Jump to content


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 853 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

In my view you are wasting your time writing letters requesting information.

 

You need to make a formal complaint on the basis that regardless of what level of fees you may or may not have agreed to, they cannot charge more than the 20% cap. They will know full well that if they don't agree to reduce it, the Legal Ombudsman will order them to if & when you take the complaint to them.

 

I don't buy that the contract is generally unenforceable. This is not an unfair term which renders a contract void, it's just the wrong fee quoted and the contract is quite capable of performing (and did in fact perform well) if you establish the correct fee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/news/stories/ppi-fee-cap-from-10-july/

 

On 10 May 2018, the Financial Guidance and Claims Act 2018 (“the Act”) received Royal Assent. The Act:

 

  • prohibits fees of more than 20%, excluding VAT, being charged for PPI claims, and
  • restricts SRA authorised firms and regulated individuals from charging a client where no award has been recovered.

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
In my view you are wasting your time writing letters requesting information.

 

You need to make a formal complaint on the basis that regardless of what level of fees you may or may not have agreed to, they cannot charge more than the 20% cap. They will know full well that if they don't agree to reduce it, the Legal Ombudsman will order them to if & when you take the complaint to them.

 

I don't buy that the contract is generally unenforceable. This is not an unfair term which renders a contract void, it's just the wrong fee quoted and the contract is quite capable of performing (and did in fact perform well) if you establish the correct fee.

 

I'm sorry but I think you're quite wrong. This is not merely an incorrect fee, it is "in your face" breach of statutory duty and it should be reported to the MOJ.

 

I think it is worth writing because I think you need clarification from them. These regulations are new and it may be that this firm knows something that we don't and is able to say that there is some exclusion or exception. The best thing to do is delay a little, write the letter, see their response – and if they have picked up something that we didn't understand then you save embarrassment. If we find that we are right – then all you've lost is a week or two.

 

I'm all for being very prepared and as perfectly informed as possible before striking out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I need to qualify what I have said earlier in respect of unfair terms. I've gone back and refreshed my memory and I realise now that the term is not unfair if it deals with the subject matter of the contract. In this case, the subject matter of the contract is the service rendered in exchange for the price. Therefore even if the price is excessive, it cannot be held to be unfair and in that respect it will always remain enforceable.

 

However, this contract is still unenforceable because it would be void for illegality. It is clearly unlawful for any CMC to attempt to charge more than a reasonable price for the services they have provided and in any event subject to a maximum of 20%.

 

It would appear that this CMC has attempted to levy 30% and that is expressly forbidden by the new regulations. Therefore the term is unlawful and for that reason the contract is void for illegality. No court would be prepared to intervene.

 

The contract is, in my view, void ab initio.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

 

Thanks again. I agree with you BankFodder. I do not see how a contract that has an element within it that is illegal not rendering the whole contract invalid and unenforceable. Also here you need to remember that I have not signed anything and at worst is a contract based on a verbal agreement where what I was agreeing to was never cited. If they had read out all the terms and conditions and then I agreed then maybe that would be a different matter, or even asked if I had read and understood and agree to the terms and conditions in the paperwork they sent me. But this never happened. I will send the letter as originally and kindly suggested by By BankFodder in post #21.

 

As soon as I hear anything back I will update the thread. It It would certainly be interesting to see what they say about why they think they can charge 30%.

 

Thanks as always

 

DJC

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

Hi

 

Just an update. I sent the letter on 19th December, when I track the item with Royal mail on the website or phone it still hasn't been delivered, I guess there is a delay with the Christmas deliveries and all :(

 

In the meantime I have been ignoring their calls to my mobile and landline, but this morning I have had a text of them saying "Reminder: Payment is now overdue. To arrange payment and avoid any further action please click **** or call us on ****.

 

Regards

 

DJC

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe that a letter sent on the 19th won't be delivered by now. I would say that it is lost.

Send another - tracked.

