendant entered in to a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreement with Vanquis under account reference xxxxxxxx ('the agreement')   2.The defendant failed to maintain the required payments and arrears began to accrue   3.The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 27/09/19 and notice given to the defendant   4. Despite repeated requests for payment the sum of xxx remains due and outstanding.   And the claimant claims a. The said sum of xxxx b. Interest pursuant to s69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue accruing at a daily rate of £0.610 but limited to one year being £222.65 c. Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the  particulars of 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 allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings with Vanquis. I do not recall the precise details of the agreement and have sought to seek clarity from the claimant.   2. Paragraph 2 is noted but I do not recall the original creditor providing either Notice of Default or Default Notice or Notice of Sums in Arrears pursuant to the CCA1974.   3. Paragraph 3 is noted. I do not recall ever receiving this notice pursuant to sec136 of the Law of Property Act 1925.   4. The claimant has since provided alleged copies of a Notice of default, Default Notice and notice of assignment by way of my CPR 31.14 request but until it can provide a copy of the executed credit agreement pursuant to sec 78 CCA1974 the provisions of section 87/88 of the CCA1974 are irrelevant until such compliance.    5. On receipt of a notice of acting letter sent from Lowell Solicitors, the Defendant sent for on the 12/11/2020 via royal mail a section 78 request to Lowell Portfolio Ltd pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. This for a copy of the agreement. The claimant has partially complied and disclosed various documents however they were unable to comply with disclosing a valid full copy of the executed agreement on which their claim relies upon.   6. The claimant disclosed various screenshots taken from  the originators software of the application and also confirms on their covering letter the relative legislation The Electronic Communications Act 2000 with regards to wet signatures and the requirement of a tick box to validate the application.The screenshots  are devoid of any tick box or any authenticity of IP address conformation check.Therefore the claimant remains in default of my section 78 request and pursuant to section 78  6 a of the CCA1974  the claimant is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.   7. On receipt of this claim form I sent a CPR 31.14 request on the 11/2/21 via royal mail to Lowell Solicitors and again the claimants solicitors only disclosed exactly the same documentation. The claimant therefore after a second attempt by the defendant remains in default of said request.   8. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:-   a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement ; and b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and c) Show or evidence service of a Default Notice /Notice of Sums in Arrears, d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   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.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • 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
      • 33 replies

Backdoor Hoist CCJ - old BPF car Finance - set aside


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 348 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

Hi,

 

I am having problems paying bills due to lack of work and have agreed temporary monthly payments with several CC companies including to my surprise after reading the forum MBNA.

 

The only real pain has been Barclays Partner Finance who will not accept my offer for a token payment and have pressed me to pay more.

They have received an income and expenditure report compiled with help from the CCCS but still ask for what I cannot afford.

 

The loan was for a car which has since been sold and a cheaper one aquired to reduce costs and enable me to work.

 

The calls with this company have been quite distressing after the first person I spoke to said that they would accept an offer of £5.

I wrote another letter to offer this amount which was refused again.

 

I tried to pay a token amount over the phone and was put through to collections who did everything they could do squeeze more out of me, constantly threatening debt collection and legal action, obviously this didn't help them as I don't have it.

 

The people at Barclays do not listen,

they talk over you constantly and are extremely rude,

which I did expect , which I presume is their goal.

 

The last thing they said to me after reluctantly processing my £5 payment was to tell me that they will be fast tracking the account for collection.

Amongst other things said to scare me was that I should consult a lawyer and disregard the CCCS.

 

I have paid a token amount for the last 2 months and have no details of any charges they have recently made to the account.

 

At a court case what is the likely outcome?

Surely they can only order me to pay what I can afford is that correct?

 

If that is the case then they will end up with £1 a month, surely they know this and why would they bother?

Or is all this hard talk designed to scare me into paying them?

 

I don't think I can avoid a court date just need to know what to expect.

 

thanks in advance and apologise if the post is too long for you!

 

Royal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 94
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

you mean file a court CLAIM TO HALT THE sb PURPOSEFULLY TO AN OLD ADDRESS yes any DCA will.  

