Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My WS as I intend to send it... any problems anyone can spot?         In the county court at Middlesbrough Claim No:  Between Vehicle Control Services Limited (Claimant) V   (Defendant) Witness Statement Introduction It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper of XXnn XXX   Locus standi/bye-laws and Relevant land Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 (PoFA) allows recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle. However, the first paragraph 1 (1) (a) states that it only applies “in respect of parking of the vehicle on relevant land:”. The definition of “relevant land” is given in paragraph 3 (1) where subsection (c) excludes “any land ... on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control”.  The bus stop is not on relevant land because the public road on which that stand is on is covered by the Road Traffic Act.  Notwithstanding that the claimant claims that " the claimant has given the Defendant its contractual licence to enter the site", the claimant has not given any contractual licence whatsoever. This is a road leading to/from the airport which is covered by the Road Traffic Act.  A list of highways on the Highways act 1980 does not even exist. The defendant brings the attention of the court that VCS is using this non existent document issue as a deliberate strategy to debunk the fact that this road is not relevant land. VCS are put to strict proof that it is relevant land not covered by the Road Traffic Act nor by Byelaws. While it is true that landowners can bring in their own terms, it is also true that whatever terms they bring  cannot overrule Byelaws and the Road Traffic Act. If Bye Laws are involved then the bus stop is not relevant land and neither is the specious argument about First Great Western Ltd. Is the claimant ignorant of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012? The road outside of Doncaster Sheffield Airport is not relevant land and is not covered by the Protection of Freedoms Act. That makes the charge against the claimant tantamount to fraud or extortion. The claimant mentions a couple occasions where they have won such cases. It is brought to the attention of the court that none of those cited cases were on airport land. VCS actually has also lost a lot more cases than they have won using their prohibitive signs.  Airport land is covered by Bye Laws and hence the claim by VCS is not applicable in this instance. The remit of VCS ends in the car park and does not extend to the bus stops on public roads or land which they have no jurisdiction over. All classes of people go to the airport. This includes travellers, taxis, fuel bowsers, airport staff, companies delivering food and drink for each aircraft, air traffic controllers and buses with passengers. It is therefore absolutely ridiculous to attribute VCS with any sort of permissions. The defendant submits that VCS should not confuse a major thoroughfare with a car park and presume to act as land owners and usurp the control of any land which is not relevant to them.   Protection of Freedoms Act The clearest point on section 4.1 of the Protection of Freedoms act is that “The provisions in Schedule 4 are intended to apply only on private land in England and Wales. Public highways are excluded as well as any parking places on public land which are either provided or controlled by a local authority (or other government body). Any land which already has statutory controls in relation to the parking of vehicles (such as byelaws applying to airports, ports and some railway station car parks) is also excluded.” Therefore, as this case pertains to an airport, the claimant unlawfully obtained the registered keeper’s details against the defendant’s vehicle. Thus, on this basis alone, the defendant implores the court to throw out this case. Notwithstanding the above point, if perchance Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 were to apply, the claimant is put to strict proof that they complied with the requirements of section 7 stating, “(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to driver for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met. The notice must — (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;” Without such proof the court must of necessity throw out this case forthwith.   Deceit, Intimidation and Extortion The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim include £50 legal costs, yet in the letter dated  03/06/2021, the Claimant stated that they were no longer represented by Elms Legal and all further correspondence should be sent to the VCS in-house litigation department. Why should the Claimant be asking the Defendant to contribute to their employee’s salary?  Furthermore, as per another letter dated 30th July 2021, the Claimant wrote, ‘Should you fail to accept our offer of settlement then we will proceed to Trial and bring this letter to the Court’s attention upon question of costs in order seek further costs of £220 incurred in having to instruct a local Solicitor to attend the hearing in conjunction with the amount claimed on the Claim Form.’ I find this an extraordinary statement given the Claimant knows legal costs are capped at £50 in Small Claims Court. I cannot think of any reason why the Claimant would write this letter other than to intimidate the opposing party with the threat of an extortionate sum of money, hoping they would be able to take advantage of someone not knowing the Small Claims Court rules. Given that this letter came from the Claimant’s in-house litigation department, clearly well-versed in the law, this cannot be anything but deceitful and disingenuous behaviour which the court should never tolerate.    Contractual costs / debt recovery charge  In addition to the £50 legal costs, the Claimant is seeking recovery of the original £100 parking charge plus an additional £60 which is described as ‘debt collection costs’. In the Vehicle Control Service v Claim Number: 18 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated, ‘Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones-Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates […] in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court in Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law. It is hereby declared […] the claim be struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.’  In Claim number F0DP806M and F0DP201T, Britannia v Crosby went further in a landmark judgement in November 2019 which followed several parking charge claims being struck out in the area overseen by His Honour Judge Iain Hamilton-Douglas Hughes GC, the Designated Civil Judge for Dorset, Hampshire, Isle of White & Wiltshire. District Judge Taylor echoed the earlier General Judgement or Orders of District Judge Grand stating, ‘It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedom Acts 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in ParkingEye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998…’ Vehicle Control Service v Claim Number: 19 51. Moreover, the addition of costs not specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.  It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).  The Defendant is of the view that the Claimant knew, or should have known, that to claim in excess of £100 for a parking charge on private lands is disallowed under the Civil Procedure Rules, the Beavis Case, the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 and Consumer Rights Act 2015, and that relief from sanctions should be refused.   Alleged contract The court should consider if there is any contract to start with and if the alleged offence is on relevant land. The consideration will inevitably lead the court to conclude that there is no contract.  Also the court should note that there is no valid contract that exists between VCS and Peel. Under the Companies Act, a contract should be signed by the directors of both companies and witnessed by two independent individuals. This alleged contract, which makes no mention of pursuing registered keepers of vehicles to court, makes its first appearance as a Witness Statement. Thus the alleged contract is null and void.  The Beavis case referred to by the claimant is about parking in a car park. The claimant is here attempting to equate that case to stopping, not parking, in a bus stop and on a road that is covered by the Road Traffic Act. The defendant submits that there can be no contract as there is no offer but there is only a prohibition. Again, it is not relevant land and VCS has absolutely no rights over it. Further, the defendant would like to point out that motorists NEVER accept any contract just by entering the land. First they must read it and understand it and then, and only then can they realise that "No stopping" is prohibitive and cannot offer a contract.   Bus stop signage The signs around the bus stop do not mention who issued the “No Stopping” signs so it could not have been issued by VCS since the IPC CoP states that their signs should include the IPC logo and that the creditor should be identified. Nothing on the signs around the bus stop that says “NO Stopping” mentions VCS or Peel Investments who are now purporting to be the land owners of a public road. As the signage should identify the creditor, since it does not, this is a breach of the CoP.   The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 does not prohibit stopping in a restricted bus stop or stand, it prohibits stopping in a clearway. The defendant would like to ask the court to consider if any clause of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 that the claimant alleges has been violated by the defendant. There is no mention of permits on the signage. If there were, would it mean that Permit holders were allowed to stop on “No Stopping” roads? Notwithstanding what the claimant calls it, the mentioned signage is NOT a contractual clause. A “No stopping” sign is not an offer of parking terms.  Since the signage around the bus stop is prohibitive, it is as such is incapable of forming a contract. Further, the defendant would like to point out that the prohibitive sign is not actually at the bus stop but a few metres before the stand itself. There is no mention of a £100 charge for breaching the “No stopping” request, or if there is one then it is far too small to read, even for a pedestrian. As already stated, a Witness Statement between VCS and Peel Investments is not a valid document. It will need more than the Claimants feather to outweigh the case against the Defendant regardless of who was driving. There is no law of agency involved. This is not a case of employer/employee relationship. VCS cannot transfer the driver's liability to the registered keeper. There can be no comparison between a railway station and an airport. This is a totally fatuous analogy which cannot be applied to this case.  