Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
      • 160 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
  • Recommended Topics

Barclays Masterloan - Enforceable Recon CCA?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1634 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

CPR 3.10 is with regards to court claim and procedures...no connection to your reconstituted agreement.

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 OTHER

 

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

Can I just check when the agreement was signed, I mow its before 2007, but I dont remember seinga date, probably missed it, just save me going back through the thread.

 

On ‎01‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 12:44, HSBCandMe said:

...and my paying it over the past 16  years makes no difference? The court cannot impose validity because it is pre-2007 despite the CPR?

 

Part 3.10 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) provides:

 

"General power of the court to rectify matters where there has been an error of procedure

3.10 Where there has been an error of procedure such as failure to comply with a rule or a practice direction-

  1. the error does not invalidate any step taken in the proceedings unless the court so orders; and

     

  2. the court may make an order to remedy the error."

There is provision in the act to remedy unfair treatment, section 140, I think your case may be a good candidate, at least it could be included in any defence. As you say 16 years.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HSBCandMe said:

It was an address I used at one point, not at time I took out loan. 


And that means?..... ( think about it) :)

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

No date...incorrect address...does it actually have an agreement number ?

 

Nice to see BC Reconstitutes are improving :biggrin: 

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 OTHER

 

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

Does the fact it is undated impact on it?

 

The recon is itself quite old now, 6 years, as I have been paying a long time.

 

 I've been too chicken to take the bank on :(   

 

I have sent in a fresh CCA to see if what they reproduce matches it.

 

I was hoping to catch them out.. 

 

However, Barclays have not responded to my latest CCA request which is now over a month overdue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a good thing. WHy would you want them to respond and provide one.  If they dont provide one.. STOP PAYING THEM

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sure when they wake up they'll cobble something together, but yes, as of next instalment and 16 years on, I will stop paying them. I seem to have enough to query the validity of the recon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HSBCandMe said:

 

Does the fact it is undated impact on it?

 

Not with regards to complying with your section 77 request....although it must be an accurate copy compiled from the data available.If they wish to enforce by it then yes it must be accurate at least with the address agreement number and date of agreement.Given your agreement is pre April 2007 then also sections 61/ 127 of the CCA1974 come into play

  • Thanks 1

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 OTHER

 

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

why not sar them now before it gets sold on

that way you'll know what they hold.

 

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

Yes as far as Section 78 is concerned it is not acceptable, I hesitate to say unenforceable, because as we all know that is upto the court, unlike unenforceability under section 237. All you should have to do is run down the list provided in Carey, above, if all that is not included it is not a true copy, the court shoulld enforce until a true copy is produced.

 

However

 

Just read this from the first post. If this was the case, the orriginal agreement would be completely unenforceable under section 127(3)

 

Yes as far as Section 78 is concerned it is not acceptable, I hesitate to say unenforceable, because as we all know that is upto the court, unlike unenforceability under section 237. All you should have to do is run down the list provided in Carey, above, if all that is not included it is not a true copy, the court shoulld enforce until a true copy is produced.

 

However, I see they have already been SArd?

 

Just read this from the first post. If this was the case, the original agreement would be completely unenforceable under section 127(3)

 

9. An internal email that says: “The information is correct…The Masterloan was for £15,000, drawn on X 2003 and £4,236 interest was immediately applied. This was apparently common practice for this type of loan. When the loan went to recoveries at Barclaycard, we believe the proportion of interest which did not apply – i.e. the amount relevant to the loan after the date the loan was charged off – should have been refunded. Looking at the entries to the Masterloan this was not done. Whilst there is no PPI premium to refund or any issue of a mis-sell, it would appear there will have to be some refund of interest. The exact amount will need to be calculated at the 10.9% rate….The reconstructed credit agreement is therefore correct as per the s.77 request.”

 

The total credit would contain the interest according to this, a big breach of the CCA. Also they seem to think that reconstructing the copy means making it compliant, it does not of course, it means making the information on the copy exactly the same as the original. Fraud anyone?

 

They also say this

 

0. An internal email that says: “What do we normally send for Masterloans where the original document is not available... At this moment this could result in us having to write-off the balance.”

 

They knew it was unenforceable.

 

 

My bad for not reading the whole thread

 

Just another thought.  what they have done is recalculate the APR(interst)to accommodate the sum remaining and in order to construct what would appear to be a complaint

section 77 request.

 

That sum should ave been returned to you, now ask our PPI'ers, about contractual compound interest. Because if this is the case that is what you are due on this unpaid amount.IMO

 

The info you have needs examining , but it is certainly a possibility. Wouldn't be surprised if they owed you money

  • Thanks 1

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ppi on a loan is std 8% ...

credit cards could be compounded whilst their int was charged

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

1 hour ago, dx100uk said:

,Ppi on a loan is std 8% ...

credit cards could be compounded whilst their int was charged

 

I dont really want to start arguing interest on PPI DX. suffice to say the debtor on a loan will receive 8% interest compensation, yes,

However first he must be put into the situation he was in if he did not have the PPI. If a payment is missed it will increase the sum due for that month by that premium amount, the next months interest will be calculated on the last months balance thus the payment will be compounded. The repaid balance will increasingly be affect by the ppi payments until it is terminated.

I think the FOS do this by reducing your outstanding loan ball then refunding the monthly premiums, then as you say they add the compensatory 8%.

