Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Post #415 you said you were unable to sell it yourself. Earlier I believe you said there had been expressions of interest, but only if the buyer could acquire the freehold title. I wonder if the situation with the existing freeholders is such that the property is really unattractive, in ways possibly not obvious to someone who also has an interest in and acts for the freeholders.
    • i dont think the reason why the defendant lost the case means anything at all in that case. it was a classic judge lottery example.
    • Hello, I will try to outline everything clearly. I am a British citizen and I live in Luxembourg (I think this may be relevant for potential claims). I hired a car from Heathrow in March for a 3-day visit to family in the UK. I was "upgraded" to an EV (Polestar 2). I had a 250-mile journey to my family's address. Upon attempting to charge the vehicle, there was a red error message on the dashboard, saying "Charging error". I attempted to charge at roughly 10 different locations and got the same error message. Sometimes there was also an error message on the charging station screen. The Hertz 0800 assistance/breakdown number provided on the set of keys did not work with non-UK mobiles. I googled and found a bunch of other numbers, none of which were normal geographical ones, and none of which worked from my Luxembourg mobile. It was getting late and I was very short on charge. Also, there was no USB socket in the car, so my phone ran out of battery, so I was unable to look for further help online. It became clear that I would not reach my destination (rural Devon), so I had no choice but to find a roadside hotel in Exeter and then go to the nearest Hertz branch the following day on my remaining 10 miles of charge. Of course, as soon as the Hertz employee in Exeter plugged it into their own charger, the charging worked immediately. I have driven EVs before, I know how to charge them, and it definitely did not work at about 10 different chargers between London and Exeter. I took photos on each occasion. Luckily they had another vehicle available and transferred me onto it. It was an identical Polestar 2 to the original car. 2 minutes down the road, to test it, I went to a charger and it worked immediately. I also charged with zero issues at 2 other chargers before returning the vehicle. I think this shows that it was a charging fault with the first car and not my inability to do it properly. I wrote to Hertz, sending the hotel, dinner, breakfast and hotel parking receipt and asking for a refund of these expenses caused by the charging failure in the original car. They replied saying they "could not issue a refund" and they issued me with a voucher for 50 US dollars to use within the next year. Obviously I have no real proof that the charging didn't work. My guess is they will say that the photos don't prove that I was charging correctly, just that it shows an error message and a picture of a charger plugged into a car, without being able to see the detail. Could you advise whether I have a case to go further? I am not after a refund or compensation, I just want my £200 back that I had to spend on expenses. I think I have two possibilities (or maybe one - see below). It looks like the UK is still part of the European Consumer Centre scheme:  File a complaint with ECC Luxembourg | ECC-Net digital forms ECCWEBFORMS.EU   Would this be a good point to start from? Alternatively, the gov.uk money claims service. But the big caveat is you need a "postal address in the UK". In practice, do I have to have my primary residence in the UK, or can I use e.g. a family member's address, presumably just as an address for service, where they can forward me any relevant mail? Do they check that the claimant genuinely lives in the UK? "Postal address" is not the same as "Residence" - anyone can get a postal address in the UK without living there. But I don't want to cheat the system or have a claim denied because of it. TIA for any help!  
  • 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

First Trust Bank sold my 2005 debts to Asset Link Capital


pete263
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2439 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

Hi, In 2005 I developed long term illness and had to give up working.

 

To cut a long story short I owed my bank (First Trust) approx £300 (I cant remember the exact figure) for a couple of direct debits that came out of my current account at the time.

 

I also had a credit card (again with First Trust) and the balance on that was approx £600.

 

I contacted the local Citizens Advice, got a payment plan set up with a token payment of £1 per month for the current account and credit card. ( I have paid every month ever since)

 

At the time the Bank agreed to charge no interest on either the credit card or current account, although sadly I do not have this in writing anywere.

 

The bank has now sold the debt onto Asset Link Capital and I have had a letter from them asking me to setup a payment plan with them but the £300 current account debt has now grown into a £1100+ debt!

Its obvious the bank has been charging interest on this account all along.

 

Interestingly, the credit card debt has not had any interest added to it.

 

Im at a total loss as to what to do about it and would be very grateful for any help.

I do not mind paying off genuine debt that Im responsible for but to charge that amount of interest is criminal.

