Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I remember a similar issue with a customer claiming that 'alexia' had ordered something that wasn't ordered and when it should have been off, .. with Amazon quoting evidence that they had that the customer had said a word 'similar' to the activation word - which 'accidentally' activated it .. followed by 'accidental' ordering due to interpreting what was said   I would not ever consider one of these things in my house.
    • is installing an Alexa type device in your home similar to having bug listening devices installed by Police or security services ?   Woman finds recordings collected by Amazon’s Alexa – and you can hear yours WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Amazon customers can request all their data from the shopping giant, and can automatically delete voice data in the Alexa app  
    • Yes please I think we would like to know all about it. Saying "I didn't foresee any problems so I didn't bother to…" As I say I didn't bother to look when I cross the road because I didn't think I would be run over
    • My WS as I intend to send it... any problems anyone can spot?         In the county court at Middlesbrough Claim No:  Between Vehicle Control Services Limited (Claimant) V   (Defendant) Witness Statement Introduction It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper of XXnn XXX   Locus standi/bye-laws and Relevant land Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 (PoFA) allows recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle. However, the first paragraph 1 (1) (a) states that it only applies “in respect of parking of the vehicle on relevant land:”. The definition of “relevant land” is given in paragraph 3 (1) where subsection (c) excludes “any land ... on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control”.  The bus stop is not on relevant land because the public road on which that stand is on is covered by the Road Traffic Act.  Notwithstanding that the claimant claims that " the claimant has given the Defendant its contractual licence to enter the site", the claimant has not given any contractual licence whatsoever. This is a road leading to/from the airport which is covered by the Road Traffic Act.  A list of highways on the Highways act 1980 does not even exist. The defendant brings the attention of the court that VCS is using this non existent document issue as a deliberate strategy to debunk the fact that this road is not relevant land. VCS are put to strict proof that it is relevant land not covered by the Road Traffic Act nor by Byelaws. While it is true that landowners can bring in their own terms, it is also true that whatever terms they bring  cannot overrule Byelaws and the Road Traffic Act. If Bye Laws are involved then the bus stop is not relevant land and neither is the specious argument about First Great Western Ltd. Is the claimant ignorant of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012? The road outside of Doncaster Sheffield Airport is not relevant land and is not covered by the Protection of Freedoms Act. That makes the charge against the claimant tantamount to fraud or extortion. The claimant mentions a couple occasions where they have won such cases. It is brought to the attention of the court that none of those cited cases were on airport land. VCS actually has also lost a lot more cases than they have won using their prohibitive signs.  Airport land is covered by Bye Laws and hence the claim by VCS is not applicable in this instance. The remit of VCS ends in the car park and does not extend to the bus stops on public roads or land which they have no jurisdiction over. All classes of people go to the airport. This includes travellers, taxis, fuel bowsers, airport staff, companies delivering food and drink for each aircraft, air traffic controllers and buses with passengers. It is therefore absolutely ridiculous to attribute VCS with any sort of permissions. The defendant submits that VCS should not confuse a major thoroughfare with a car park and presume to act as land owners and usurp the control of any land which is not relevant to them.   Protection of Freedoms Act The clearest point on section 4.1 of the Protection of Freedoms act is that “The provisions in Schedule 4 are intended to apply only on private land in England and Wales. Public highways are excluded as well as any parking places on public land which are either provided or controlled by a local authority (or other government body). Any land which already has statutory controls in relation to the parking of vehicles (such as byelaws applying to airports, ports and some railway station car parks) is also excluded.” Therefore, as this case pertains to an airport, the claimant unlawfully obtained the registered keeper’s details against the defendant’s vehicle. Thus, on this basis alone, the defendant implores the court to throw out this case. Notwithstanding the above point, if perchance Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 were to apply, the claimant is put to strict proof that they complied with the requirements of section 7 stating, “(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to driver for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met. The notice must — (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;” Without such proof the court must of necessity throw out this case forthwith.   Deceit, Intimidation and Extortion The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim include £50 legal costs, yet in the letter dated  03/06/2021, the Claimant stated that they were no longer represented by Elms Legal and all further correspondence should be sent to the VCS in-house litigation department. Why should the Claimant be asking the Defendant to contribute to their employee’s salary?  Furthermore, as per another letter dated 30th July 2021, the Claimant wrote, ‘Should you fail to accept our offer of settlement then we will proceed to Trial and bring this letter to the Court’s attention upon question of costs in order seek further costs of £220 incurred in having to instruct a local Solicitor to attend the hearing in conjunction with the amount claimed on the Claim Form.’ I find this an extraordinary statement given the Claimant knows legal costs are capped at £50 in Small Claims Court. I cannot think of any reason why the Claimant would write this letter other than to intimidate the opposing party with the threat of an extortionate sum of money, hoping they would be able to take advantage of someone not knowing the Small Claims Court rules. Given that this letter came from the Claimant’s in-house litigation department, clearly well-versed in the law, this cannot be anything but deceitful and disingenuous behaviour which the court should never tolerate.    Contractual costs / debt recovery charge  In addition to the £50 legal costs, the Claimant is seeking recovery of the original £100 parking charge plus an additional £60 which is described as ‘debt collection costs’. In the Vehicle Control Service v Claim Number: 18 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated, ‘Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones-Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates […] in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court in Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law. It is hereby declared […] the claim be struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.’  