As stated in the defence, it is denied the Claimant is entitled to the recovery or any recovery at all. The nefarious parking charge notice given for a vehicle on a public road bus stop was ill advised to start with.   Conclusions:   VCS has failed to present ANY reasonable and valid cause to apply to the DVLA for the Defendants details. VCS has failed to provide ANY valid  contract with the landowners. “No stopping” is prohibitive therefore cannot form a contract the event happened on a bus stop over which VCS has no jurisdiction the signage either does not show that there was a charge of £100 for stopping, or the font size was too small for any motorist to be able to read it  the signage does not show the Creditor which fails the IPC CoP and hence the signage is not valid the WS contract does not authorise VCS to pursue motorists to Court Given all these factors it seems that VCS have breached the GDPR of the Defendant quite substantially and it would appear right that an exemplary award is made against VCS in the hope that they will drop all further cases at Doncaster airport where they are pursuing motorists on non relevant land. The Defendant wishes to bring to the attention of the court that the Claimant cites an irrelevant case of a car park and tries to apply its merits to a bus stop. That in itself invalidates the entire fallacious claim. Accordingly, this case is totally without merit. Some statements are pretty close to perjury and others are designed to mislead or misdirect. None of the analogies seem appropriate or relevant. All the false information presented as a statement of truth could have been stated using half the words and without all the repetition which appears to be trying to build a strong case where there is none at all. One particularly bad example of misdirection is in the photographs. The Clearway sign shown near the bus stop is very unclear unlike the Clearway sign two photos before it which may well include terms and conditions. The one by the bus stop is totally different.   47. Lastly I wish to bring to the attention of the court, a systematic pattern of the Claimant’s court action behaviour in several of their cases. They tend to have a VCS paralegal writing a Witness Statement, then mentioning in the last paragraph of the Witness Statement that they may be unable to attend court and subsequently the paralegals never turn up to be cross examined. In the event that Mohammed Wali is unable to attend court to be asked about his claims, then I would like to know why he is not able to attend when the hearing has been scheduled months in advance, is during working hours and as a result of covid, is online, meaning there is no travel involved. Ambreen Arshad, the other paralegal employed by VCS, does exactly the same. 
    • Hang on. don't panic!   You sent the snotty letter which has told the fleecers to put up or shut up.  So far they've haven't taken you to court.  This might change, but so far you're in the driving seat.  You don't have to deal with them any more.  It's up to them if they have the gonads to start court action or not.   Regarding DCBL, they are not representing their client in the normal way that a solicitor represents a client, because the sums of money involved are too low for that.  They are just chucked a few quid to send a couple of "threatening" letters.  There is no point in dealing with them.   If you want the original PCN send a SAR to UKPCM only.  For the SAR letter simply click on "SAR".   However, the SAR has nothing to do with the 30 days, you've already dealt with that with the snotty letter.  You need to read lots of similar threads and familiarise yourself with the legal process.  CAG is a superb free library.    
    • Hi again, so I will send a SAR to UKPC because I don't remember seeing the  NTK.  Then should I let DCBL know otherwise they will probably issue the court papers but they might hold off if i tell them about the SAR?   what do you think?  I need to do it this weekend or it will be beyond the 30 days.  Otherwise to let it run will definitely lead to a court case perhaps??   Can I get a copy of a SAR letter on here? thanks
    • 👍   One thing, write "unlawful", not "illegal".   Sorry to be pernickety, but "illegal" = "a crime".   "unlawful" = "not in accordance with the law".    They've lied to the DVLA but that's not actually a crime, it's misuse of your personal data which is a civil matter, and you can sue the idiots once your case is over for breach of GDPR, but it's not a criminal offence.
    • Just added also paragraph 11 stating " Notwithstanding the above point, if perchance Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 were to apply, VCS should prove that they complied with the requirements of section 7 stating, “(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to driver for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met. The notice must — (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;” Without such proof the court must of necessity throw out this case forthwith."
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Logbook loan - car repo'd off private drive without consent.please help


