Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Recommended Topics

  • Posts

    • As you have made this so black and white, I have just realised I have probably made a total mess up here 😕   Yes, the original RBS mortgage from 1999 changed in 2009 to a buy-to-let with a different mortgage company, for the same property.   As I thought I had to have a life assurance, this would be ok, even though it was a much smaller amount.   It states the policy holder as myself and the property address and says 'in return for the payment of agreed premiums the company will pay the benefits in accordance to the policy conditions' it doenst really specify who would be paid. I have actual document here.   Something to mention, when I bought this property it was uninhabitable and I have never actually lived there. It was empty for ten years until 2009 when I got some additional borrowing, renovated it and let it out.   In 2011 therefore when it changed to Aviva, that mortgage had been paid off 2 years before.   I have a feeling you are going to say it was my responsibility to have cancelled the policy in 2009 with RSA or with Aviva?     As I had been advised by RBS, I thought I had to life insurance/assurance of some kind as I had a mortgage.      
    • I'm on a Covid run all this week, for some reason I thought it would be quite easy, starts in St Andrews then Dundee, Perth, Stirling, Cumbernauld then Glasgow over 200 miles. I drop of empty Test boxes and collect the ones that are ready to go to the Labs for results.   Every Testing Station today said they had not been very busy over the weekend, it was quite nice weather over the weekend which is more than likely the reason for the lack of numbers.
    • Credit file: One account(showing balance of £0 due) for main line showing missed payments from December 2020 (when the contract itself was terminated in August 2020). One account(showing loan of £204 due) for second line showing as being in default since November 2020. As a result of these my credit score has gone down-this is due directly to these two accounts which showed on my credit report as a 'negative factor'   Credit disadvantage: When my Virgin contract ended, I attempted to take up a new contract with another company. I was prevented from doing so at Vodafone as they required a deposit of £150, plus I would not be entitled to the free handset, but would have had to pay £179 for it and the monthly payments would be increasd. I was able to take out a handset at Three, but again instead of being entitled to it free, I had to pay £189 for it.   I will check carefully to estimate the amount of time involved-I have queries going back to October 2019 attempting to deal with this.   I have also received from Virgin another letter giving me the password to unlock the files they sent me(shame it doesn't actually work) and a second email again confirming they will erase my data unless they have to keep it.   I'm wondering if they're planning to use that email as their response for the ICO where he gave them until March 11 to either tell me what they are going to do to put things right or explain why they believe they have met their data protection obligations'?      
    • “We want to get Amigo back to life again” – CEO’s statement as lender posts £87m loss View the full article
    • My case is adjourned to this Month. I'm about to send out my Supplementary Witness Statement. Could someone please check if the following is efficient? My court cost is now over £1000 as it was adjourned 3 times  Thanks!   Supplementary Witness Statement to address the new case exhibits introduced at the hearing on 10 November 2020   VCS v Ward  1.       This case is often quoted by the claimant as assisting their case. However in this instance it actually assists mine. It is contended that the act of stopping a vehicle does not amount to parking. This predatory operation pays no regard to the byelaws at all. It is likely that this Claimant may try to rely upon two 'trophy case' wins, namely VCS v Crutchley and/or VCS v Ward, neither of which were at an Airport location. Both involve flawed reasoning and the Courts were wrongly steered by this Claimant's representative; there are worrying errors in law within those cases, such as an irrelevant reliance upon the completely different Supreme Court case. These are certainly not the persuasive decisions that this Claimant may suggest.  Semark-Jullien Case  2.       Whilst it is known that another case that was struck out on the same basis was appealed to Salisbury Court (the Semark-Jullien case), the parking industry did not get any finding one way or the other about the illegality of adding the same costs twice. The Appeal Judge merely pointed out that he felt that insufficient information was known about the Semark-Jullien facts of the case (the Defendant had not engaged with the process and no evidence was in play, unlike in the Crosby case) and so the Judge listed it for a hearing and felt that case (alone) should not have been summarily struck out due to a lack of any facts and evidence.  3.       The Judge at Salisbury correctly identified as an aside, that costs were not added in the Beavis case. That is because this had already been addressed in ParkingEye's earlier claim, the pre-Beavis High Court (endorsed by the Court of Appeal) case ParkingEye v Somerfield  a. (ref para 419): https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2011/4023.html  ''It seems to me that, in the present case, it would be difficult for ParkingEye to justify, as against any motorist, a claim for payment of the enhanced sum of £135 if the motorist took the point that the additional £60 over and above the original figure of £75 constituted a penalty. It might be possible for ParkingEye to show that the additional administrative costs involved were substantial, though I very much doubt whether they would be able to justify this very large increase on that basis. On the face of it, it seems to me that the predominant contractual function of this additional payment must have been to deter the motorist from breaking his contractual obligation to pay the basic charge of £75 within the time specified, rather than to compensate ParkingEye for late payment. Applying the formula adopted by Colman J. in the Lordsvale case, therefore, the additional £60 would appear to be penal in nature; and it is well established that, in those circumstances, it cannot be recovered, though the other party would have at least a theoretical right to damages for breach of the primary obligation.''  
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Recommended Posts

