Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   9. 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.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

Phiddius

Course Costs

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 506 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,

In Sept 2017 I enrolled on a course at University, at the induction day I signed an agreement for the course costs £2170 payable in 3 parts. I signed a Direct Debit form, and over the coming months all the money was taken from my bank successfully.

 

Job done in my opinion.

 

8 weeks ago, I received a threatening letter, not far off a screaming banchee coming in the room and demanding £320. "You agreed to accept responsibility for your course fee's and if you don't pay immediately we will pass this to an external debt collection agency"

 

I had no idea what this was about.

I called them, and they didn't either, so I was told that something was wrong but they were not sure what, and would look into it.

 

 

4 weeks later, Another letter arrived, even more angry than before with more threats. I have, demanded an explanation of why I being asked for £320.00 I feel this is not an unreasonable thing to ask.

 

They say, I was charged the wrong amount, and the correct amount is on the website, it's in the terms and conditions that they are allowed to charge for any mistakes they make, so pay up.

 

"The 2017/18 Tuition Fee Regulations state ‘1.10 The University reserves the right to correct administrative errors identified during invoicing and take action to recover any shortfall in fees in accordance with the published tuition fee listing for the appropriate academic session.’ Our Regulations are published externally in advance of the application cycle"

 

I think I have to pay them, even though its not the amount I agreed to pay, I just think their approach is awful, what if this was a more vulnerable person (as some students can be), they were very iron fist in their approach.

 

Can I legally demand an invoice from them in advance of the £320 payment, as I have asked for them to issue an invoice and they say its only a correction.

 

thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't regard administrative errors one and the same as a contract stating the costs of the course which you signed and agreed to and paid by DD...end of.

 

Now if they issued a new credit agreement explaining that the credit agreement you accepted was quoted incorrectly and ask you sign the new one to replace the previous...that could be possibly accepted.

 

You cant use administrative errors to correct credit agreements....because if it ever went to court the first thing a Judge will want to see is the agreement and price and if you paid in full.

 

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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

according to themselves they must correct the mistake during the invoice period, not a year later. It may be a moot point if you are continuing the couse beyond the 17/18 academic year as they just wont accept you on it next year if you have a debt to the uni.

I agree with you about the unneccessary manner they have used in correcting their error, use the college grievance procedure to get an apology for the way they have behaved. Your senior tutor will most likely be the first port of call and generally academics who take that role have the students interest as heart because they delay their promotion by doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"The 2017/18 Tuition Fee Regulations state ‘1.10 The University reserves the right to correct administrative errors identified during invoicing and take action to recover any shortfall in fees in accordance with the published tuition fee listing for the appropriate academic session.’ Our Regulations are published externally in advance of the application cycle"

 

 

 

 

Have you checked what "the published tuition fee listing" for 2017/18 actually says?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thank you for some good advice, appreciated.

 

> Ethel Street

"Have you checked what "the published tuition fee listing" for 2017/18 actually says?"

Actually, I couldn't find it anywhere, and so I have demanded that they send me a link to that published fee...

 

> ericsbrother

along with the unnecessary approach and demanded an apology ...

 

> Andyorch

followed by - saying if I do find the published fee online then I may consider paying this additional fee ie produce a new agreement accompanied by an explanation.

 

plus raised a complaint in the hope of protecting people in future who may be frightened by this kind of approach.

 

so thank you, I'll let you know how that goes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its irrelevant what you find on line.....as it may have been updated and "someone " error corrected since you signed the agreement.....as it stands they are making you correct someone else error.

 

 

" at the induction day I signed an agreement for the course costs £2170 payable in 3 parts. I signed a direct debit form, and over the coming months all the money was taken from my bank successfully. "

 

You have kept to your part of the agreement and fulfilled your liabilities.

 

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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andyorch, thanks for your reply,

 

They have responded to me by sending me a brochure showing the full price last year for the full time study, £4'860, no indication of the part time course costs.

 

I agreed my contract on 6.9.17 for £2'110 part time, then paid it as you are aware.

 

They sent me a copy of an advisory note they sent on 6.9.17, showing cost of the full time course, obviously I didn't see it then as I was not at home, I was in the university signing their agreement and didn't associate the full price with anything I was doing.

 

They also sent me a copy of a new invoice, they claim was sent to me on 7.2.18 showing a new figure of £2'430 and giving me 30 days to pay it. No explanation of any error. Anyway, I have never seen it until a few days ago.

 

I checked online and this years costs actually show the part time fee, which is now £2'140. I asked about that and they say that the university exercised its right to revise the fees for new entrants joining in 18-19

 

So basically they made a mistake charging me and want the missing pennies, and say they have the right to do so, even though this years fees are almost what I paid.

 

 

Thanks gain for any advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have sent the corrected invoice after Sept 2017...not in Feb 2018......they should have examined the agreement signed in Sept 2017.

 

Given its their error why not suggest a monthly payment plan of say £30 PM as its their error...your not in a position to pay in full to balance their errors and they should agree to meet you half way ?

 

 

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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andyorch

ok, thanks for your advice, I'll respond to them, thanks

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...