In Claim number F0DP806M and F0DP201T, Britannia v Crosby went further in a landmark judgement in November 2019 which followed several parking charge claims being struck out in the area overseen by His Honour Judge Iain Hamilton-Douglas Hughes GC, the Designated Civil Judge for Dorset, Hampshire, Isle of White & Wiltshire. District Judge Taylor echoed the earlier General Judgement or Orders of District Judge Grand stating, ‘It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedom Acts 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in ParkingEye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998…’ Vehicle Control Service v Claim Number: 19 51. Moreover, the addition of costs not specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.  It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).  The Defendant is of the view that the Claimant knew, or should have known, that to claim in excess of £100 for a parking charge on private lands is disallowed under the Civil Procedure Rules, the Beavis Case, the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 and Consumer Rights Act 2015, and that relief from sanctions should be refused.   Alleged contract The court should consider if there is any contract to start with and if the alleged offence is on relevant land. The consideration will inevitably lead the court to conclude that there is no contract.  Also the court should note that there is no valid contract that exists between VCS and Peel. Under the Companies Act, a contract should be signed by the directors of both companies and witnessed by two independent individuals. This alleged contract, which makes no mention of pursuing registered keepers of vehicles to court, makes its first appearance as a Witness Statement. Thus the alleged contract is null and void.  The Beavis case referred to by the claimant is about parking in a car park. The claimant is here attempting to equate that case to stopping, not parking, in a bus stop and on a road that is covered by the Road Traffic Act. The defendant submits that there can be no contract as there is no offer but there is only a prohibition. Again, it is not relevant land and VCS has absolutely no rights over it. Further, the defendant would like to point out that motorists NEVER accept any contract just by entering the land. First they must read it and understand it and then, and only then can they realise that "No stopping" is prohibitive and cannot offer a contract.   Bus stop signage The signs around the bus stop do not mention who issued the “No Stopping” signs so it could not have been issued by VCS since the IPC CoP states that their signs should include the IPC logo and that the creditor should be identified. Nothing on the signs around the bus stop that says “NO Stopping” mentions VCS or Peel Investments who are now purporting to be the land owners of a public road. As the signage should identify the creditor, since it does not, this is a breach of the CoP.   The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 does not prohibit stopping in a restricted bus stop or stand, it prohibits stopping in a clearway. The defendant would like to ask the court to consider if any clause of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 that the claimant alleges has been violated by the defendant. There is no mention of permits on the signage. If there were, would it mean that Permit holders were allowed to stop on “No Stopping” roads? Notwithstanding what the claimant calls it, the mentioned signage is NOT a contractual clause. A “No stopping” sign is not an offer of parking terms.  Since the signage around the bus stop is prohibitive, it is as such is incapable of forming a contract. Further, the defendant would like to point out that the prohibitive sign is not actually at the bus stop but a few metres before the stand itself. There is no mention of a £100 charge for breaching the “No stopping” request, or if there is one then it is far too small to read, even for a pedestrian. As already stated, a Witness Statement between VCS and Peel Investments is not a valid document. It will need more than the Claimants feather to outweigh the case against the Defendant regardless of who was driving. There is no law of agency involved. This is not a case of employer/employee relationship. VCS cannot transfer the driver's liability to the registered keeper. There can be no comparison between a railway station and an airport. This is a totally fatuous analogy which cannot be applied to this case.  As stated in the defence, it is denied the Claimant is entitled to the recovery or any recovery at all. The nefarious parking charge notice given for a vehicle on a public road bus stop was ill advised to start with.   Conclusions:   VCS has failed to present ANY reasonable and valid cause to apply to the DVLA for the Defendants details. VCS has failed to provide ANY valid  contract with the landowners. “No stopping” is prohibitive therefore cannot form a contract the event happened on a bus stop over which VCS has no jurisdiction the signage either does not show that there was a charge of £100 for stopping, or the font size was too small for any motorist to be able to read it  the signage does not show the Creditor which fails the IPC CoP and hence the signage is not valid the WS contract does not authorise VCS to pursue motorists to Court Given all these factors it seems that VCS have breached the GDPR of the Defendant quite substantially and it would appear right that an exemplary award is made against VCS in the hope that they will drop all further cases at Doncaster airport where they are pursuing motorists on non relevant land. The Defendant wishes to bring to the attention of the court that the Claimant cites an irrelevant case of a car park and tries to apply its merits to a bus stop. That in itself invalidates the entire fallacious claim. Accordingly, this case is totally without merit. Some statements are pretty close to perjury and others are designed to mislead or misdirect. None of the analogies seem appropriate or relevant. All the false information presented as a statement of truth could have been stated using half the words and without all the repetition which appears to be trying to build a strong case where there is none at all. One particularly bad example of misdirection is in the photographs. The Clearway sign shown near the bus stop is very unclear unlike the Clearway sign two photos before it which may well include terms and conditions. The one by the bus stop is totally different.   47. Lastly I wish to bring to the attention of the court, a systematic pattern of the Claimant’s court action behaviour in several of their cases. They tend to have a VCS paralegal writing a Witness Statement, then mentioning in the last paragraph of the Witness Statement that they may be unable to attend court and subsequently the paralegals never turn up to be cross examined. In the event that Mohammed Wali is unable to attend court to be asked about his claims, then I would like to know why he is not able to attend when the hearing has been scheduled months in advance, is during working hours and as a result of covid, is online, meaning there is no travel involved. Ambreen Arshad, the other paralegal employed by VCS, does exactly the same. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Im massivly over my over draft limit before action. Bank threaterning legal action!!!