car cash point LBL - Burlington/Marstons wants car Urgent help _ Live in NI - Page 3 - Log Book Loans / Bills of Sale - Consumer Action Group

 

Hi Melissa,

I'm pretty much the same boat as you,

 

they refuse to accept any form of repayment plan to get the account on track, now refusing to acknowledge emails.

 

My bill of sale states the Apr rate rather than the annual interest rate, also incorrect details on the schedule of goods.

 

A fella from chartsbridge called at the house with some random punk in a flat bed truck...

Told them the bill of sale wasn't valid and that they wouldn't be taking the car,

 

to be fair to the agent, he was polite enough and said "fair enough, there's not much we can do then" and away they went...

so double check to make sure all details of bill of sale are correct. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, I am yet another victim of these vultures.

To cut a long story short I fell foul of repayments and the account subsequently defaulted... It was a mixture of severe stress, mental health issues relating to the pandemic and relationship difficulties. 

 

I didn't receive the default notice which was issued in September as it had been sent to a previous address,

 

I contacted them apologising and have made several offers to try and rehabilitate the account and get back on track, to no avail, they refuse to accept any form of payment plan but are demanding an extortionate settlement balance which includes over £400 in repossession charges. 

 

Here is where it gets interesting,

I hiked out the paper work and started digging in to the legislation surrounding the bill of sale etc.

A big error they have made is that instead of the annual interest rate which is to be included, they have quoted the Apr rate as the interest rate.

 

I approached ccp about the validity of the bill of sale, pointed out the errors contained within, sent them a screenshot of the legislation and requested that they provided any evidence they had to the contrary and their immediate reply was "we do not acknowledge your complaint, the bill of sale is valid, this is our final response to the matter".. 

 

Fast forward several days,

Wednesday this week, An agent from chartsbridge calls to the house with another fella in a flatbed truck wanting to seize the car, I told him he wasn't getting it as the bill of sale was in dispute and it was not valid... He didn't put up any fight or argument whatsoever, and left... Havent heard anything from them since. 

 

I sent an email to ccp about their blatant disregard for the fca and ccta guidelines regarding repossession and their unfair treatment in their refusal to even acknowledge my proposal. Also pointed out that their website states that they recognise the difficulties people are facing during the pandemic and will ensure to treat customers fairly and sympathetically... Never got a reply. 

 

Seems all communication from either of them has stopped..... 

 

Another thing to add....

Had they properly looked into my finances they'd have seen I was heavily in debt, 2 defaults from previous hp agreements where I voluntarily surrendered the respective car, not to mention the fact that they took photos of a bank statement from a separate bank account that consisted mainly of gambling transactions.

 

There is also no record of them carrying out an affordability search on my credit file nor has the default or anything at all from them been registered on it.

 

I know I shouldn't have taken the loan out in hindsight, but at the time I was desperate. 

Edited by fightingthefight
Adding text
Link to post
Share on other sites

i've moved your posts to your now existing thread.

 

stick in an irresponsible lending claim FtF

 

i'll check the BOS carefully later

 

 

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

FtF very busy this W/end pop in later

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 have several grounds for complaints 

But getting a bos struck out once registered with the high court 

is of the upmost difficulty 

You would need either a very experienced pro bono or very deep pockets 

If you lost you are liable for the lenders costs

Impossible to do yourself 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Sorry for the delay, will get my bos uploaded as well as the credit agreement in the morning.

 

I received an email from advice ni regarding the account and the bos and they said if there were errors on the bos there would be grounds for complaint and also that if I advised ccp and chartsbridge that I was in discussions with them they would have to place a hold on any activity for 30 days.

