Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Work from home is "an aberration" that will be corrected as soon as possible says Goldman Sachs chief. View the full article
    • Work from home is "an aberration" that will be corrected as soon as possible says Goldman Sachs chief. View the full article
    • The mini electric vehicle being made by China's biggest carmaker is now outselling Tesla two to one. View the full article
    • https://www.bindmans.com/news/neale-v-dpp-the-right-to-silence-citizens-duties-and-coronavirus-regulations   Perhaps the OP should have said nothing - and risked arrest!   "Firstly, the case calls into question the logic behind aspects of the criminal justice response to the public health crisis created by the Coronavirus pandemic...   "Secondly, it is clear that some police officers have misunderstood and misstated their powers, and citizens’ obligations, under the Regulations and at common law...   "Thirdly, the case confirms reasonable excuses for being outside are not limited to those explicitly set out in the Regulations. Police officers considering whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that an offence has been committed under the Regulations so that an FPN may be issued, or the reasonable grounds for suspicion that are necessary for an arrest, should give proper consideration to any explanation given by members of the public (and what a court might think of them) rather than only recognising those exceptions explicitly listed in the Regulations and/or government guidance...   Fourthly, the case is an example of a failure of the CPS review into prosecutions brought under Coronavirus Regulations, which has found that alarming numbers of cases were wrongly charged..."   Above quotes from the Bindman's article, not the decision.  Case arose from the first lockdown and was in Wales.  Same now?  Also was about not being at home - not mask wearing.    
  • 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

lowells got three hits to the nose on three debts - all written off!


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 988 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'd be very grateful if you could help me with the following query:

 

How do you calaculate whether a bank account debt is statute barred?

 

If the debt is due to an unauthorised overdraft whereby mulitple debit card payments were allowed by the bank to be taken when there were insufficient/negative funds and no deposits were made into the account subsequently

 

what date do you choose for six years elapsed?

From the first transaction out of the account that made it a negative balance?

 

And if I may also ask:

How do you calculate the statute barred date for a credit card?

Is it from the last payment made to the card or is it from the first payment missed?

 

Thank you very much :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overdrafts are the last deposit made by yourself.

 

Credit cards are the first contractional missed payment.

 

Andy

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if say a final deposit was made in Jan, leaving a positive balance, and then two months later debit card payments were taken out resulting in an unauthorised overdraft and then default? (Thank you Andy!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds correct

You say multiple debit card payments...what pdl loans?

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
Even if say a final deposit was made in Jan, leaving a positive balance, and then two months later debit card payments were taken out resulting in an unauthorised overdraft and then default? (Thank you Andy!)

 

Yes you defaulted on the facility when you failed to deposit funds..thats your breach of the agreement.The OC would then have to issue you a formal warning and allowing up to 28 days for you to respond...if you fail to make arrangement then they issue a Demand/Termination Notice (Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974...again another 14 days to respond.

 

So all in last deposit not made plus 2 months tops.

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy

 

Yes DX despite there being insufficient funds the bank allowed multiple random debit card payments out, like four on one day sometimes, resulting in an unauthorised overdraft I hadn't agreed to, and then added penalty charges and interest etc and then allowed more debit card payments to be taken weeks/month later compounding the problem. I'm curious as to why the bank thought it reasonable to allow such payments at the start let alone when there was a significant negative balance.

 

I remember there as a case in the news some years ago about someone winning against overdraft charges but I can't remember it now. Anyway I was also hoping it would be statute barred sometime this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The case was Oliver Foster Burnell v LLoyds TSB Bank

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

so were these PDL direct debits?

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

ok surprisingly this post has concluded

- I sent an upset email to the FCA email contact of the debt-buyer after I received a letter talking about possible escalation to legal action complaining about various things and also stating that they must action a GDPR request if they don't satisfy my complaint

 

- this was a few days ago

- have today received a posted response stating that they will close this account and not pursue it,

 

send me a cheque for inconvenience (I didn't ask for or mention this) and also noting I have two other accounts with them (credit cards) they're closing those two accounts as well

confused.gifjaw.gifconfused.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is this DCA ?

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow punched lowlife on the nose 3 times...well done!!

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

They are Low Life.They rely on the ignorance of most people with regard to debts with idle threats and downright lies to get you to pay them thier parent company buy portfolios of debt from banks etc for peanuts and try to get the debtor to pay full whack.As soon as you stand up to them they back down and move on to another victim (sucker)

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...