Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
    • quite honestly id email shiply CEO with that crime ref number and state you will be taking this to court, for the full sum of your losses, if it is not resolved ASAP. should that be necessary then i WILL be naming Shiply as the defendant. this can be avoided should the information upon whom the courier was and their current new company contact details, as the present is simply LONDON VIRTUAL OFFICES  is a company registered there and there's a bunch of other invisible companies so clearly just a mail address   
    • If it doesn’t sell easily : what they can get at an auction becomes fair market price, which may not realise what you are hoping.
    • Thank you. The receiver issue is a rabbit hole I don't think I'm going to enjoy going down. These people seem so protected. And I don't understand how or why?  Fair market value seems to be ever shifting and contentious.
  • 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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

experto/varde now PRA Group chasing old MBNA silver nomination choice card debt


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 532 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

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 1 month later...

itc607 Hi.not giving up on this,will continue to chase Varde to get DOA.

 

It brings up a linked ?? I have read at length the Data Act looking for those items the DCA or OC do not have to supply,and I cant find any reference to the DCA who has purchased a debt and their right to with hold that document that shows what they actually paid for the debt.They will not reveal this document as we have all found when SAR requested.WHY?

 

regards FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it the general opinion now that those of us fighting experto and mbna on the dodgy default and sale before expiry of default are flogging a dead horse?

 

Not really sure why you would think this. All the Experto threads that I have subscribed to for a while seem to be dormant at the moment.

 

With my own, since having a spurt of letters between November and December, it has gone quiet again.

 

If they have sent you anything claiming to be your agreement, scour it for obvious errors, then IF you need to defend a court case at any point, you can question the validity of what they send in response to your s78 request.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it the general opinion now that those of us fighting experto and mbna on the dodgy default and sale before expiry of default are flogging a dead horse?

 

Not really sure why you would think this. All the Experto threads that I have subscribed to for a while seem to be dormant at the moment.

 

With my own, since having a spurt of letters between November and December, it has gone quiet again.

 

If they have sent you anything claiming to be your agreement, scour it for obvious errors, then IF you need to defend a court case at any point, you can question the validity of what they send in response to your s78 request.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dotty Hi again.with you on this keep chasing.

 

any thoughts on my 47 para 2

 

Regards FS

 

Hi FS,

 

I have read on here somewhere that their argument is that the sale documents contain sensitive information of other sales, although I don't understand why they can't just delete that information and leave just your sale confirmation. But let's face it, we would never want to pay anymore than they paid for it (IF we ever had to pay) and they are not going to let that information be revealed unless a judge ordered it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am at arguing the case that I had a DN asking for the full balance and the fact the account was sold befor expiry of DN I wrote to MBNA to get them to confirm the date of sale and to whom sold they replied on mbna paper but from experto that the account had been assigned to Varde no date, on my comms sheets it says account sold to experto so I have written back asking them to confirm the date and to whom sold,now the calls are startind again.The reason for asking if we are flogging a dead horse is the fact lots of threads on here are saying the DN and Termination route are dead in the water.

Link to post
Share on other sites

itc1607 you are correct when MBNA/Experto/Varde are involved in general getting Varde to send Letter of Assignment almost impossible,Experto produce Assignments on MBNA paper,and further insist they are authorised to act for Varde.

 

Experto I feel are very doubtful in what they are getting away with

 

I will continue to chase these companies,with a view to disputing their right to hold a DCA licence.

 

regards FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

itc1607 you are correct when MBNA/Experto/Varde are involved in general getting Varde to send Letter of Assignment almost impossible,Experto produce Assignments on MBNA paper,and further insist they are authorised to act for Varde.

 

Experto I feel are very doubtful in what they are getting away with

 

I will continue to chase these companies,with a view to disputing their right to hold a DCA licence.

 

regards FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Still all quiet from Experto,but in response to another thread I have had a good look at all the letters in my possession .

 

(1) MBNA sold the debt 13 days after receipt of DN.

 

(2) MBNA advised me that had sold the debt to Experto and gave their address etc

 

(3) Experto write and state they are acting for Varde Ireland who purchased the debt from MBNA(so MBNA are telling outright porkies,they did not sell the debt to Experto.

 

(4) No NOA from Varde ,No letter confirming Experto are authorised to act for them

 

(5) Experto have produced their version of a NOA with the name Varde on it,no date,and blank paper used no Varde headed paper.

 

(6) Also have the MBNA letterheaded paper from Experto,in Experto envelope

 

I think what MBNA/Experto are getting away with has got to be very doubtful legally any thoughts

 

FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still all quiet from Experto,but in response to another thread I have had a good look at all the letters in my possession .

 

(1) MBNA sold the debt 13 days after receipt of DN.

 

(2) MBNA advised me that had sold the debt to Experto and gave their address etc

 

(3) Experto write and state they are acting for Varde Ireland who purchased the debt from MBNA(so MBNA are telling outright porkies,they did not sell the debt to Experto.

 

(4) No NOA from Varde ,No letter confirming Experto are authorised to act for them

 

(5) Experto have produced their version of a NOA with the name Varde on it,no date,and blank paper used no Varde headed paper.

 

(6) Also have the MBNA letterheaded paper from Experto,in Experto envelope

 

I think what MBNA/Experto are getting away with has got to be very doubtful legally any thoughts

 

FS

 

I'm in exactly the same position FS. Experto have also written to me stating that the Application form they sent me is a perfectly enforceable agreement. What do you make of it, who do you think owns the debt, MBNA, Varde or Experto?

 

BF

Link to post
Share on other sites

MBNA application forms are reported to be in most cases non-enforceable, in the case of my OH!s well they sent an application form with a signature of hers on it , only problem is the CCA was not taken out with them it was as a result of a phone call, card to earn points, turned out to be a credit card whereby points earned for a holiday company, no CCA signed.

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not heard anything for ages from Experto but strangely enough my OH has now started getting bombarded with calls from Fredericksons and one letter from them chasing payment and another from MBNA advising that they have passed the debt to Fred's, yet we have both had letters from MBNA stating that no action will be taken due to non-compliance of s78 request.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...