bassplayer88
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5328 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

Its only my humble opinion but I think that you will probably have to make arrangements to make payments that you can afford. Also have you opened a parachute account and transferred your business over to that account. At least you will have control of your money. What stage of the process are you at?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have parachute account. All buisiness has been moved.

Havent sent any letters but have all my statements so dont need to send the data protection letter.

In terms of my od repayments they have only just rung me today, only mentioned legal action if I dont do anything. I said I would ring them back in the next week when I had an idea what was happening with my cash flow. Maybe I should offer a small payment monthly and begin proceedings?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not over my limit but I have an overdraft. I am in the same position as you and I have opened a parachute account. However I am at the AQ stage. This week a sent a formal letter of two lines or so formally informing my bank that my account was in dispute. I also sent a separate letter offering to repay a small amount off my overdraft each month. When I win my case I will have more than enough money to pay it off. I think that the two issues are separate but you do have a responsibility to pay what you owe even though the bank owes you money too. However if your acount is in dispute the banking code states that they cannot give your details to credit reference agencies. So really I have tried to give myself a little breathing space. Hope this helps

 

KARISH:smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bassplayer

 

At what stage is your account - is it still branch controlled?? Or in a bank collections department.

 

If still branch controlled **** them.

 

Protect your business - Move it

Enter a small repayment program - What you can afford - If you have a debt and offer to repay it no court will rule against you - provided you can prove it reasonable.

 

Start action and follow the guidelines carefully

 

I am an Ex-banker so know the system

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bassplayer88,

 

right I think I get the jist of your problem. Really good to hear you have a parachute account!!! This will help you either way you choose to go.

 

AJG's advise hear is sound and he is right if you can pay something you should, it will keep the wolves from the door and buy you time whilst you wait for your charges to be settled!!

 

I would advise you to spend some time looking at this excellent thread:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloydstsb-successes/26172-mindzai-lucid-lloyds-tsb.html?highlight=mindzai

 

It is long (no apologies tho) and will not only help because they, i believe, were in a similar situation to you but will give you some excellent pointers on the way. This includes some examples of the best letters I have ever read on the topic AND a truely excellent spreadsheet for detailing your charges and calculating interest (whatever rate you choose to go for).

 

Take my advice give yourself a full day to fully ingest the information and processes in that thread and on this site so that you are comfortable with the arguments.

 

Hope this helps and as ever if I had tip me a wink when I pass by or my scales.

 

Gooders

 

PS. Having thought about it a little more, I think there is an argument against AJG's advice. (sorry AJG mate, I stress it is only IMO)

 

Enter a small repayment program - What you can afford

 

If you write to the branch/department dealing with your situation under the heading DISPUTED DEBT and outline in the letter why you are disputing the debt ..... the unlawful charges they levied etc. You are covered under the banking code so that they cannot continue the default or pass on the information to CRAs. This again will buy you time. But will by no means SOLVE the problem.

 

As these accounts are in dispute, I have stopped all payments going in or out of them until the issue is resolved. Section 13.6 of the Banking Code clearly states that you may only pass details of my debts to the credit reference agencies if the debts are not in dispute. As previously stated, I have disputed these debts in writing
from Mindzai's thread

 

In relation to continued pressure after dispute passed

As you are aware, this would constitute a further breach of section 13.6 of the Banking Code.