Recommended Posts

Hi

 

A bit of a long post, i took out a logbook loan a couple of years ago for £1000 and have really struggled to keep up with the payments on the account. I should never have taken it

 

When i first ran in arrears they sent someone to repossess the car and after a lot of back with the police involved i ended up paying the arreas and charges so they didnt take the car this was last year just before lockdown i got the payments back on track and set up again

 

However this year i ended up hospital and missed a payment on the loan this was in may i have since been trying to get in touch with them via txt and email (partially deaf and cant hear on the phone)asking them to take payment as this is what i had done in the past and the automatically take card payment and what's happening with the account

 

as i have received no reply from them

i still had no reply to date

i also advised i was no longer working .

 

this morning i have gotten up and found that my car has gone from the drive

i contacted the police to report it stolen and they advised me a finance company had it and i need to get in touch with them.

 

The car had my 4 month olds pram car seat and other belongings in, there was not a letter posted to advise it had been taken.

The only 14 day dn i received was last year, does this still count

 

I think the remaining balance to pay was about £750 

 

I dont know what to do as i dont want to lose the car 

 

Can anyone please advise

 

Thanks

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

opps they repo'd the car 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

Hi. Yes they took it from the drive

 

ive spoke to the logbook company this morning the want £1000 to release the car and £300 set up on a payment plan, i asked why it was now £1300 they said £300 recovery charges and £200 admin fee, this was applied in may

 

ive got 6 emails/txts asking for them to take payment since then and they said there was nothing they could do as they had already passed it over to recovery. i told them could have advised me, they also said a dn was sent in december .

Link to post
Share on other sites

A guy with a flatbed like Anglia or Burlington s are NOT court BAILIFFS and are totally powerless.  AFAIK even if the bill of sale is correctly registered and you've had a default notice, they cannot repo from a private drive without a court order, or your permission at the time. else they void the agreement and you can demand the car back + compensation.

 

tell them you want the car back in 24hrs or you are going to launch a court claim and sue 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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Logbook loan - car repo'd off private drive without consent.please help

Thanks DX, i have paid the £1000 to release the car and set up a payment plan for the remaining £300,i just wanted my car back as soon as possible as im taking the kids on a short break this week, im really not happy about the whole dealings with them from start to finish since i took the loan in 2019

 

I have kept every txt, email that i have sent and they sent me

 

Shall i request a sar(will this include bos)

Check bos

Make formal complaint

Complain to ccta

Proceed to fos if unresolvable

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

are you saying you don't have a copy of 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

Hi Dx

 

Im not sure if i have a copy ive been totally hopeless in the past.

 

Would this have been with the paperwork when i signed for the loan 

 

i haven't been clued up at all. I thought stupidly id take the loan and pay it back as fast as i could i was desperate for the cash at the time and stupidly took this loan out not realising the consequences it would bring financially and mentally 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes must be there

 

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi DX

 

I have had a good look through everything i have the bos appears to be okay. Can i do anything retrospectively with the bos if it hadnt been registered correctly with regards them having instructed collection of the veichle twice in the past.

 

Also im not sure if this can have any bearing but i signed the agreement on the 31/08/2019 the company signed it on the 03/09/2019 the solicitor witnesed it on 02/09/2019 and the court stamped it on the 04/09/2019

 

Im just going theough everything and it seems a complete mess 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you mean the bill of sale was stamped within 7 days then its legal.

 

now there is an associated loan agreement regulated by the consumer credit act there too?

and ofcouse you'd paid more than 1/3rd of the agreement sum (disregard extra fees to date!)

 

and whats this about multiple fees on other repo attempts?

 

you are not telling us the full history from day one please...

 

now if the BOS negates this i don't know yet but i don't think so.

 

it APPEARS to me you have a good claim under section 92 for ALL you money back if the BOS plays no part in extra repo laws which i don't think it does on private property..yes you DRIVEWAY is 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

Thanks for the reply 

 

Here goes from day one.

 

I took out a logbook loan in Aug/Sep 2019 for £1000 total in 78 weekly instalments of £35.90 total repayable was £2800.20 secured by way of my car (valued at £4500 at the time.

 

No credit checks, proof of earnings/benefits were requested only income/expenditure sheet as far as i can recall.

 

Things got of to a pretty bad start i was charged a £12 late payment fee for 7 day notice email as there had been no instructions in how to pay i thought the money would be deducted automaticly it wasnt.

