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

Cabot no CCA - Merged EGG loan/card ebt


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1834 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

the question was:

Should egg have rescheduled the £9k in a new CCA when it defaulted?  They didn’t.

 

the answer is no.

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

9 hours ago, Dodgeball said:

But yes, of course, they can. As long as both agreements have been terminated. They are then just sums owed as such they can, of course, be combined

 

 

But the interest rates on the original debts were different, and there was ppi etc.  

 

Merging them unfair practice - FCA issue? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, HSBCandMe said:

 

But the interest rates on the original debts were different, and there was ppi etc.  

 

Merging them unfair practice - FCA issue?

 

1

 I did say the agreements were terminated, there is no requirement for interest to be charged. at all.

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

Ok, well hopefully they can't provide the CCAs for the loan and  CC. By the way, Egg flogged me a "top-up loan" which was merged with the original loan and cc at default as well. So another CCA to look for.

Edited by HSBCandMe
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no rebate figure on an open-ended(cc) agreement

 

In 2008 Egg terminated 161000 accounts under a contractual clause without default, were you one of these?

 

Long thread on here about it, many thought it was illegal, not me I hasten to add. I was correct, unfortunately. 

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

 No I was defaulted. In 2006. Passed to a number of cccas and then arrow bought it. Now owned by Cabot.  As I say, 3 credit agreements involved and no CCA yet for any of them.  They should need all 3 to prove the amount claimed surely? 

 

I gather from other threads that egg ccas are notorious for being badly drafted?   If and when I get sent any, I will post them up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they will need all three yes.

now egg agreements..

well any were online there were issues with the PPI aoto ticked box.

and I believe until apr 2007, they still had to send you an agreement to sign

which, going by the DCA's that have tried court claims of these to date, ..they never appear as they didn't exist?

as I bet you don't ever remember physically signing all 3 and sending them back? 

as all WERE before APR 2007??

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

ALL3x from 2003. I applied for them on-line and they sent CCAs to sign and return in the post.

 

 CCAs were signed, defo, I remember.  The top up loan also had ppi, I know that much from dsar.

 

First step is to see what DCA comes back with. I think I have enough ammo here to keep them tied up for a while :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember the Egg agreement from that era very well, they were called the Total Limit agreement by many on here and elsewhere.

Many thought it to be unenforceable because the Credit term was called total limit instead of total credit.

 

Very big thread on here, several of the "team" were convinced. Again I said the idea was ludicrous, as the PT, were about contents, not form.

 

A few of the debt buyers had set up, as part of their business, a system where they agreed to take over these agreements and fight them in court, for a fee of£800.( to be fair, this forum did not know about this)

 

Obviously, I was incensed, and set about trying to stop people falling for it, in the end, I was banned. 

 

One of these DMCs decided to create a "Test Case" by appealing one of the earlier failed county court judgement in the High court. If successful this would create a precedent for their "ingenious" technical argument.

 

The faithful day of the high court ruling came around, and the court dismissed it, out of hand, saying the argument had no merit, he went on to say exactly what I had said A year or so earlier, word for word. It was an embarrassment.

 

Still waiting for the apology.

 

 

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

very few DCA claimform successes at all here on any EGG debts of that era.

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

55 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

very few DCA claimform successes at all here on any EGG debts of that era.

Sorry, you mean very few successes for the creditor or debtor?

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

oh them ofcourse DB..

andy's careful dissection of what the actual agreement says ..

esp the bit about an agreement will be sent to you to sign.

 

don't think these signed agreements are available from EGG, and the DCA's rollout the online application with that line and lose everytime...🤣

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

Soo there are cases on here where egg agreements have lost because they were unable to send a signed agreement. Not a copy request, of course, you mean present one in court. Do you have a link to one of them, please? I would be interested to see it, and particularly if it was after Carey.

 

 

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

google custom search up on the right

claimform EGG

I will guess

or p'haps claimform Barclaycard egg

 

we try and name the thread correctly to help others find them.

 

there are quite a few to my memory DB.

 

dx

 

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

2 hours ago, HSBCandMe said:

In your experience, are most of those old pre-2007 egg CCAs enforceable?

Not only mine but that of High Court Judge, Chambers

 

Alexandra Slater vs egg 2010  August 09  will be on here or on Baily

 

He said

 

We note your reiteration of your argument in relation to the use of the term "Approved Limit".

 

You allege that we have failed to comply with section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the CCA) by failing to include all of the terms prescribed by schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit Act (agreement) Regulations") on the basis that the credit limit is described as the "Approved Limit".

 

This allegation is incorrect.

 

The form of agreement used by Egg contains all of the relevant information prescribed both by Schedule 1 and by Schedule 6 of the Agreement Regulations.

 

"Approved Limit" is specifically defined in Condition 1.3 of your agreement as the amount you can borrow from time to time on the account and is therefore clearly understandable.

 

There is no requirement under the CCA to use a particular term or phrase when describing the amount of credit.

 

The description of the credit limit complies with paragraph 8(b) of schedule 1 of the Agreement Regulations.

This has been confirmed by the High Court in Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking plc (9 August 2010, high Court, Mold District Registry, unreported).

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, dx100uk said:

oh them ofcourse DB..

andy's careful dissection of what the actual agreement says ..

esp the bit about an agreement will be sent to you to sign.

 

4

like to see this, is it on this thread?

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

Use the search as post 42

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

 

Nope, nothing, section 42 was my post, i presumed you meant 41.

 

No matter :)

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

4 hours ago, dx100uk said:

google custom search up on the right

claimform EGG

I will guess

or p'haps claimform Barclaycard egg

 

we try and name the thread correctly to help others find them.

 

there are quite a few to my memory DB.

 

dx

 

 

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...