Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • 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

Stealther Vs MBNA


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6246 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 this my first post on this site though my partner and I have been reading behind the scenes for sometime. Were currently pursuing 13 creditors to reclaim charges. My reason for posting in this forum is we had 2 accounts with MBNA all though when we originally took out the agreement one of them was with another issuer.

 

We have received a summary of charges for both accounts and an incomplete statement for one but nothing from the other. We also received a goodwill payment of all the charges they listed less £12 for each charge. All this on Day Forty I might add.

 

So my question is this are they now breaching my original request as the forty days are up? And if this the case what should I be saying to them in my next letter?

 

I wish to check the charges against my statements because they have lied to and bullied me in the past so I don’t trust them. I also want to claim the full amount and interest on the money owed.

 

Would be greatful for any advice

Thanks

Barclaycard - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

Egg - SETTLED

First Direct - SETTLED :)

Halifax - SETTLED

HSBC - Moneyclaim - defence

Littlewoods - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

MNBA - SETTLED

RBS - SETTLED

Time Retail Finance - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

 

The missus

Abbey - LBA sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi this my first post on this site though my partner and I have been reading behind the scenes for sometime. Were currently pursuing 13 creditors to reclaim charges. My reason for posting in this forum is we had 2 accounts with MBNA all though when we originally took out the agreement one of them was with another issuer.

 

We have received a summary of charges for both accounts and an incomplete statement for one but nothing from the other. We also received a goodwill payment of all the charges they listed less £12 for each charge. All this on Day Forty I might add.

 

So my question is this are they now breaching my original request as the forty days are up? And if this the case what should I be saying to them in my next letter?

 

I wish to check the charges against my statements because they have lied to and bullied me in the past so I don’t trust them. I also want to claim the full amount and interest on the money owed.

 

Would be greatful for any advice

Thanks

 

Welcome Stealther! We are always in need of new anti-MBNA'ers!!!

 

Right, you can now have them for non-compliance. They have breached the 40 days. You can write and tell them you are accepting the offer as part payment but will be pursuing them for the rest. I wouldn't give them more than seven days to fulfil their obligations under the DPA, you have after all issued a full SAR, who are they to treat it otherwise? Make sure you report them to the Information Commissioners office too for non-compliance of a SAR.

 

Once you get the whole lot of charges together, don't forget to add on contractual interest and then minus off the the amount they have given you already.

 

You will get it........never fear!

 

Keep us posted & good luck.:)

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for your advice - I'm going to get on to that straight away - I'll let you know how it goes.

 

Just a quick question, MBNA advised me that they would pay the goodwill gesture into the accounts that I used to hold with them (they are now held by debt recovery companies). Is it possible to insist that I receive the money as a cheque and not allow the money to be used to pay off the debt on these accounts? Any help would be gratefully received.

Barclaycard - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

Egg - SETTLED

First Direct - SETTLED :)

Halifax - SETTLED

HSBC - Moneyclaim - defence

Littlewoods - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

MNBA - SETTLED

RBS - SETTLED

Time Retail Finance - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

 

The missus

Abbey - LBA sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for your advice - I'm going to get on to that straight away - I'll let you know how it goes.

 

Just a quick question, MBNA advised me that they would pay the goodwill gesture into the accounts that I used to hold with them (they are now held by debt recovery companies). Is it possible to insist that I receive the money as a cheque and not allow the money to be used to pay off the debt on these accounts? Any help would be gratefully received.

 

No problem, glad to be of help, just shout if you need anything else.

 

Generally they will pay the money to whoever is holding the account. However, you could insist to them that you won't proceed with legal action if they pay the money directly to you. You might need to phone them to do this as they are generally pretty quick. They might argue the toss but you could be brave and be very insistent.

 

Have a look at Phil & Alison Vs MBNA, they have just got a huge whack of money paid to them instead of the DCA as they insisted they would only withdraw court action on that condition.

 

The fact of the matter is these buggers will do anything on the basis that you will be intimidated, please DON'T BE! Ring them up and tell it like it is. Tell them you will accept their part payment (and will be putting that acceptance in writing along with the request that they carry out your instructions in full in line with the SAR) and that you'll be pursuing them for the whole bloody lot, with contractual interest on top and you want it paid to you otherwise court here we come. Oh and you will proceed to Court if they try anything else. Don't give them any slack whatsoever! There have been so many shrinking violets on this site and when they get angry and do something, the results are usually spectacular!

 

I am right behind you!!!!:):):):D:D:D

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and PS :

 

Don't forget to put in the complaint to the Information Commissioner. MBNA have after all breached the Data Protection Act. The more complaints that go in the better for us. It is a simple form that you can do via their website so very hassle free. There is a link on here in the sticky but if you can't find it, or if nobody else responds, just Google it and it is there. That is how I found it once in a hurry.

 

Keep it simple, just report the facts. It is back up too if you have a punch up with MoronsBNA. Make sure they know you have complained too.:cool:

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just thought I'd give an update and ask for some advice. MBNA have ignored my letter giving them 14 days to comply with the SAR. I have reported them to the Information Commissioner (yesterday) and now need to know what to do next. I've written them a letter informing them that I've reported them to the Information Commissioner and have given them a further 7 days to comply with the original SAR. Should I also estimate the charges that they have put on my accounts and send them a letter asking for those back? Or should I wait? Is there a template letter for estimated charges? Any help gratefully received!!

Barclaycard - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

Egg - SETTLED

First Direct - SETTLED :)

Halifax - SETTLED

HSBC - Moneyclaim - defence

Littlewoods - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

MNBA - SETTLED

RBS - SETTLED

Time Retail Finance - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

 

The missus

Abbey - LBA sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Right everyone - just thought I'd update you about what has been going on. MBNA have ignored my letters asking for my SAR so I have reported them to the Information Commissioner. I have estimated the charges using the information that they have sent to me with a number of old statements that I have found. I am now about to write MBNA a letter asking for the estimated charges back....does anyone have a template letter or even a letter that they have sent that I could look at please?

Barclaycard - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

Egg - SETTLED

First Direct - SETTLED :)

Halifax - SETTLED

HSBC - Moneyclaim - defence

Littlewoods - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

MNBA - SETTLED

RBS - SETTLED

Time Retail Finance - Moneyclaim - acknowledged

 

The missus

Abbey - LBA sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right everyone - just thought I'd update you about what has been going on. MBNA have ignored my letters asking for my SAR so I have reported them to the Information Commissioner. I have estimated the charges using the information that they have sent to me with a number of old statements that I have found. I am now about to write MBNA a letter asking for the estimated charges back....does anyone have a template letter or even a letter that they have sent that I could look at please?

 

Stealther, you need to file an N1 at Court for non-compliance. Don't give them any slack, they have broken the terms of the Data Protection Act. This will force them to reveal the information.

 

Personally, I would give them a ring and tell them this is your intention and ask them why they have not complied with your SAR. It might give them a shove up the bum (:rolleyes: ).

 

My own opinion is that estimating the charges will cause you problems in the long run, others may beg to differ, but I would want all the information in front of me, lock, stock and barrel before I commenced a claim as you need to get it 100% right. You don't want to give them any room for maneovre or to be able to come back and say that they are defending because your charges are too high or something like that.

 

It will be worth the extra effort to get it right, I think!:)

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...