Don't you have their email address? Send it by email as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Save the texts you are receiving

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BankFodder.

 

I have all the texts they have sent me, and the call logs from their attempted phone calls to my mobile.

 

I have just now emailed them to their payments and complaints email addresses.

 

I will get another copy of the letter sent to them, last time I used one of their return envelopes, this time I’ll just use a normal one.

 

Thanks, and regards 😊

 

DJC

TBC_2a.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Just sent again recored delivery.

 

After speaking to the Lady in the post office she says that you cannot track signed for, you just see an entry in the tracker for them accepting it and then when it is signed for. Sometimes if there is no one there to sign for it, it will simply just be posted (they shouldn't do this but it happens). So it is possible that they have the first letter, or that it will turn up (probably at the same time as the second letter....).

 

Moral of the story is, if there is anything in their valuable, sensitive etc, you should pay the extra for special delivery.....

 

On another note, just had a call off TGC on the landline, just told them that I have sent letter / email and I am awaiting a response for that before politley hanging up :).

 

Regards

 

DJC

Link to post
Share on other sites

are you recording your calls?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I haven't spoken to them since the intitial contact (before I realised I was being connecd) other than today on the landline, and previoulsy I have not recorded any calls. I only have the facility to record calls on my mobile, which i will do if I do speak to them on my mobile at any time in future.

 

Regards

 

DJC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys.

 

So I have had a response from TGC and it doesn't look like good news. The pack I sent back to them looks like I did sign a letter of Authority for the Halifax, and dated 8 days before the Guidance and Claims Act 2018 was enforced.

 

In the attachment we have:

 

page 1 - The LOA, this must have been in the pack and I didn't realise this was an LOA, I'm not sure what was in the pack but I thought it was just details to agree for them to search for PPI.

 

Page 2 - Their letter saying that I am still tied into paying them the high percentage fee....

 

Page 3 - Texts showing that they received the pack on 14th September 2018 and that they located the PPI on the 22nd September 2018.

 

Page 4 - Email dated 22nd September 2018 showing they located PPI for Halifax.

 

Page 5 - Email 12th October 2018 showing they submitted complaint to Halifax.

 

So my questions now are

 

1. If they had a letter of Authority for Halifax already, why did they send me an LOA for each of the claims (Credit card x 2 and Loan x 1)? These are the ones in the attachment in post #15 pages 3 + 4 (this was just a scan of one of the 3 x letters of authority for each Halifax claim, which I never sent back to them).

 

2. Even though they have an LOA signed by me dated before the 10th July 2018, Discovery of PPI, submission of the complaint and their request for payment fall after this date, does this still tie me into paying the full requested payment?

 

Really gutted if this means I now have to pay them the full amount. Any advice on this would me much appreciated.

 

Thanks and regards

 

DJC.

TGC_3a.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stuffed then

 

Shame you've been here since 2012

Had lots of our old newsletters but still used 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

you can be 100% sure that the firm knew about the forthcoming regulations and did their utmost to get contracts signed as quickly as they could before they came into force.

 

also notice how quickly they were able to receive your forms and then make the enquiry and to ascertain the ppi. A matter of days. A nice little earner.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In my view you are wasting your time writing letters requesting information.

 

You need to make a formal complaint on the basis that regardless of what level of fees you may or may not have agreed to, they cannot charge more than the 20% cap. They will know full well that if they don't agree to reduce it, the Legal Ombudsman will order them to if & when you take the complaint to them.

 

 

and hopefully people now understand the importance of not rushing and fact checking all the way and making sure that you have all your evidence properly assembled

Link to post
Share on other sites

.... and finally I have to say, not for the first time how astonishing it is to find people who leap into things like PPI claims with a contract to pay 30% of their own money for a service which clearly takes as little as just a few days but when we help them here to get 100% of their money for themselves and we help them for free, we scarcely get a thank you and very rarely any kind of donation.