 

I fell behind pretty quickly with a further 3 £12 charges added to the account and by January 2020 a repossion charge of £300 was applied to the account.

 

On the 12th february 2020 a rather angry man was banging on my door asking me to pay £900 or he was taking my car there and then by right of bill of sale which he refused to show me. I jumped in my car to stop him trying to hook it up to his flatbed and as he went to hook it up i drove it up and down  my drive he recorded me doing this and called the police claiming attempted assualt.

 

When the police came out i told the police what had happened and he was refusing to show me documentation which he showed the police quite happily the police agreed with him and said i couldnt stop him. I was told to pay or the car would be taken on top of this the police were now at the point of telling me i allow him to take the car or get arrested for attempted assult and he could take the car anyway.

 

He was on the phone to his boss who was telling him not to accept any payment and just take the car as they had had enough messing around i managed to borrow the £900 at short notice and make the payment this resolved the situation for now. I didnt want to tke it any further at the time due to fear of reprisal.

 

Following the next 12 months i became redundent and was relying on benefits to pay for the loan i advised them of this with no reply 

 

Fast forward to May of this year and i have been charged another 3 £12 late payment charges and a £200 admin fee and another £300 repossession charge as in the thread above

 

There is currently 

£213 left to pay

£3471 paid to date

£884 in charges inclusive of above

 

I have a copy of 

The bos

Fixed sum loan agreement regulated by consumer credit act 1974

Pre contract form

 

Hope that makes sense

 

Thanks

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the repo fees are unlawful and reclaimable and so are all the £12 charges and at their int rate.

 

pers if you can borrow the money needed i'd get this done and dusted and then raise serious complaints with them then off to the authorities

 

i'm still convinced that repo off a private driveway is unlawful and voids the whole agreement.

 

First read this especially 4.8.4 and 4.8.5

 

https://www.ccta.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Bills-of-Sale-Code-of-Practice-consumer.pdf

 

You need to make a Formal Complaint in writing on what you have learnt from the advised link

 

 

 

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

Sadly once a valid dn has been issued and expired and not been remedied
they can and will lift off a private drive, provided no damage is caused to the private property
Annoyingly the Government decided to reject the Law Commissions findings regarding LBLs which leaves the DN as your only protection
However, the FOS has beefed up its attitude to LBLs (been lent on imo)
(see the link in the sticky, and read the sample case study)
So your plan of action is
Send a SAR to gather all the required information
Read the FOS link and the CCTA guide from 4.7 onwards
Compile a Formal Complaint
Post it up prior to submission
IMO you have a strong affordability case, and just look at the outcome in the FOS case study!!!

  • Thanks 1

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

Thanks Dx and the theoldrouge i appriciate your time and advice.

 

I have recieved the sar information back

 

Just a quick few questions, i plan on complaining about affordability as i dont belieive they carried any other checks other than a income/expenditure sheet, they have also left the supporting documents/evidence blank on this sheet ie wage slips seen, bank statements provided i dont think they requested any of this from me

 

Other than the affordability side of it, im going to complain about the charges incurred which the only ones listed in the agreement are the £12 ones not the repo fees and definatly not the £200 admin charge which is now showing as a repo fee on top of the £300 repo

 

The fact they removed the car without offering me to remove goods or even tried to advise they were taking it there and then.

 

They ignored my  numerous messages telling them to take payment and asking what was happening with account, but replied as soon as they had car in possesion.

 

I told them i was in financial difficulty and also suffering with severe anxiety last year which they brushed off. I even had a message from one of their agents txting to say "ignoring this wont make it go away" after they had called me even though i told them to communicate in emails

 

Should i put all this in one complaint

 

Thanks again

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, include everything after reading the links as advised
but be very concise, don’t waffle
they will reject it all anyway
you flesh it out at 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

Hi here is what i plan on sending

 

Formal Complaint 

 

Loan Ref; xxxxxxxx 
 
I wish to log a formal complaint in relation to unaffordable lending, Unfair charges, Car repossesion, Dealing with financial and mental difficulty
 
 
I feel to bring to your attention that I believe you  have irrisponablely lent to me because of the below points;
 
- You did not do appropriate checks. Should you have used the appropriate Due Diligence, you would have seen that I was under a tremendous
amount of financial pressure accompanyed by other debts that would make this loan unaffordable. This pushed me into arrears.
- Should you have done the appropriate affordability checks at the time of the loan, you would have seen that I had more than 1
loan on the go and a large proportion of my outgoings servicing other accounts. These included Credit Cards / Other Payday Loans /
High APR Finance /Other Debts.
 
