Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Statute Barred Northern Rock/Cabot PPI


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2019 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

I had a loan account with Northern Rock which I defaulted on and they subsequently sold it on to Cabot.

The account has been staute barred for about 15 years.

 

I recently made a tentative equiry regarding PPI, via a claims company, as I heard that it shouldn't affect the statute barred status.

 

I have been advised that Northern Rock have accepted the claim and a refund of approx £1100 is due and will pay it directly to myself.

They also say that they will advise Cabot to update their account details too.

 

To receive the refund I have to sign an acceptance form which says that this ends any PPI liability etc.

However there is also a condition that states that I accept that the cash loan is still in force.

 

My question is this:

Even though NR sold the debt to Cabot will my acceptance of this condition for NR constitute activity that will affect the statute barred status, thus "starting the clock again" and therefore give Cabot licence to start demanding payments from me.

 

And also as the PPI is seperated from the original loan, which now doesnt belong to NR, are they entitled to make this a condition of acceptance.

My limited understanding was that as the debt was sold on, then my PPI claim was the only issue.

 

I'd appreciate any advice as I could really use the refund.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

you cant unbar something that has become statute barred

not even a judge can.

 

£1100 seems very small for aloan of that age and that I bet was several £1000's itself

did you not SAR NR to get all the info FIRST.

or have you the original agreement still.

 

gonna be even less cause I bet the fleecing CMC will take 40% of it after fees/tax.

 

you NEVER need to us a CMC.

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

I appreciate your quick response.

 

I don't have the original agreement, however the original loan was taken out about 2000 and was for £9000.

I lost my job in 2002 and last payment was 2003 and since then their contact just dried up,

I don't even recall being informed by NR that Cabot had taken the account.

 

I'm advised that the cash loan amount outstanding after PPI removed is £5000.

As I explained, I was worried that by accepting the conditions including the specific one about the cash loan still in force would start the clock again or that Cabot, after being advised by NR, would be able to pursue me for this. And if I rejected that specific condition that NR could withhold the refund.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

now go read post 2 again carefully esp the 1st 2 lines

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

in E&W statute barring solely prevents enforcement of any debt..or the threat of court in a letter

 

i'e someone gets a CCJ and then tries to enforce it..get the money..they cant..so don't bother with trying to goto court

the owner of the debt is quite legally entitled to ASK for the money, you are quite legally entitled to ask them to go away...

 

unlike Scotland..whereby the debt is totally extinguished ... dead gone parrot after 5yrs.

 

since the introduction of the FCA CONC rules there has been a rule that states once you have told the owner the debt is statute barred then they MUST CEASE all communication..that SB letter is in our debt collection section of our library.

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

Have you sent our sb letter since 2015 fax rule changes?

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

No I haven't sent correspondence or had any contact for a good while now, do you think I should make the 1st move and send the letter before NR pass on any updates?

 

Also just going back to what you said about the Scotland element to SB,

 

I recently moved permanently to Scotland from England so will this element now apply or will the fact that the accounts were opened in England take precedence?

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Residence at time of take out..

 

Pers I'd send nowt

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...