Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That's fine - I'm quite happy to attend court if necessary. The question was phrased in such a way that had I declined the 'consideration on the papers' option, I would have had to explain why I didn't think such consideration was appropriate, and since P2G appear to be relying on a single (arguably flawed) issue, I thought it might result in a speedier determination.
    • it was ordered in the retailers store  but your theory isnt relevant anyway, even if it fitted the case... the furniture is unfit for purpose within 30 days so consumer rights act overwrites any need to use 14 days contract law you refer too. dx  
    • Summary of the day from the Times. I wasn't watching for a couple of interesting bits like catching herself out with her own email. Post Office inquiry: Paula Vennells caught out by her own email — watch live ARCHIVE.PH archived 23 May 2024 11:57:02 UTC  
    • Frankly I think you should go to a hearing unless you feel especially nervous . If you have any worries then you should follow our link to find out about a county court familiarisation visit     You shouldn't forget that county Court judgements are very helpful but they are not binding. They are only persuasive.  It is difficult to see you losing but it might be better to be there in order to counter any arguments from the other side
    • OK - I have rejected mediation and said I wish to proceed to a court hearing. I said 'Yes' to : Do you consider that this claim is suitable for determination without a hearing, i.e. by a judge reading and considering the case papers, witness statements and other documents filed by the parties, making a decision, and giving a note of reasons for that decision? since they appear to be relying solely on my failure to purchase their additional 'parcel protection coverage/insurance' which my submission of the PENCHEV and SMIRNOVS transcripts should kick firmly into touch.    
  • 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

zubo vs LLoyds TSB (Credit Card)


zubo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6282 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 All

 

Bit late posting this.

 

Sent covering letter placing 2 accounts in dispute because of unlawful penalties and requesting info for me to investigate before I resume payments.

Sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) with 2x£10, Sent CCA S77-79 request with 2x£1 (see seperate thread if you are interested or pm me).

 

9 days later silence...:grin:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

mmm,

 

did I say silence....

 

I wish!!

 

I now get on average 4 calls perday chasing me to deal with this and since I will not divulge personal details over the phone (because of potential ID theft) then this really annoys them.

 

I wrote last weekend pointing out that they had not responded to either my SAR nor my CCA request, and that the number of calls amount to harrassment and I would report them. Nothing.

 

Friday from 19:15-19:22 I received 5 calls - 3 on the landline and 2 on my mobile. I will not discuss with them over the phone so I will invoke the law of the land re harrassment with an LBA and then an N1.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, this goes off on Monday:

 

I am writing to you in relation to my recorded letter of the 4th March stating that you were committing an offence of harassment and requesting that you cease and desist.

Despite this letter I am continuing to receive daily 4-5 phone calls from your call centres chasing payment on my accounts despite that I have made it clear to you that I require from you full compliance with Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Data Protection Act 1998. To date I have received absolutely no response to these requests. This harassment has now escalated to the point that on Friday 9th March 2007, your call centre called me on 5 separate occasions from 19:15 to 19:22 using two different phone numbers.

There can be no other interpretation of this except that it is completely excessive and is harassment and as my previous letter points out is unlawful.

Allow me to be very specific:

Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act:

(1) A person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under a contract he-

(a) harasses the other with demands for payment which, in respect of their frequency, or the manner or occasion of making any such demand,

(2) A person may be guilty of an offence by virtue of sub-section (1) (a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such actions as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.”

Furthermore your attention is drawn to:

Both the Office of Fair Trading and trade associations (run by the credit industry) have produced guidance on what activities may be considered harassment and should therefore be avoided by creditors. The following list is taken from the new Debt Collection Guidance for holders of consumer credit licences.

Creditors are warned by the Office of Fair Trading under the Debt Collection Guidance that the following practices are "considered unfair":

“PUTTING PRESSURE ON DEBTORS OR THIRD PARTIES IS CONSIDERED TO BE OPPRESSIVE.”

This includes:

• Contacting you too frequently

I have made it quite clear that you are in breach and have committed a number of offences.

