Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good points, TJ. I still think there are holes in the story.   OH [tennis fan] thinks Djokovic could have problems getting into the States for the US open if he doesn't get vaxxed.
    • There is little point asking questions if, when given a direction such as that by FTMDave above, you decide that instead of reading a thread from post #39, you read from #63 and think that it will give you answers.   This Forum is self help, so it is incumbent on you to do just that .
    • “The following has now been clarified as a category for which you may be eligible for a temporary medical exemption: Recent PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (after 31 July 2021) where a vaccination can be deferred until six months after the infection,” TA said in a letter to players and their teams.   The same document also made it clear that any applications for a medical exemption needed to be sent “no later than Friday 10 December 2021” — six days before Djokovic tested positive — meaning a positive Covid test would have come too late for TA’s exemption guidelines. Djokovic missed exemption cut-off by six days   Let alone that he quite clearly seemed to juggle the actual date of knowledge of his alleged infection to allow him to masklessly mix with youngsters and others     Anyway all other issues aside, lets ask the first question first: He applied for his visa without  required exemptions at the time, and without any intention whatsoever of being vaccinatated (not that he had time) - why? and how did he think he was going to be allowed access?   Notes: * I don't know, but Its probably a simple tick box of 'do you meet requirements and can you supply evidence' on the original application * There was clearly some issues with this known as the Aus tennis association said they had confirmed a prior infection (within stated limits/requirements) could or did allow an exemption (technicality - also included statement that infection exemption meant vaccination could be deferred form 6 months - not refused)    
    • Indeed I thought the court case concentrated more on technicalities and possible flaws in the reasoning rather than whether Djokovic met the conditions. Maybe not a legal reason, but he doesn't seem to worry about keeping to the rules about self-isolating and seems to have been economical with the truth over travel in the two weeks before the tournament.   As you say, there are doubts about the test and someone has also asked what he planned to do in the event he didn't manage to test positive a couple of weeks before he travelled.
    • There is a confusion of terminology here. When it comes to documents granting tenancies they are either described as "tenancy agreements" or "leases". However, though the former is generally used to describe an instrument granting a tenancy for three years or less and the latter to describe an instrument made by deed granting a tenancy for more than three years, they are not "terms of art", that is words or phrases with set meanings. The word "lease", though perhaps primarily used to refer to a document. also refers to an interest in land so that "lease" and "tenancy" mean the same thing, that is a leasehold interest.   Any purported grant of a tenancy for a term exceeding three years is void as provided by section 52(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925:   All conveyances of land or of any interest therein are void for the purpose of conveying or creating a legal estate unless made by deed.   By way of clarification:   Section 205(1)(ii) says:   “Conveyance” includes a mortgage, charge, lease, assent, vesting declaration, vesting instrument, disclaimer, release and every other assurance of property or of an interest therein by any instrument, except a will   Section 52(2) says:   This section does not apply to [...] leases or tenancies or other assurances not required by law to be made in writing   That is clarified by section 54(2) which says:   Nothing in the foregoing provisions of this Part of this Act shall affect the creation by parol of leases taking effect in possession for a term not exceeding three years (whether or not the lessee is given power to extend the term) at the best rent which can be reasonably obtained without taking a fine   (For your information I post as Lawcruncher on LLZ)  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

No account details


mbdiss
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5511 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

didn't think of that. will they accept that because i have moved address since i had the card. will have to have a look around my rents house to see if there is an odd statment anywhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest willowb

Hi and welcome (want an umbrella?:( )

 

When you send your SAR make sure you add your DOB, prev address etc etc and like MOTB said some proof, if they need more info they'll ask.

 

As for the default, when you get your statements and send out your prelim letter asking for the charges back you must ask for the default to be removed from your file also. And when you come to file a claim it must be in your particulars of claim that you want the default removed as well as the charges returned.

 

Set up a thread in the 'Cap One' section, read some threads in there and ask (in your thread) if you need advise. Keep your thread up to date so that there is no confusion.

 

You need to read this over and over!!! you cannot do enough reading here.....

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/

 

These are the step by step instructions, stick to the time table and if you need help...SHOUT! but be patient as people here are very busy!

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/31460-step-step-instructions.html

 

Good luck

Wxxx

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest willowb

It's 6 years from the date you post your DPA subject access request. So, even if you file a claim (allowing for the 40 days they have to send you your statements and another 4 weeks from prelim/lba to filing) in middle of Feb you claim back 6 years from today! (if you send it today:) )

 

Wxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi mbdiss + willowb,

 

Hope it's not thought that I'm mis-informing U both BUT...

 

It is my understanding that as Bank Charges have been deemed unlawful, the 6yr Limitation Period for claiming STARTS FROM when U first become aware of the unlawfulness.

This has been generally held as the date last year that OFT (...I think it was them!) made a public statement to that effect.

 

Other members of CAG (...better informed/qualified than myself!) have put forward (IMHO) arguments for claiming for more than 6yrs PREVIOUSLY BACK from the first date of Notice of Intention to Claim.

 

There are threads on the Forum supporting this...Cos they have been successful in their claims!!!

 

Hope to have been of some help?!

 

Best of Luck!

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.

And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers.

And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

(Jules Winnfield)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest willowb

Thanks Milk Tray Man:D ......I'm a lady and I love Milk Tray8-) ....sorry, couldn't resist!

 

Well, if that's the case then it has not been my understanding of the situation thus far, but if you are right then I'd quite like a mod to verify this so that I don't offer the wrong advice again:-)

 

Wxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for stealing your "Welcome" mbdiss!...

 

Hi willowb,

 

Didn't mean to upset U by treading on a "Plat's...with loads of green blobby things" toes or anything!...lol...:p

 

The following link can explain something of what I have previously said:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/33005-bong-hsbc-contractual-interest.html?highlight=claiming+for+more+than+6yrs

 

Also, if in "Search"...If you type in "Claiming for more than 6yrs" there are lots of other threads to read through!

 

P.S. Niiiiice Avatar willowb...much better than U're last one!...lol...:)

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.

And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers.

And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

(Jules Winnfield)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest willowb
Didn't mean to upset U

You didn't:)

 

P.S. Niiiiice Avatar willowb...much better than U're last one!...lol...

Thank you.....so glad you noticed:D

 

Bong is a very well-informed member of CAG and an extremely confident person (and I know Livelylad is doing the same) so it's no suprise to me that he is 'going for it'. I think that it very much depends on the individual, this site and the whole process can be taxing enough on a newbie without making it more complicated. A few more successes in this area would be a good start!

 

Thing is, anyone who has claimed for 6 years can then claim again for the years before so all is not lost if you stick to 6 years for now.

 

IMHO

 

Wxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for that willowb!

 

Totally agree with U with regards the process being overwhelming for a "newbie".

 

...Best stick to the tried and tested way first...Then go for the jugular!!!

 

P.S. Does that mean that I was right in my original interpretation?...:p

.......I'll leave U a special toffee fudge if U say I was!...lol...;)

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.

And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers.

And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

(Jules Winnfield)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take that as a YES then!...:):p

 

Special Toffee Fudge

It's made of all the RIGHT ingredients.

It's easily digestable.

It helps keep those who eat Fairy Cakes on the ground.

Though it's made to be especially non-fattening!...lol...:D

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.

And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers.

And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

(Jules Winnfield)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok people the welcome forum is for just that, It is not to be used for threads for claims. You have already been asked by Willow to start a thread in Capital One forum. Thirteen posts it far to many. I will get the title changed and moved.

 

 

 

 

 

I am not a legal expert my advice is given without prejudice and is purely my opinion only. If you are in doubt please seek professional advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...