Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Photovoltage vs Halifax


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6184 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

Well here goes...

 

I've not needed to get HFX to send my statements to me as I've kept all my statements since I opened the account in around '98 (is that weird?).

 

Spent an evening going through the last 6 years and have come up with a total of £1534 in charges applied to my account. I sent off the letter on the 2nd of Feb.

 

Received a reply dated 6th Feb which says that a CR Manager will investigate and reply shortly but no later than 4 weeks. On the same day in the post I received a letter from Blair Oliver and Scott dated 7th Feb saying that they have been instructed by their client to recover in full my outstanding overdraft amount.

 

I will be writing to Blair Oliver and Scott (Who, after some Googling I've found out are just a subsidiary of Halifax). To let them know that the Customer Services Department are dealing with me and that I will be in touch shortly but no later than 4 weeks.

 

I'm very determined to take this all the way if I need to - and I'm very glad that there is such a good resource available for everyone to use on this forum.

Photovoltage vs Halifax PLC

April 2007 - Halifax pay back all charges, court fees and interest but do not remove Default Notice from credit file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Recieved a letter on 2nd March

 

Further to our letter of 6th February 2007. I'm sorry that you have not yet had a full response to your concerns.

 

We're still investigationg you complaint, and you will receive a response from us as soon as possible but certainly no later than 2nd April 2007....

 

Sent off my Letter Before Action today.

Photovoltage vs Halifax PLC

April 2007 - Halifax pay back all charges, court fees and interest but do not remove Default Notice from credit file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I posted my LBA on the 19th March last monday (not the 8th as it sat in my car glove box for a few days).:o

 

Now I've just been to the royal mail website and phoned up their customer services to check that my letter had been received. It hasn't.:(

 

According to the csr at royal mail she said that although they try and get first class post there in a couple of days it's not a guarantee and that I should try again on Thursday or Friday. Really 10 days for a recorded and signed for first class letter to arrive??:mad:

 

Perhaps the banks are bribing the royal mail not to deliver any letters they think might be legal proceedings against them. ;)

Photovoltage vs Halifax PLC

April 2007 - Halifax pay back all charges, court fees and interest but do not remove Default Notice from credit file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

all this means is that the numpty who collected the signature hasnt logged it yet on the royal mail system this regularly happens and is why i use first class and just get a receipt of posting this is then deemed delivered after two days

bos~ Data Protection Act sent

~ statements received

~ owed £1766.82

~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006:D

~lba handed in 14/09/2006

bos Data Protection Act sent

~ statements received

~ owed £1217.86

~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006:D

~lba handed in 14/09/2006

court date issued of the 17th november

27th oct full offer totalling everything including 8% interest court costs and £10 dpa sar..... one down next to go.

 

rbs~ Data Protection Act sent off 21/09/2006:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a response from Halifax today which seems to be a copy of the first letter they sent to me.

 

complaint handling rules set by our regulator, the Financial Services Authority, gives us 8 weeks to investigate and respond to complaints.

 

And

 

If for any reason we are unable to respond fully to your concerns within the next 4 weeks we will write to update you of our progress.

 

Well bully for them as it has now been 7 weeks and 3 days since they acknowledged receipt of my first letter to them, so if I have not had a full response by Tuesday they will also be breaking the rules set by the FSA as well as contract law!

Photovoltage vs Halifax PLC

April 2007 - Halifax pay back all charges, court fees and interest but do not remove Default Notice from credit file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well what do you know.... they never know what they are doing and thier incompetance never ceases to amaze me lol. you stick to your guns and do what you have to do to get them to stick to YOUR timetable not theirs

bos~ Data Protection Act sent

~ statements received

~ owed £1766.82

~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006:D

~lba handed in 14/09/2006

bos Data Protection Act sent

~ statements received

~ owed £1217.86

~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006:D

~lba handed in 14/09/2006

court date issued of the 17th november

27th oct full offer totalling everything including 8% interest court costs and £10 dpa sar..... one down next to go.

 

rbs~ Data Protection Act sent off 21/09/2006:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

You should be hearing from them soon, then. They like to put money in your account, often just a partial payment, and then file a defence saying they have paid you.

 

Then you often have to keep fighting for the rest.

 

At least their defence gives you a laugh. I've just filed my AQ.

Nationwide-A&L-Halifax 1-Student Loans Company-NatWest-Virgin Media-Link-Capital One ALL WON!