You are instructed with immediate effect to cease and desist and notify me in writing that you have done so.

Failure to do so would leave me no alternative but to pursue remedy through the courts including compensation for the harassment. In addition I will be lodging a complaint with the TSO with a view to seeking prosecution by the TSO and subsequent to a successful prosecution I would be asking the appropriate licensing authorities to review your license since the prosecution is likely to provide evidence that LLoydsTSB as a creditor is no longer a ‘fit and proper person’ to hold a consumer credit licence.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zubo,

 

with regard to your last letter,

 

Just wondered if you ought to add that you are happy for them to contact you in writing?

 

I know you probably mentioned it in your last letter, but it may look better if you are seen to be offering an alternative line of communication?

 

I too have been plagued with calls from Lloyds with regard to overdraft and loan arrears - i know how annoying this gets, and although i can cope with them, my wife gets very worried about it.:mad:

 

Shoot me down in flames if you like, but see what you think!

 

Pondfish :)

LloydsTSB - Current Account claim £5,554 settled unconditionally 25.4.2007 :D

If the Pondfish has helped click his scales! ;-)

 

Please donate to this site if you can! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zubo,

 

with regard to your last letter,

 

Just wondered if you ought to add that you are happy for them to contact you in writing?

 

I know you probably mentioned it in your last letter, but it may look better if you are seen to be offering an alternative line of communication?

 

I too have been plagued with calls from Lloyds with regard to overdraft and loan arrears - i know how annoying this gets, and although i can cope with them, my wife gets very worried about it.:mad:

 

Shoot me down in flames if you like, but see what you think!

 

Pondfish :)

 

Pondfish

 

The short answer is yes, you need to be seen to be reasonable, but you have not seen the background this is based upon - so here there is nothing to discuss - I have made my position clear.

Allow me to summarise:

Written to them saying I think they have been unlawful, accounts are in dispute, formal requests for both SAR and CCA on both accounts.

No response.

just calls - pay your dues... attempting to ask where replies to my letters get nothing, so now ignoring call centre people.

My first letter - dont call me - reply to my letters - no reply.

calls continue

This letter and all their calls will be timed and a record made.

 

So you see ... nothing to discuss in writing...

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Zubo,

 

No worries, just thought i'd throw in my 2 penny's worth, but looks like you have it all covered.

 

I don't doubt any of what you are saying with regard to Lloyds!

 

Good luck, hope the letter sorts things out for you.

 

I turned to the CCCS for help in the end, and that seemed to do the trick!

No phone calls for weeks now, and i'm only paying a token £1 per month towards the debts! :D I got the interest stopped as well. :D :D

 

If you are interested i can post some details.

 

Pondy

LloydsTSB - Current Account claim £5,554 settled unconditionally 25.4.2007 :D

If the Pondfish has helped click his scales! ;-)

 

Please donate to this site if you can! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Zubo,

 

No worries, just thought i'd throw in my 2 penny's worth, but looks like you have it all covered.

 

I don't doubt any of what you are saying with regard to Lloyds!

 

Good luck, hope the letter sorts things out for you.

 

I turned to the CCCS for help in the end, and that seemed to do the trick!

No phone calls for weeks now, and i'm only paying a token £1 per month towards the debts! :D I got the interest stopped as well. :D :D

 

If you are interested i can post some details.

 

Pondy

 

thanks Pondy

 

Support on the site is quite remarkable!!

 

I'll see how my main strategy pans out, but I'll keep you in mind re CCCS if all else fails....

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I almost missed their SAR response.

Basically a letter from Vicky saying that their charges are fair and my request for SAR is being sent to the department concerned - but no mention of the CCA request.

Thats just dandy... I am sending them a default notice on both accounts since 12+ days have expired.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zub

 

interesting

 

I sent Lloyds a credit card s78 request and have received a bundle of info about the account (similar to a sar, but also containg details of card issues dates, account numbers, credit limits)

 

But no actual CCA, so the fun continues!

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...