 

in case people missed it, a few years ago we helped somebody recover £64,000 and they gave us £50 donation. Do the calculation yourselves.

 

Once again I have a taste of sick rising up in the back of my throat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

After going over it and trying to figure out what happened as I couldn't understand how I had sent them anything before the pack I returned, I now realise I had put the 7th instead of the 9th on the forms. I completed them in early september and then sent them off. I am pretty stupid on 2 levels. Putting the wrong month down as well as going with a CMC in the first place.

 

I am going to dispute the date in the form as it was put in incorrectly and the fat they received it in september should prove that but I don't know how that will go.

 

Any Ideas where I would stand in that? I made a mistake on the forms and if I had put the proper date on them (2nd September 2018) I would be protected by the new law. You can bet your bottom dollar that a mistake that meant they couldn't benefit from they would dispute till they are blue in the face, but the other way round....

 

I'll let you know how I get on.

 

Regards

 

DJC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

 

After going over it and trying to figure out what happened as I couldn't understand how I had sent them anything before the pack I returned, I now realise I had put the 7th instead of the 9th on the forms. I completed them in early september and then sent them off. I am pretty stupid on 2 levels. Putting the wrong month down as well as going with a CMC in the first place.

 

I am going to dispute the date in the form as it was put in incorrectly and the fat they received it in september should prove that but I don't know how that will go.

 

Any Ideas where I would stand in that? I made a mistake on the forms and if I had put the proper date on them (2nd September 2018) I would be protected by the new law. You can bet your bottom dollar that a mistake that meant they couldn't benefit from they would dispute till they are blue in the face, but the other way round....

 

I'll let you know how I get on.

 

Regards

 

DJC.

 

I don't really understand what you are saying here.

I suggest that you help us to understand it and then advise before you go rushing off to them

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically the only thing I ever sent them was the pack in September.

 

Insteady of putting 02/09/18 on the forms, like an idiot, I put 02/07/18 (or they have doctored the forms but it looks like my writing...)

 

So I made a mistake on the date, and I'm not quite sure what I can do about that now, but the forms were signed, sent and received by them early september.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it certainly does seem extraordinary that they only acknowledged receipt of your documents on 14 September which is a full two months after the date which you put on the forms but a much more reasonable and shorter delay after the date on which you really signed them.

 

Are these documents which you have received a response to your SAR? Or are you expecting a larger disclosure?

 

I would have expected that when they receive documents that they mark them with the date of receipt and there doesn't appear to be anything like that here.

 

I have to say it's not looking good and I'm not too sure how we can help to save you from yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BankFodder

 

I don't think anyone can save me from myself. I just seem to always make things difficult for myself.

 

I have not received anything other than what I have posted so they have not supplied me with any of the full information as part of the SAR. They have basically ignored that request as far as I can tell and only sent that one photocopy of the LOA and the demand for payment that came with it.

Edited by Andyorch
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you'll have to sit back and wait and see what they say and then when they find against you, you will have to decide your next step.

 

It's a shame that you have mixed two issues in with each other. You have complained about the date problem and at the same time you have also said that you didn't understand that you are signing an agreement.

 

You would always be better to raise one issue at a time. It's too late now.

 

I certainly agree with you that it would seem extraordinary that they would send these acknowledgements of having received your documents so late after you had sent them. However, you are left with the problem of proof – as you well know.

 

If you could find some other people who had gone to the same firm and who were able to tell you about their experience of having sent off the packs and how quickly they receive the acknowledgement, then this would help you enormously.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BankFodder.

 

I have not sent the email response to them as yet, so I can amend before I do.

 

Their email response was to the same letter which I sent in the post originally as per #34.

 

Do think I should i just return as per pages 1 and first half of page 2 and remove "The pack I returned, I believed, was for you to search for PPI not acceptance of you to submit a

complaint on my behalf or any fee associated" and thereafter?

 

Regards

 

DJC

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...