 

PS. After reading through some other cases is it feasible for me to request a CCA for the Credit card debt and I dont think a CCA would help with a current account?

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore debt collection communications.

 

Send a Data Protection Subject Access Request to First Trust for copies of all records on the current account and credit card.

 

 

In the request letter, ask for copies of all file notes, all statements of accounts and in particular any records regarding to an agreement made in 05/06 for no interest or charges to be added. If you click on subject access request there is a link to the standard template 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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply,

 

I have a Subject access request from October 2014 from them ( a friend at the time was advising me on financial matters) and I can find nothing in the notes regarding interest or charges being frozen. To be honest I cant make much sense of them as its a printout of 150 so pages titled CACS report, I did find the name of the person from the CAB who dealt with this back then but after ringing them she no longer works for the CAB.

 

Should I request another SAR? Sorry if I seem a bit confused but my illness makes it very difficult to process information at times.

 

If worst comes to the worst what is my best course of action for resolving this, CCA the credit card and token payment for the current account?

 

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, no point sending another.

 

You could write to the Bank asking them for confirmation that back in 2005/06 following intervention from Citizens advice that interest/charges were removed and no longer to be added to the account.

 

Don't mention the debt being sold and the issue.

Get the Bank to confirm what they agreed at the time.

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

so you received a letter of assignment.

Did the bank continue to send out annual statements before selling the debt on?

Does the new demand have a breakdown of how the debt is formed?

 

With a SAR it is supposed to be intelligible so what you received didnt meet the requirements on a SAR as they are supposed to send explanatoty text with their reams of figures.

 

 

That is a stick to beat them with but they wont be sending you it now but you have good grounds for a complaint when you ask again and get the same type of data.

 

 

That should get them a ticking off and hopefully a refund of your tenner (I know but even a small victory is still a victory).

 

you can ask Link for a breakdown of the amount and they will have to chase it up with First Trust or they wont be going anywhere enforcing the debt.

 

 

So, ask link for a breakdown first and then SAR to First Trust if they cant provide anything meaningful

 

I bet some of the original charges were unlawful so you will be able to reclaim these from Link.

 

 

They wont have paid that much for the debt so if they have to pay you say £100 that is probably more than the debt cost them and they have no way of wriggling out of it, the liabilites go with the benefits to them.

 

 

If you are lucky you get back the charges plus interest so the end result is that they will owe you more then the origianl amount, your debt is cleared and you get some cash. Wouldnt that be a result.

 

For the moment you pay the £1 a month if the assignment is real as per the original agreement. they will ahve to go to court to vary that and they might not have the correct paperwork to back up their decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much for your answer, its a weight off my mind.

 

 

Found the exact figures for the debt and the current account was £417, the credit card £661 so on the current account there has been nearly £800 interest.

 

The SAR is pretty unitelligible as you mentioned, no explanatory texts or anything, just a bunch of codes and figures really.

 

By the way, I had PPI and insurance on the credit card so I dont know why it was never settled through the insurance.

 

The bank never sent me annual statements and the new demand from Link only has a total figure, no breakdown at all.

 

I'll follow your advice now and firstly ask link for a breakdown and SAR the bank,

 

 

should I offer to pay Link the £1 per month immediatly or wait until they give me a breakdown? Also, when I get the SAR back how do I know what charges are unlawful?

 

Thanks for your patience and for the advice :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

cash cowed blind

quite honestly id just stop paying both of them

 

 

link never own enforceable debts anyway.

 

 

a DCA is NOT A BAILIFF

and has

NO SUCH LEGAL POWERS.

 

 

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

also 1st trust were an irish bank

are you still in Ireland?

why are you blindly paying a English DCA for an irish debt???

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

doorstep hassle?

 

they are NOT BALLIFFS!!

 

where this come from...

not been talking to these muppets have you

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

Thats true dx and I'll keep that in mind :wink: Going to try it re: ericsbrother and see how I get on..

... I'll keep you's posted and let you know how it plays out.

 

 

Just finished the letter asking for the breakdown so that'll get the ball rolling.

Cheers for the advice everyone, it IS appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, I also have a copy of the agreement for the credit card and PPI is included in it, is it worth my while contacting the original creditor about this or should it be LINK?

I didnt have the card for very long so cant imagine Id be owed very much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

always the OC

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...