Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 162 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

Frst National Finance Ltd V Steveshawx - Help needed


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6330 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

I had three agreements going back to 1999, for goods bought from Power House, I Defaulted and then agreed to pay up a reduced amount to clear. Default is about to clear feb 08.

 

Have been sortin through old paperwork and discovered statements i demanded from the DRC - Fleetwood. The statements have outlined letter charges increasing the debt oveer a period of time, just:rolleyes: within statute bar of six years.

 

Can i justifyably reclaim these charges as the debts are showing as satisfied? they dont amount to too much individually, but, as always i was scared to argue the toss at the time and if they go to court, the contractual interest rate was 29.9%, a lot of money per pro each claim.

 

that's not the issue - the issue is that the debts were (unlawfully) inflating my account as such....

 

If I go ahead, i have the statements and could send a prelim letter instantly, what does the forum recommend?

 

 

Edit here - in my fit of peak I've checked the APR -it is a comparative 27% over the year, so calculates as correct, so no gold stars :( here, I rescind the APR bit - but stand by the contractual issue.

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

anybody??

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

taken the bull by the horns - retrived the orignal agreement (gawd knows how i found it), read it - interest wrongly calculated (s/be 29.8% not as 62%), repayment terms were "6 monthly payments of .... starting after 36 months" - deafault issued around 12 months...even though dispute was raised then:eek: . (shame I didn't have the empowerment then - I was suffering from depression and was quite ill- I certainly have the power now!!) over £60 worth of letter charges and harrassment from DRC "Fleetwood" - worked out that I have been bullied into overpayment of £150 - so we'll see..........given them 14 days to respond with caveat that If nothing forthcoming a further 14 days before action!:D

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just read your post about the errors on your agreement. I took a creditor to court 2 years ago and had an agreement declared unenforceable due to technical errors. You should read a House of Lords case : Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (google it) - this shows VERY clearly that the accuracy of an agreement is VERY important!

 

If your original agreement shows 6 monthly payment instead of 36 and errors in interest rate then I would write to DCA and say if they don't stop now you will take claim to court to have agreement declared unenforceable. Unfortunately in my claim, although the agreement was unenforceable the court ruled that it is still valid and therefore no monies already paid could be claimed back. I don't know if this would apply to your case - depends on facts and circumstances.

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Steve, only just found your thread.

 

I would definitely go after them if they have added penalty charges onto the accounts. use the standard proceedure at this point in time unless you have reason to believe the agreements have flaws in them.

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks Pam - I'll see what FNTF Ltd say - they may back off and close it all up considering........:rolleyes:

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve, don't say the agreement is unenforceable unless you have checked the facts properly - you might start a war!!

 

However, it seems to me that a) the payment schedule is wrong and also the interest rate (as entered on the agreement - did you say 62%!!!) would constitute an extortionate credit bargain!

 

Is it possible you could PM me a scan or photocopy of the agreement if I PM'd you my email address?

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Steve, only just found your thread.

 

I would definitely go after them if they have added penalty charges onto the accounts. use the standard proceedure at this point in time unless you have reason to believe the agreements have flaws in them.

 

Tamadus, thanks for the encouragement:) . There is only one agreement amongst the three that "breaks" and confuses the conformity. All agreements have carried excess charges for letters from £10 to £25, and inflate the recovery amounts. Two have been paid off as a satisfactory arrangement, and show as such on my CRF. since reading these threads I go through some conflicting thoughts -do i or don't i? - well dammit - I think I do.......:D

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve, don't say the agreement is unenforceable unless you have checked the facts properly - you might start a war!!

 

However, it seems to me that a) the payment schedule is wrong and also the interest rate (as entered on the agreement - did you say 62%!!!) would constitute an extortionate credit bargain!

 

Is it possible you could PM me a scan or photocopy of the agreement if I PM'd you my email address?