- On my Credit Files with the 3 major agencies (Callcredit, Equifax / Experian), I cannot find any searches that had been completed at the time of a loan being offered. While the searches may have disappeared, I would have expected to see something that shows your firm did a “Hard” search to check my financial commitments and I would request that you prove you did complete this along with providing evidence you completed affordability checks that include proof of income.
 
I am bringing this to your attention because I believe that you as a lender did not treat me with comply with section 5 of the CONC Sourcebook on Responsible Lending or use Due Diligence upon my application and have allowed me to get into this position. I also would expect a company to check bank statements as part of their underwriting criteria. I would also expect that with your authorisation to trade under the OFT /
FCA, you would have had stringent underwriting criteria.
 
The charges that you have applied to the account seem unfair and unreasonable in total you have added £884 in total charges to a loan of £1000.
 
I would like to point you to CCTA code of paractice bills of sale 4.8.4
 
"Members shall not impose charges, of whatever nature, on customers who are in arrears unless the
nature of and likely amount of those charges are disclosed at the Pre-contract stage and are limited to doing no more than covering the member’s reasonable costs"
 
There are charges on the account that are not specified at pre contract stage and seem excesive of reasonable costs.
 
 
I would also like you to investigate the behaviour and practices of xxxxxxxx the third party company instructed with reposesion of the veichle the agent knocked on neighbours doors to see if i was home, demanded payment without proof of bill of sale, alleged attempted assault and refused to accept payment as his boss just wanted the car.
 
The second time the car was taken early hours sunday morning no attempt was made to notify me and as a result i believed my car had been stolen, as a result i didnt have the oppertunity to remove my personal belongings from the car including my 4 month old babys bag and pram with essentials.
 
Please be reminded that it is your responsability of any company/agent acting on your behalf and not up to me to contact the company.
 
Despite advising you of financial difficulty/severe anxiety/stress/pregnancy/partially deaf. You did not treat me fairly and appropriately and carried on with recovery of debt
 
You ignored messages of offering payments and asking what was happening with the account over the months leading up to the car being possesed but responded immiedietly once the car had been taken possesion of.
 
I did advise you i was partially deaf and you kept on trying to call me as opposed to email/message even one of your agents messaged me to say "ignoring calls wont make this go away"
 
I look forward to your response
 
 
Link to post
Share on other sites

needs lots of work including spelling.

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

Thanks DX do you have any pointers ill go through the spelling with a fine tooth comb im not very good at putting this together 

 

Im concerned about going into detail too much with waffling and pointless information

 

Should i quote the gudence more or is this not needed

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit wordy and repetitive.....get to the point 2/3 paragraphs is all that is required....succinct. 

 

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

Thanks Andy

 

I have cut the complaint down to precise points is this any better

 

Loan Ref; xxxxxxxx 

 

I wish to log a formal complaint in relation to unaffordable lending, Unfair charges, Car repossession, dealing with financial and mental difficulty

 

I feel the need to bring to your attention that I believe you have irresponsibly lent to me because you did not do appropriate checks.

The charges that you have applied to the account seem unfair and unreasonable in total you have added £884 in total charges to a loan of £1000. There are charges on the account that are not specified at pre contract stage and seem excessive of reasonable costs.

 

I would also wish to complain of the behaviour and practices of xxxxxxxx the third party company instructed with repossession of the vehicle, The agent knocked on neighbours doors to see if I was home, demanded payment without proof of bill of sale, alleged attempted assault and refused to accept payment as his boss just wanted the car, removing the vehicle with no notification and no opportunity to remove personal belongings.