Ring Hoist and ask for the claim hander of your claim....tell them you intend to set a side and will request costs or give them the opportunity to set it aside themselves by consent.   Once

Possibly not...as like most DCAs......I will prepare an N244 and draft Order for you later......Im a bit snowed under at the moment.

Hi RB,

 

Could you get CCCS to write on your behalf confirming you are only able to offer the token payments because of your current situation. This may carry more weight than you speaking to them on the phone, which normally gets you nowhere except stressed.

 

Keep up the token payments - only time will tell if they are prepared to take this to court.

 

And don't be worried about this - the court is unlikely to order you to pay what you honestly cannot afford.

 

Don't discuss this by phone any more if they call you. Tell them you'll only communicate in writing, then hang up.

 

If they are calling you frequently, keep a log of time and dates of every call in case you need to make a phone harassment complaint.

  • Haha 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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Slick,

 

Thanks for that, I will talk to CCCS and see if they can do that.

 

I was doing ok until I spoke to the two Barclays people yesterday, the tactics they use I think are really dangerous, especially when used against people who are lacking support from either family or forums.

Luckily I have both so can recover fairly easily from a day or two of feeling bad.

 

Thanks again, I will post any developments from BPF.

 

Royal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest from Barclays Partner Finance is that they will accept a payment of £39 minimum for twelve months without any charges.

I have been told to offer £1 by the CCCS which they have refused.

They will now send me letters every 10 or 20 days at a cost of £22.00 per letter until I pay up.

 

Are these charges legal and could I charge them £22 every time they call me?

 

Also one of their operators suggested I sell my car to pay the loan,

I believe this is against OFT regs so is it worth a complaint?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Royal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi RB,

 

I take it CCCS were not able to write on your behalf offering the token pay'ts. If you can't afford the £39, continue to pay what you can.

 

The £22 charges for their letters are not enforceable, but you can't charge them re the phone calls either. ;)

 

I know you use the car for work, but I don't think they've breached any rules suggesting you sell it to clear the loan.

 

Have you sent BPF a CCA request to see if they have an enforceable credit agreement. Use Letter N from here and enclose a £1 postal order - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/20758-creditors-dcas-letter-templates.html

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks slick,

 

The CCCS couldn't act on my behalf unless they were negotiating a DMP or IVA. As I am in negative equity they can only advise.

 

The next thing I will do is send them a CCA request as you suggest, just in case!

 

Thanks again,

 

Royal.

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

Hi,

 

I am currently in a position with Barclays Partner Finance where I have been advised to offer a token payment, as with my other Barclays accounts they have refused and carry on adding charges and interest.

 

This BPF loan was for a car.

When being sold the loan by the garage I seem to remember them telling me it would be HP, they even criticised a loan I had for a previous car as it was not HP!

 

The garage dealt with a company called European Finance.

I am now dealing with Barclays Partner Finance which also was known as Clydesdale.

 

Looking through my reciepts I find that my receipt for the car was made out as sold to European Finance ltd and delivered to me.

This would tell me that it was HP and not an unsecured loan.

(Although terms and condition say otherwise)

 

When getting advice for the debt problems I was told to carry on paying for the car, when another creditor did a check they phoned to tell me that this was not an HP loan and should be treated as non priority also, hence the token payment to BPF.

 

Now, is an HP loan better for the consumer than an unsecured loan or vice versa?

Also does anyone think this may be a case of miss selling a loan?

Why would they put the finance house as the owner on the receipt if it was supposed to be an unsecured loan?

 

Thanks in advance for reading and any advice!

 

Royalblue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...

Just an update. Now with Mercers (Barclays)

 

Mercers still calling but now maybe once a fortnight rather than every day.

 

Funny thing is, I am never in!

 

Have not CCA'd them yet as it appears they ignore those at will. I will wait for them to make a move and then CPR them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi RB,

 

Before involving yourself with the CPR route, users have had success recently in getting their credit agreement after FOS intervention.

 

CCA request; Account in dispute letter; BC refuse to supply agreement; complaint to FOS; BC produce their credit agreement or whatever they hold.

 

See here - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclaycard/231901-tony3x-barclaycard.html

 

:)

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to post this back in June.

 

I received an offer of a new loan contract at a reduced Apr. It was all filled in and ready to go...I just needed to sign it!