 

Regards, Pam

 

Thanks Pam,

I'm unable to scan in at the mo - but if it can wait I'll try and do during the week...would appreciate some help here. Payment Schedule is very clear " By [6] monthly payments of £12.68 (commencing [36] month(s) after the date of this Agreement and payable on the same date in each subsequent month)"

Needless to say under the pressure of the DCA, I paid 12 installments before the 36th month came!!! (the DCA is an in house agency for FNTF ltd operating in South Wales - a trading arm of "Instantsilver Ltd" based with their head office in Tricity House!!)

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit here - in my fit of peak I've checked the APR -it is a comparative 27% over the year, so calculates as correct, so no gold stars :( here, I rescind the APR bit - but stand by the contractual issue.

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This IS interesting - should it have been payable by 36 monthly payments starting 6 months after date of ageement?

 

The way I see it, your obligation reads on the actual document as being to pay £12.68 for 6 months and not until 36 months have past.

 

My opinion is that this seems to be a situation where not only could you claim back unlawful charges but also any payment made over and above the 6 x £12.68 the agreement stipulates!!

 

I bet the loan company/DCA have not had a look at the agreement recently. Have you sent them a CCA request for a copy of this?

 

Please tell me more - this seems to be a right c***k up!

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

C**k up it is!

 

I didn't notice the switch of words until I retrived my copy of the agreement (Keep until business is completed - sad but true:smile: ). It also seemed true to me that what you have mentioned is what I should pursue. A technicality, as I understand it can negate a CCA 1974 contract as is it misleading and confusing......if you want to see the financial and related particulars, my scanner is up and I will gladly let you see this part - but you must be aware that I'm a little wary....:cool: , so PM me your email address.

 

i've had some "experience" of fighting financial institutions in the past - my business was bumped by one NWB:-x in 1992 for extortionate charges bounced cheques and the like, and a secured loan i weedled out of on a large technicality, in 2002 without going to court!

 

That's in the past - illness prevented the fight:( , but I'm back and having a go at - Hfax and this lot - work gets in the way, of course, but I'm determined to reclaim my right (to coin a phrase):D

 

This site is giving me a great deal of feist, and I'm going to win.

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have not already done so then you should send the original creditor a DPA subject access request for copies of all docs. etc and send the DCA a CCA request for a copy of your original agreement. This might produce a copy of it from them that you can use in your claim without disclosing yours - but if not you still have an original copy anyway.

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Have copied the following from an OFT doc. entitled:

 

"Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 as amended by the 2004 Amendment Regulations

 

8 PRESCRIBED TERMS

8.1 What are ‘prescribed terms’?

 

S61(1)(a) CCA provides that, for a regulated agreement to be properly executed, it must contain all the prescribed terms of the agreement and conform to regulations under s60(1) – see Q1.14.

 

Reg 6(1) provides that the terms specified in Sch 6 to the Agreements Regulations are ‘prescribed terms’ for the purposes of s61(1)(a) and s127(3) – see Q8.2.

 

8.2 What if prescribed terms are missing or incorrect?

 

s127(3) provides that the court may not make an enforcement order unless a document containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor – see Q1.21.

 

If therefore any of the prescribed terms is missing, or incorrect, the agreement is not enforceable against the debtor, and the court is precluded from making an enforcement order.

 

8.3 What are the prescribed terms?

The prescribed terms specified in Sch 6 are as follows:

• amount of credit – see Q8.4

• credit limit – see Q8.5

• rate of interest – see Q8.6

repayments – see Q8.9.

 

Sch 6 was not amended by the 2004 Regulations.

 

Office of Fair Trading Consumer Credit (Agreements etc) Regs draft FAQs 92"

 

It would appear from this that your agreement is wholly unenforceable because (as the agreement is written) 6 x the stated monthly repayment would not cover the total amount due under the agreement!!:)

 

Looks good to me!!

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Pam,

Really helpful stuff here. I'm going to hit them with it all this week. Could be interesting to see how they argue the validity of the contract - we'll see! will keep you posted ;)

 

Steve

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to above - I don't know how much you have paid already on this but if it was me I would argue that the interest charged is incorrect because they have calculated it over 36 months (which would have been correct) but your obligation under the agreement (as written and signed by both parties) is for a repayment period of only 6 months.