 

Despite advising you of financial difficulty/unemployment/severe anxiety/stress/pregnancy/partially deaf. You did not treat me fairly and appropriately and carried on with recovery of debt

You ignored messages of offering payments and asking what was happening with the account. I did advise you I was partially deaf and you kept on trying to call me as opposed to email/message.

 

I look forward to your response
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Better.......but it requires a positive conclusion to what you now expect to happen and if not what further appropriate action you are prepared to take and who you will report to. If you have the relevant links/legislation to unfair lending drop them in also as to what you will rely upon.

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

Thanks again, right here goes

 

Loan Ref; xxxxxxxx 

 

I wish to log a formal complaint in relation to unaffordable lending, Unfair charges, Car repossession, dealing with financial and mental difficulty

 

I feel the need to bring to your attention that I believe you have irresponsibly lent to me because you did not do appropriate checks.

 

The charges that you have applied to the account seem unfair and unreasonable in total you have added £884 in total charges to a loan of £1000. There are charges on the account that are not specified at pre contract stage and seem excessive of reasonable costs.

 

I would also wish to complain of the behaviour and practices of xxxxxxxx the third party company instructed with repossession of the vehicle, The agent knocked on neighbours doors to see if I was home, demanded payment without proof of bill of sale, alleged attempted assault and refused to accept payment as his boss just wanted the car, removing the vehicle with no notification and no opportunity to remove personal belongings.

 

Despite advising you of financial difficulty/unemployment/severe anxiety/stress/pregnancy/partially deaf. You did not treat me fairly and appropriately and carried on with recovery of debt

 

You ignored messages of offering payments and asking what was happening with the account.

I did advise you I was partially deaf and you kept on trying to call me as opposed to email/message


Due to the above I would not deem it unreasonable for you to refund all charges and interest and revert to the financial position before the loan transaction took place. I would also request compensation for the unfair treatment I have received as per guidelines in CCTA code of practice.


If an unsatisfactory response is received then I will take the case to the financial ombudsman services.

 

I look forward to your response
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still a bit lame " The charges that you have applied to the account seem unfair " don't seem they are.!!!!

 

Due to the above I would not deem it unreasonable for you to refund all charges and interest "   Due to the above I demand that you reverse/ credit all charges and interest to the account.

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

Might it be better to drop the word unaffordable and use the correct term...irresponsible lending and unlawful charges relaiming??

 

Pers id also remove the begging.

I hereby raise a formal complaint.....

 

And also i feel? No i bring

 

and the i also wish.. No you demand they investigate the action s of flatbed fake bailiffs!!

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

Hi Dx/Andyorch thanks for your advice i have made the changes as below, is this good to go 

 

Loan Ref; xxxxxxxx 

 

I hereby raise a formal complaint in relation to irresponsible lending, Unlawful charges, Car repossession, dealing with financial and mental difficulty.

 

I bring to your attention that you have irresponsibly lent to me because you did not do appropriate checks.

 

The charges that you have applied to the account are unfair and unreasonable in total you have added £884 in total charges to a loan of £1000. There are charges on the account that are not specified at pre contract stage and are excessive of reasonable costs.

 

I also demand that you investigate the behaviour and practices of xxxxxxxx the third party company instructed with repossession of the vehicle, The agent knocked on neighbours doors to see if I was home, demanded payment without proof of bill of sale, alleged attempted assault and refused to accept payment as his boss just wanted the car, removing the vehicle with no notification and no opportunity to remove personal belongings.

 

Despite advising you of financial difficulty/unemployment/severe anxiety/stress/pregnancy/partially deaf. You did not treat me fairly and appropriately and carried on with recovery of debt.

 

You ignored messages of offering payments and asking what was happening with the account.

 

I did advise you I was partially deaf and you kept on trying to call me as opposed to email/message.


Due to the above I demand that you reverse/credit all charges and interest to the account and revert to the financial position before the loan transaction took place. I would also request compensation for the unfair treatment I have received as per guidelines in CCTA code of practice.


If an unsatisfactory response is received then I will take the case to the financial ombudsman services.

 

I look forward to your response.
 

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...