 

I emailed ccp this morning and cc'd chartsbridge into it, stating that I was in discussions with a debt advice company regarding the account and as such requested that they put the account on hold for 30 days as per fca and ccta rules. Never received anything back. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fightingthefight said:

My understanding is that bills of sale aren't regulated hence they say they can repossess, but does the fact that its tied in with a regulated agreement not make a difference? 

A dca/guy with a flat bed has absolutely zero legal powers. No dca with whatever paperwork even from a court does not make them or give them any magical bailiff powers even on a temporary basis.

 

As for the no taking cars till the 31st, i doubt very much the FCA  even considered toy town dca actors in that advice. But never the less i'd like to thing it applies.

 

as for the agreement s it must be an hp agreement not a pers loan as this one..that gives 1/3 paid protection cover

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
38 minutes ago, fightingthefight said:

they just rely on you caving in and letting them take the car? 

you mean getting had blind...thats all DCA's ever do on anything ...they are totally powerless on any type of debt ...end of.

 

they can goto court and get a ccj on a debt, but that does not make them bailiffs and that getting of a CCJ is use of no special magical powers..you or i can goto court and raise a claim if we believe someone owes us money..they are no different to us the std joe public.

 

with regard to repo/lifting cars, it doesn't have to be a DCA.. there is only one condition that protects you - that being the car is under an HP Agreement and you have paid more than 1/3rd so thus is deemed protected good, - they CAN take it from the public highway as long as they have a copy of the Default Notice and (where necessary) the Bill of sale.

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

But they can't take it from your drive?

Nor move another car that would be blocking the car in question in?

 

And would it need to be a paper stamped copy of the bos?

 

The guy that called at my house only had a tablet 🤣

he left before I even had a chance to ask for the bos 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites

posts moved to your own thread 

please try and ask Q's here only.

 

only court bailiffs can seize cars from private property.

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 weeks later...

Thought I'd give this a bit of a bump, car cash point now refusing to reply to emails, complaints or return calls. Also refusing to supply me with a copy of the default notice, the sar and refusing to acknowledge the fact that they are duty bound to place an account on hold for 30 days when I am in discussion with a debt help organisation. 

 

Bit the bullet and rang chartsbridge. They've placed the account on hold whilst I speak with the debt advisor etc...bur here is where it gets interesting... 

 

They contacted ccp who were quick enough to reply to them, despite ignoring me completely. Ccp stated to them that they weren't willing to negotiate a settlement as the account had been in default since last February... The default notice wasn't issued until late August!!! 

 

Chartsbridge now refusing to answer requests for details of the default notice they were supplied with.... Something stinks!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

well at some point a DN has been issued, if was issued late, is sadly of little importance.

 

why dont you sar both of them...

 

 

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

Yea I understand what you mean, but the difficulties with paying etc didn't arise until July, everything was grand up until then. Its just strange that with chartsbridge usually being quite prompt in replying, they've done the same and blanked me when I highlighted the issues with the default notice, and ccp giving them wrong information.... 

 

Will submit a sar for sure... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For reference.....

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/45-46/43/contents

 

Quote

 If the bill is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the lender will have to serve a default notice on the grantor before it can be enforced.

 

https://www.blakemorgan.co.uk/bills-of-sale/

 

Andy

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

They can't refuse your SAR request 

In order to repossess their car

if they have a signed, stamped and registered bos plus a valid expired dn that is all they need 

You really need to negotiate a settlement or consider a time order , yes If the negotiating is via a professional debt advisor they must allow 30 days for the negotiation 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have tried to reach a settlement but they are ignoring all communication, refusing to reply or even acknowledge complaints /offers. To be fair to the dca, they've been more than helpful and have placed a hold on the account their end and are trying to get info regarding the default notice, but they haven't received anything back either. 

 

Ccp have said to the dca that the default notice was issued in January last year when in fact it was August this year, and there were definitely no default notices issued before that. Made an sar with the dca also which they are more than happy to provide, given my concerns about the info that has been provided to them. The dca did however state that they don't have a default notice on file and an sar wouldn't provide the info I'm looking for but are happy to provide it anyway. 

 

The only conclusion I can reach is that ccp are refusing all contact to enable the car to be repossessed.... Which for now, won't be happening due to an arrangement with the dca

Edited by fightingthefight
Adding text
Link to post
Share on other sites

You say the dn was issued in August, so you received a copy then?

Have CCP sent a final response to any of your complaints 

inviting you to go to the FOS?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

did you get those SAR s running

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...