 

In my opinion your total liability was therefore

6 X stated monthly payment plus 6 months interest. If you have already paid more than this then there is a very good case for getting the excess back!

 

Good luck, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:?: i've just been checking my Credit ref file on Experian and note this this company is updating the files from GE Capital - :eek:

FIRST NATIONAL TRICITY FIN LTD:

CREDIT DATA MANAGEMENT OFFICER, CREDIT DATA MANAGEMENT, GE CAPITAL BANK LTD, PO BOX 700, LEEDS, LS99 2BD

 

 

so if anyone wishes to use the above feel free - I can feel a long letter to be written.......:D

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update - sent wordy letter, quoting Pam's suggestion and a little more re defaults via email to GE Capital consumer finance.

 

saves a stamp - ensures a read receipt, and they have 14 days to pass it on and action.:cool:

 

clocks ticking........:D :D :D

 

[email protected] although the site does say they can't enter into email discussions, so what? i'll sit and wait for the mail man..

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

update - bad pancake chef - replied from GE Money - "

Thank you for your recent email.

 

Unfortunately due to security precautions with email we are unable to action or discuss account specific enquiries.

 

To resolve your particular enquiry we need this request done in writing and sending to our Credit Management team for resolution.

Please forward a copy of the attached letter to our credit management team directly and they can investigate your query immediately

Kind regards

 

Mark Gilston

g GE Money

 

 

I nearly replied with - "what do you think was attached?" it was in writing, not HTML or binary language, - I think your not listening"

 

I did reply with - please forward my letter then, there's a good fellow, to the correct department, the clock is ticking and I know the company has got my letter, so use your head, get your finger out and expedite some customer service that can be deemed as "good"

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve

 

Have you requested a copy of agreement under CCA or have you gone straight for the jugular and pointed out the errors in the agreement?

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pam, (thanks for the PM),

 

I've put a "carefully worded" request that they investigate the original agreement, and then consider the impact of the terms by defaulting me at the time they did so. I've given them 14 days, but they are playing with me. Searching my files i found a photocopy of the letter i sent to the DCA, along with a copy of the agreement. This was 2005, and after I sent this, they went verrry quiet, in fact I haven't heard fro them since!:cool:

They're playing cute at the moment - said they couldn't transfer an email to the "correct" department........Cr@p!

 

I'm sticking to my timeline - if i start a war, a barrister friend reckions the argument is in my favour. Aside all this they've applied penalties to the accounts i had - these will be collected soon too! (evil laugh he he mwahaha) - sorry:mad:

 

Steve

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for you! As I said before, I think you are entitled to claim back any monies paid over and above the 6 x monthly payment + 6 months interest - after all they can't correct the agreement now!! :D

 

P.S You WILL get an email notifying you about your change of username.

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

14 days up, nil response, they've ignored me, I didn't ignore them! - now to a form of words via an LBA - can anyone give me a clue on some wording please?;)

 

The claim is for an over payment - £193 + , and should I add compounded interest or contractual interest as the last contact I had from them was Jan 2004, so in 3 years I've accumulated potential loss of that interest. Plus - I've been defaulted and this shows an outstanding balance (I'm ignoring this as it doesn't apply) - compensation for loss of reputation? - or does that take it too far - should I claim 29.8% contractual or too greedy?:D

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve

 

Is the £193 you quote the difference between 6 x the monthly payment and 36 times?

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pam,

No the amount is calculated as the overpaid amount they screwed from me whilst they put the dogs on, debt collecting.

 

so, 6 x 12.68= £76.08

actually paid = £270 (by harrassing and haranguing phone calls from DCA)

difference =£ 193.92;)

 

plus default removal, they applied prior to the interest deferrment of 36 months.:-o

Halifax - paid out without getting to court - £250 WON - no intention of going, stated too costly!!

Halifax no 2 account - paid out without a fight - (by mistake, £1650 - should have been £1200 - had to pay some back)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...