Thames Credit -statute barred sent 13/11/08

BCW- prove debt letter- 14/08/08

Apex- CCA 14/08/08

Redcats UK- SAR 14/04/09

Call Serve- CCA 14/08/08

Littlewoods- no CCA letter 03/09/08- Lowells now

Wescot- CCA 19/9/08

Capital One/Debitas- now with Lowells

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. All information has been obtained from this site. If you are unsure, please seek professional advice. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Allocation Questionnairre. So they can assign it to the right court- eg small claims.

 

So I can get a court date.:D

Nationwide-A&L-Halifax 1-Student Loans Company-NatWest-Virgin Media-Link-Capital One ALL WON!

Thames Credit -statute barred sent 13/11/08

BCW- prove debt letter- 14/08/08

Apex- CCA 14/08/08

Redcats UK- SAR 14/04/09

Call Serve- CCA 14/08/08

Littlewoods- no CCA letter 03/09/08- Lowells now

Wescot- CCA 19/9/08

Capital One/Debitas- now with Lowells

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. All information has been obtained from this site. If you are unsure, please seek professional advice. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Here's what's new.

 

4th April submitted my MCOL claim totaling £1,968.53 inc interest and court costs.

11th April Halifax acknowledged the claim.

 

Received a letter yesterday (post round here is rubbish) dated 10th April from Halifax.

 

They are going to arrange a payment of £1,122 as full and final settlement. Obviously they still need to pay me an additional £846.53 for it to be a full settlement.

 

What's the best tactic now to ensure that I get everything that is owed to me?

Photovoltage vs Halifax PLC

April 2007 - Halifax pay back all charges, court fees and interest but do not remove Default Notice from credit file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ther is a letter in templates to refuse settlement, or accept payment as a partial payment and that you will carry on with you claim for the outstanding amount.

 

They will credit your account with the amount whether you like it or not (see my post above on their defence tactic).

 

The key is to write to them to say, thanks but where is the rest of it?

 

They did this to me, which is why I'm still fighting.

Nationwide-A&L-Halifax 1-Student Loans Company-NatWest-Virgin Media-Link-Capital One ALL WON!

Thames Credit -statute barred sent 13/11/08

BCW- prove debt letter- 14/08/08

Apex- CCA 14/08/08

Redcats UK- SAR 14/04/09

Call Serve- CCA 14/08/08

Littlewoods- no CCA letter 03/09/08- Lowells now

Wescot- CCA 19/9/08

Capital One/Debitas- now with Lowells

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. All information has been obtained from this site. If you are unsure, please seek professional advice. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/25716-rejecting-offers.html

 

I do believe you would need to inform MCOL (or the court if your case has been allocated to your local) about the payment and adjust the amount you are claiming for - I'm sure someone would correct me on this one.

But keep going - you will get the full amount.

HALIFAX

30th Oct 06 - 18th Jan 07 - Success in claiming £3617.95

HALIFAX 2nd claim

5th Mar - 16th Apr - Success in claiming £176

EGG (3 accounts)

20th Jan 07 - SAR posted

17th Mar 07 - Paperwork received - bits missing

19th Mar - Non-compliance for missing bits posted

9th Apr - ICO complaint filed

BARCLAYCARD

20th Jan 07 - SAR posted

21st Mar - Statements received

23rd Mar - Prelim posted

31st Mar - Offer for £30 rec'd

10th Apr - LBA sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were me, I'd be accepting this as a partial payment and then jo fight on for the rest. At least you've got something out of them in the meantime, a morale booster if nothing else :D

BATRacer: Browser-based motor racing simulation. Free to play :)

 

http://batracer.com/-1FrontPage.htm?6q0

 

Advice offered by abo999 is without predjudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it.

You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt

 

Halifax: £1299 settled in full, payment received

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

OK - here's an update on whats happened.

 

They have paid the money into this account - the full ammount claimed in my MCOL claim.

 

However they will not let me access the money as the account was closed by Halifax in January, just before I started my claim against them.

 

So I have the money there, less the amount the account was overdrawn by. But I don't want to accept it as part of my claim was to have the default notice removed from my credit record.

 

There are so many threads on this I'm finding it a ball-ache to sit and read through. Has anyone successfully had a default notice from Halifax removed from their account?

 

The main reason I ask is that having the money from the charges back is nice but I can't live with another 6 years of not being able to get a mortgage or car loan etc. I need that default removed - and the only reason it is on there is because of Halifax's charges.

Photovoltage vs Halifax PLC

April 2007 - Halifax pay back all charges, court fees and interest but do not remove Default Notice from credit file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...