 

Now having told them I have no work and can only afford a pound, wouldn't this come under some sort of bad lending law?

'We know you have no money but sign this and we can take you to court!'

 

This led me to believe that they have no valid agreement.

I haven't followed it up yet as I was trying to sort out my problems with MBNA, which are now nearly over...so onwards.

 

Royal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could report this to the OFT and/or Trading Standards but they won't investigate it on a personal level. Waste of time IMHO as Barclays are not going to be affected in any way.

 

I'm sure you're right - they offer a better rate to get you to sign a new agreement because they have no valid agreement for the old one.

 

Or are we being too cynical. ;)

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but it could be the best £1.50 you ever invested.

 

;)

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

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

Send a reminder enclosing a copy of the first letter.

 

:)

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

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

Hi,

 

Received a copy of agreement and terms of which you can see below.

 

Ok This is 2007 so not sure what the changes in 2006 mean.

 

The Agreement below is a good scan but as you can see is ineligible, would this be from microfiche and could it be improved?

 

Terms, sent on a separate sheet with section 4.3 missing from the terms I was originally given. (4,3 deals with changing payment date) would this be relevant for any reason?

Good quality copy but not taken from the originals originally sent to me.

 

Invoice This may be either here nor there but when I bought this car I was told that the previous agreement I had with another finance company was not as good as the hp loan they could provide. (this was said when I told them I was going to extend the loan repayments form a previous loan on the car I was part exing)

 

I took them to their word and recieved an invoice saying the car was sold to a finance company as any hp loan would.

 

It turns out that this was an unsecured loan at a higher interest rate than stated. Although the supplied T&C would have explained this to me I did not read them all the way through.(Too trusting and excited to get the car!)

 

All I have is my memory of the converstaion with the salesman and the invoice that would seem to back it up. (my memory)

 

Any ideas on the agreement and the dodgy sales techniques would be welcome.

 

Thanks,

 

Royal.

 

bpf-ag-ed.jpgbpf-terms-ed.jpgcar-invoice-ed.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi RB,

 

The document is just legible although I believe the Reg'ns say it should be easily legible, which it is not.

 

It appears to contain the necessary Prescribed Terms in the main agreement as required.

 

Your comment about the high interest rate is probably irrelevant. I see the rate is on the main agreement. I can't quite make it out - is it 55% ? :eek:

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

No it wasn't 55%. Looking at it closely in hand it looks like it could be 11% but I couldn't be sure. I guess that makes it ineligible if I cant read it!

 

Would this have been taken from a michrofiche and could they improve it?

 

I think I will just send a nice letter asking them to send one I can read clearly.

 

Also, Do you have any pointers or ideas about the mis-selling part because the difference between hp and unsecured is bugging me. It was actually MBNA who told me it was unsecured when they were doing a check on my other creditors.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi RB,

 

Yes, certainly the document is not clearly legible as required by the CCA 1974 so you should write back pointing out that this is a requirement with which they must comply, and would they therefore send you a legible copy.

 

I don't think you can argue about the interest rate. If you didn't like it, you shouldn't have got carried away about the "new motor". ;)

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Slick,

 

Sent a letter today asking for a nice clear copy I can read!

 

I wasn't really bothered about the interest rate as such I think I am more peeved at the car salesman who dissed my current loan with black hearse (who had offered to extend it) in favour of a new one that he would earn commission on! and in doing so lied about it! I sort of know that is a long shot though!

 

Next car I get will be cash though for obvious reasons!:smile:

 

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have to look it up but, as you've got your copy of the CCA open, can you check it out.

 

;)

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 OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what it says:

 

61.—(1) A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless

(a) a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms

and conforming to regulations under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed

manner both by the debtor or hirer and by or on behalf of the creditor or owner,

and

(b) the document embodies all the terms of the agreement, other than implied terms,

and

© the document is, when presented or sent to the debtor or hirer for signature, in

such a state that all its terms are readily legible.

 

I am not sure though as it says: 'when presented or sent to the debtor for signature'

 

presumably that would mean a legible copy would need to be supplied in court too?

Edited by royalblue1878
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • dx100uk changed the title to Backdoor Hoist CCJ - old BPF car Finance - set aside
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...