Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Notice how Kev goes about his scam.  In Kahunaburger's case they left the car park well before the time shown on the ticket they had purchased.  But because Kev added on the time taken to look for a parking spot and queue to pay/try to get an internet signal he still sent them an invoice. So If you had left before the Justpark message, say at 3:55, Kev would still have managed to turn that into a stay of 4:06 and thus an overstay and an invoice. Unfortunately for Kev, judges have ruled against his reasoning.  Have a read of this famous case  http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html  
    • Its okay - It happens. And this is why DCAs  user every trick in the book to try and make you crack.  Now its time to come back.    Im not sure how to proceed if Im honest if they have issued a Letter Of Claim.  Only as You could complain to Oakbrook and they still proceed with Legal Proceedings, but I dont know if that would help or hinder the legal proceedings if they began down that avenue.  I know a FOS complaint wouldnt stop Legal Action and probably run along side it.  But I guess a judge would view a disputed balance with the original creditor as cause for concern whether the DCA's claim is valid?    A bit of a muddle.     
    • That is superb. To answer your question - Dear Mr Dhaliwal Change the sentence - As our disabilities were ignored and disregarded for the time taken I believe this is discrimination against us ... To - As our disabilities were ignored and disregarded for the time taken I believe this is discrimination against us contrary to the Equality Act 2010. Iceland have always been useless, not only in your case but in others, but I think if they realise they are breaking the law it will encourage them to act. I also think the letter is overlong and you could lose the paragraph - I cannot afford any unfair charges of this kind as I am severely struggling financially. I cannot work and am a carer for my disabled Son who also has a mental and mobility disability. I obviously do not have any disposable income and am in debt with my bills. So its an absolute impossibility for me to pay this incorrect charge - as the main points are made elsewhere.  
    • Hands up in the fact that i have probably F***** *P!!
    • Car Finance Awards celebrates best of the industryView 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

bgqs v Halifax


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6199 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

Okay, I issued my SAR and have recieved a list of charges (not statements) amounting to £336.00 :)

 

I was simply going to issue my Prelim letter but there is one problem. Halifax have not given me details of interest that has been charged and I want to claim contractual interest on this amount. Is this still possible ?

 

Can I apply a notional % of interest to my claim pre-court in lieu of the 8% statutory interest.

 

I have done a lot of reading on this but dont really understand the best method to take considering I have not been given information of interest deducted.

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am looking at it another way. Here are the figures:

 

If I claim Statutory Interest (When claim is filed in Small Claims), I will be entitled to 8% to be added to the claim figure.

 

Eg. £336 + £138.47 = £474.47

 

However, if I opt to apply for the contractual daily rate of 0.16p (18.9% AER) to the claim value of £338 and advise them of this in my Prelim Letter & LBA, then the figures work out to be as follows based on when the charges were deducted:

 

Eg. £336 + £484.58 = £820.58

 

I know it is questionable whether compound interest would be deemed satisfactory by a judge but if I could provide evidence of previous claims that were calculated using this method, then surely it would go in my favour.

 

???

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I best going for the contractual interest method ?? Anyone ? Sorry to push but I want to send my prelim letter tomorrow :)

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay contractual interest method being used....Total claim is:

 

I calculate that, as at today’s date, you have taken a total of £280.00. In addition, I also claim Contractual Interest (compounded) under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in our contract and as such, enclose a summary of charges and interest with this letter for your information.

As Halifax PLC has taken unlawful charges from my account, this constitutes unauthorised borrowing – thus, the rate of Contractual Interest used is the bank’s unauthorised borrowing rate.

The standard rate of unauthorised borrowing set by Halifax PLC is 29.8% EAR (see Halifax PLC Current Interest Rates), therefore this rate is added to the above amount and will continue to accrue (at a rate of 0.20p per day) until this claim is settled. I calculate the Contractual Interest element at £778.61 (to 16th March 2007).

The total amount claimed including contractual interest is £1,058.61.

 

Let the good times roll :)

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

LBA being posted Monday 26th March 2007.

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

N1 Being Sent Sat 7th April :D

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I have received an offer from Halifax in the order of £517.98. The amount of interest has been recalculated to £117.98 rather that the full amount of contractual interest claimed...

 

They have advised that if the offer is not acceptable, then they will enter their defence....are they bluffing ?

 

They have said they will refund the charges, an element of calculated interested and incurred court fees...however, this is some £660 short of my claim valued which included contractual interest...

 

Should I refuse their offer ?

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I have partially accepted the offer from the Halifax and requested to have a judgement in default made for the balance.

 

However, Halifax have now entered a defence and I have received an AQ to complete...

 

Should I go for the Contractual Interest balance ??? What is the chance of Halifax defending this one ?

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have partially accepted the offer from the Halifax and requested to have a judgement in default made for the balance.

 

However, Halifax have now entered a defence and I have received an AQ to complete...

 

Should I go for the Contractual Interest balance ??? What is the chance of Halifax defending this one ?

 

I need advice on this one asap...thanks

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have recently thrown a case out (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/11164-cank-halifax-9.html#post847697)

 

This guy was in the same position as you. He had won his claim, and was going after the CI.

HOW TO...DUMMIES GUIDE TO CAG...Read here

STEP BY STEP GUIDE...Read here

F&Q's... Read here

EVERYTHING YOU NEED THE A~Z GUIDE...Read here

 

Go to our Cag Toolbar Download page here

 

Please don't forget this site is run on DONATIONS If this site has helped in any way, then please give a little back. ;-)

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. All I know has come from this site. If you are unsure, please seek professional advice. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I did read this thread but his claim was pre-6 years so it may have failed on the limitations alone ?

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

As sea-sidelady rightly says canks case was lost, right enough to say it was over the 6 years also and it may have been any or both that swung it but it was lost which dosent give much encouragement.

Sorry i cant say YES/NO but that choice is yours based on what you have read within the forum and i must admit there isnt much there that would make me pursue the CI especially as it is the CI alone that you are chasing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-if-successes/18017-me-helifax.html have a read of this, if you are claiming CCI you should reject any offer to keep your claim intact, I see you have already accepted a partial offer and now it is really up to you if you continue for contractual alone, the link I have posted for you should help.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay decision made....I dont want to risk paying £100 for the allocation questionnaire and not being able to get the money recovered...I will tell the court that the claim is settled.

 

Thanks all...:D

Claims:

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.1) - Claim Issued 16/3/07 Await Defence to be Entered - Data Protection Act Non-Compliance - *WON

 

bgqs v Barclays (Claim No.2) - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges + s.68 Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

bgqs v Halifax - Prelim Letter Sent (Charges +C.I Interest) - 16/3/07 - *WON

 

*Paid Deposit on New House with my Winnings !

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...