Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • J&P Credit Solutions are specialists on debt recovery. Either way they seem to be swapping between the JandP and IDR whatever their exact definitions are.
    • Primary and secondary teachers are supporting pupils with their own money, buying food and warm clothing. Eight in 10 primary teachers in England spending own money to help pupils | Education | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Increasing numbers of children hungry and lack adequate clothing, with two-thirds of secondary teachers also supporting pupils  
    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
  • 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

bristol west erc


darkflex152k
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6328 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

hi,

first ever post !! i have emailed bristol and west about erc totalling almost £7k, have had a standard letter back from MrsTucker advising i signed the terms and conditions etc. I relised I went about it the wrong way so have sent them the following template

 

Request for repayment of early redemption charge

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Account Number: xxxxxxxxx

 

I am writing to request a refund of the early redemption charge of £xxxx which was debited to my account on xx/xx/xxxx. I now understand that this charge is in all likelihood disproportionate to the costs that you actually incured. As such, this penalty is unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent consumer regulations. Such disproportionate charges are considered to be unfair per se by the OFT who reported on 5th April 2006 and are therefore presumed to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary.

 

If you believe that this charge is proportionate to the costs you have incured as a result of the early redemption of my mortgage, could you please demonstrate this by providing a full breakdown of those costs or a pre-estimate of your losses. Please note that I do not require an explanation as to why this charge was made; I am fully aware of the terms and conditions of my mortgage. What I require is a breakdown of your costs in order to reassure me that the charge is justified.

 

Having taken legal advice on this matter it is very clear, as you will no doubt be aware, that English contract law requires such charges to be a genuine pre-estimate of your losses. In the case of Castaneda and Others v Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Co Ltd., (1902) 12 SLT 498 the House of Lords held that a contractual party can only recover damages for actual or liquidated losses incured from a breach of contract as opposed to a charge which represents a penalty. This was upheld in the case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79. In addition to this, your charge represents an unfair term of contract which is contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SL. 1999/2083). Your charges constitute an unfair penalty under Schedule 2 of the said regulations which provide an indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair. Under paragraph 1(e) of schedule 2 this specifically includes terms which have the object of requiring any consumer who fails his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation.

 

I would also like to bring to your attention the following statement by the Office of Fair Trading:

 

A term in a mortgage agreement which requires the borrower to pay more for breaching the contract than actual costs and losses caused to the lender by the breach (or a genuine pre-estimate of that) is likely to be regarded as an unfair penalty and to be unenforceable at Common Law and (in a consumer mortgage) under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations.

 

The fact that I signed the mortgage offer containing the term relating to the early redemption charge does not make this term enforceable, as I’m sure your legal department are fully aware.

 

I will now give you 14 days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

 

If you do not respond, or if you do not respond positively, within this time period, I shall send you a Letter Before Action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. While I would like to settle this matter amicably and without the need for court action and the attendant publicity this will receive, you can take this letter as 28 days notice of my intention to issue a claim should you not comply with my request. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

***anyone had any luck with this ??**

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Darkflex,

 

Bristol & West aren't the easiest of companies to deal with AlanfromDerby has recently had success with them (not ERC after a long battle starting in February (I think but may be wrong).

 

It is still early days, although there have been several successful ERC claims have a look through the other institutions successes. In particular Halifax, Birmingham Midshires, Alliance and Leceister, Natwest and Gmac have all paid out on ERCs.

 

There are a few claims against B &W going through at the moment.

 

Best of luck

 

Zoot

Link to post
Share on other sites

just had a reply today :normal blurb then :

 

i note your comments this " penalty is umlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent consumer regulations" however we are not aware that there have been any rulings around these charges, if you are able to provide appropiate literature with this regards, we will review and consider accordingly.

 

You go onto say that we should not refer to your contract, however this is impossible as you make reference to the Unfair terms in Consumer ContractsRegulations (SL199/2083). You also refer to your mge agreement which itself is your contract with us. At the time you entered into this contract all terms were clearly set out. You had legal representation, so would have been advised of these terms.

 

The mge product which you agreed to take , gave you a beneficial intrest rate, which if repaired earlier resulted in the ERC, and this was made transparent at the outset

 

The mge deed itself would refer you back to the terms under whcih the mge was granted, which would confirm the fees payable.

 

If court action is iniated we will produce this letter. I am unable to comply with your refund for the ERC

 

 

WHAT NOW ???????????????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

I sent off the prelim letter waited 14 days then sent off the LBA, they were rude enough to offer me a measley £60. I am in the middle of moving house at the moment so in a week or so I will file a court claim.

 

From everything I have seen and read on this site... stick to your time table as much as possible as they will push it back and back and hope you give up...

 

Do not give up! Its your money!!!!

09.12.2006 B&W LBA sent

 

22.11.2006 B&W prelim letter sent asking £5500.32

 

23.11.2006 TMB S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bristol & West aren't the easiest of companies to deal with AlanfromDerby has recently had success with them (not ERC after a long battle starting in February (I think but may be wrong).

 

Yes, you are correct - the first letter was sent on 16th February and we are now in the final stages of settlement.

 

Keep strong, ensure that YOU set the timetable, and don't be put off by their attempts to intimidate you with legal jargon and threats over legal costs.

 

Look forward to reading your progress, although zoot is the expert on ERC's.

 

All the best.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hey darkflex hows it going?

 

Have you filed? Sorry no response in ages Ive been offline moving house.

09.12.2006 B&W LBA sent

 

22.11.2006 B&W prelim letter sent asking £5500.32

 

23.11.2006 TMB S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

hi,

sorry for the delay in responding, no i haven't done so, i have other mortgages with b west and am concerned they might do something to them, I want to make sure it it solid for success before i take them to court, I send them the LBA letter and they basically rebuffed me again saying no, i signed the terms and conditions etc

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't even think about issuing a claim in the current climate.

Please note that I am not a legal expert and all advice given is without prejudice and is purely my opinion only.

 

** Nationwide - £1821.15-PAID IN FULL - Aug 06 **

** Halifax Mortgage -£390 - PAID IN FULL - Nov 06 **

Lloyds TSB - MCOL issued 09/03/07 - £2953 + costs - ON HOLD....

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't even think about issuing a claim in the current climate.

 

Ditto, I've put mine on ice for now

09.12.2006 B&W LBA sent

 

22.11.2006 B&W prelim letter sent asking £5500.32

 

23.11.2006 TMB S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Darkflex.

 

DO NOT FILE YOUR CLAIM !

 

There have been a number of claim during the last week that have been defeated, leaving the user with a huge bill for the costs including the cost of a barrister.

 

Put your claim on hold for the time being.

 

Regards, Rooster.

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...