 

 

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

not on loans..

the interest is fixed and known 

go read the fos website its 8% statint on loans always has been.

unless its a secured loan/mortgage.

 

anyway looking at those docs looks like they changed it to a Barclaycard loan and no paperwork work was ever signed so its going nowhere 

stuff em stop payments

let them sell it on.

 

dx

 

  • Thanks 1

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

Yes DX, because as well as getting you premium back and your 8%the loan is restructured to make up fofr the extra interst you have paid when you missed any instalment.

 

Any none of this is relevant because I was referring to the rebate which should have been forthcoming after the termination of the first agreement, under the cca. I think they mention it when the talk about money which should have been returned.

 

 

 

Yes I agree, I think , well I know that is exactly what they have done.

 

As said the copy should be a copy of what the lender was shown before and at the time of execution. The safeguard is there to ensure he knows exactly what he is buying, same with section 127(3). It is a drastic remedy imposed by Francis Beniun draftsman of that particular part of the act.

 

The creditor CANNOT enforce unless it can be shown,  even on balance of probabilities, that certain terms where available to the debtor. The previous legislation The Moneylenders Act had a similar provision,  it is also why such importance is given to the issuance and receipt of copies.

 

The point is, as per post one, on receipt of the section 77 they set about concocting a copy which would fit the facts of the loan, this is not what is required, and is more than enough IMO to render the Agreement(if there was one) irredeemably unenforceable.

 

Anyway needs to either do nothing see what happens, or write them a letter, which I would be pleased to assist with if required.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys. I will be putting a letter together to Barclays and will cease making payments

 

I will post it up here for comment prior to sending.

 

However, do I put the account in formal dispute to halt debt collection activities?  But if I do that, wouldn't it mean they can't sell it on (which is what we want them to do)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

es Just say the CCA does not comply with the copy regulations under section 77 and 180 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

From the results of an eelier SAR it seems that when the earlier loan was terminated there was no calculation made as to rebate in regards of Section 95 of that act.

 

Since the total credit of the refinance would not have been the default balance there is no saying what figure would have been on the new agreement, indeed if any new agreement existed at all. Then we come to the original agreement, you say the interest was applied incorrectly, then surely this agreement would also been unenforceable under section 127(3) of the act.

Please confirm by return that the debt you refer to is in fact unenforceable in a court of law as per FCA guidelines. 

 

Some ideas for you

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

 “as a refinance arrangement, this agreement was exclusively conducted by post and phone, in which case no cancellation rights would have applied at that time. There is no cancellation rights in the agreement because there would not have been any cancellation rights in this case. Our refinance loans have always been transacted either at branch offices or totally through the post following telephone conversations." 

 

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/Global/Migrated_Documents/corporate/can-you-cancel-it-final.pdf

  • Thanks 1

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 OTHER

 

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

Very good. I would lose all mention of fraud, its fine for us to say here, but ...

 

Just before the paragraph about what the copy is for something like.

 

In a reply you stated 

"We therefore consider that the copy agreement we sent to you in response to your s.77 request contains all the relevant terms, complies with all requirements applicable at the time the agreement was entered into and is therefore a true copy for the purposes of s77. Our agreement with you is therefore legally enforceable.”

 

I must remind you that the copy requirements are not there to show how the account"worked". But to show what was shown to the debtor on execution of agreement.

Calculating how the debt worked after the event does not do this.

In Carey the court stated that a copy can be re-created from other sources, he meant other written sources, not a calculation after the agreement was issued see under

d. This exercise is not a mere formality. The creditor will need to check carefully that the details of the debtor at the time are correct and that those are the particular terms (including prescribed terms) that he/she agreed to. This is to ensure that it is an honest and accurate copy.

 

I would also cut down the PPI content. just say , I

would also complain bout how the PPI was calculated the FSO say that I should be put back into the position I would have been in, that is before any other sums are refunded, since the balance of the account was inaccurate(wrongful inclusion/disemination of interest) perhaps you should illustrate how this was achieved.

 

On ‎02‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 10:18, Andyorch said:

 “as a refinance arrangement, this agreement was exclusively conducted by post and phone, in which case no cancellation rights would have applied at that time. There is no cancellation rights in the agreement because there would not have been any cancellation rights in this case. Our refinance loans have always been transacted either at branch offices or totally through the post following telephone conversations." 

 

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/Global/Migrated_Documents/corporate/can-you-cancel-it-final.pdf

Hi Andy, I think they mean nothing under the act. I would have to check if that is true. Previously I said the Distance selling rules had been adopted, I was incorrect. I had an idea the agreement was after 2004 .

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 OTHER

 

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

And section 10 of the following...

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/3134/made

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 OTHER

 

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

I'm sure I'm being a bit thick here but ref CCA s.67 are you saying the bank are right about there being no requirement for cancellation clause? 

 

Also, ref s.10 Consumer Contracts SI, this is 2013 and presumably is not retrospective?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

7 minutes ago, Andyorch said:

And section 10 of the following...

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/3134/made

Hi  Andi. Dont forget this is an old agreement, you need to refer to the original CCA. I believe this agreement was sent by post where you signed and returned it? If this is the case there should have been a copy in there for you to keep. 

 

As far as being cancellable is concerned as you say this is the section.  

d agreement may be cancelled by the debtor or hirer in accordance with this Part if the antecedent negotiations included oral representations made when in the presence of the debtor or hirer by an individual acting as, or on behalf of, the negotiator, unless—

(

 

 


 

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...