 

13.6 of the Banking Code clearly states that:

 

We may give information to credit reference agencies about the personal debts you owe us if:

• you have fallen behind with your payments;

the amount owed is not in dispute; and

• you have not made proposals we are satisfied with for repaying your debt, following our formal demand.

 

Anyway mate, hope this gives you a few options. Will keep an eye on how you proceed but I cant recommend Mindzai's thread highly enough!!!!!

If I have helped tip my scales:)

 

I am not a legal eagle, professional accountant, [problem] artist or axe murder so please bear in mind that my advice is just that advice from someone in the same boat as you.......

Claims:

Lloyds TSB Acct 1 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d/Statements received/£2500ish to be claimed + contractual interest

Lloyds TSB Acct 2 - *WON* over £5K won with compond CI at 28.9%

Lloyds TSB PPI *WON* - CCA'd/They cant find agreement/£2650 awarded

Halifax TSB Closed account issues*WON* - £610 in compensation for an account closed with £10 in it!

Student Loans - 20 Feb 07 CCA'd/on back burner for now

 

Hmmm seems Im on the right end of winning, God that feels GOOD!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest louis wu

Just a word of caution.

 

Gooders advice is spot on, and the banking code qoute is correct, however, some banks have a proviso on their T&Cs which basically allows them to pass info whether there is a dispute or not

 

 

 

This is taken directly from the banking code standards board website

 

http://www.bankingcode.org.uk/pdfdoc...%20FINAL.p df

(pages 43 and 44)

 

The important bit for this thread is as follow

 

13.6 We may give information to credit reference agencies about the personal debts you owe us if:

• you have fallen behind with your payments;

• the amount owed is not in dispute; and

• you have not made proposals we are satisfied with for repaying your debt, following our formal demand.

 

13.7 In these cases, we will give you at least 28 days’ notice that we plan to give information about the debts you owe us to credit reference agencies. At the same time, we will explain to you the role of credit reference agencies and the effect the information they provide can have on your ability to

get credit.

 

It then goes on to say....

 

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sections 13.6 and 13.7 refer to the disclosure of default information, and when it can be relayed to credit reference agencies. For some time it has been common practice for banks and building societies to obtain the customer’s consent to such disclosures before borrowing is taken out, usually by way of a declaration on an application form.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

So, it may not stop a default being registered. Its not right, and I firmly beleive this can be challenged under the unfair terms in consumer contract regulations 1999. That doesn't solve the immediate problem.

 

 

Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but from personal experience, a bank defaulted me, even after I quoted 13.6 of the banking code in various letters to them.

 

Ultimately, you can add a clause in you POC later to have any default removed, but for now, you are at the mercy of the banks.

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

Louis,

 

Agreed but I still think Bassplayer should dispute the debt as a course of action anyway. It at least goes to show that there IS a dispute and if that THEN needs to be fought through the unfair terms in consumer contract regulations 1999 the so bet it.

 

The way I read this, its just as important to buy this guy some time. If the dispute fails then maybe AJGs advice of offering a token amount until he can pay it off in 1 go may well be the way forward!

 

Gooders

If I have helped tip my scales:)

 

I am not a legal eagle, professional accountant, [problem] artist or axe murder so please bear in mind that my advice is just that advice from someone in the same boat as you.......

Claims:

Lloyds TSB Acct 1 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d/Statements received/£2500ish to be claimed + contractual interest

Lloyds TSB Acct 2 - *WON* over £5K won with compond CI at 28.9%

Lloyds TSB PPI *WON* - CCA'd/They cant find agreement/£2650 awarded

Halifax TSB Closed account issues*WON* - £610 in compensation for an account closed with £10 in it!

Student Loans - 20 Feb 07 CCA'd/on back burner for now

 

Hmmm seems Im on the right end of winning, God that feels GOOD!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Alison82

Why don't you offer to pay them one pound a week say that is all you can afford and carry on with your claim in the meantime, if they default you add the reoval of this default in with your claim this is exactly what happedend to me 14 months ago and I got all of my money back and no default good luck!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest louis wu

Gooders, totally agree, just wanted to add a word of caution. If it was me (and it has been) I would/have done exactly as your post suggests.

 

With regards to Alisons post, again, is good advice, but I think they will default you no matter what, the default seems personal to them and they love giving them out.

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never walk away from debt you will regret it.

 

You hide behind what ever you want but it will catch up with you

 

Make a reasonable offer, one which you CAN afford, stick to it and then take them on.

 

I do not know the circumstances but Banks accept all reasonably offers, as if it does go to court they may end up with less.

 

This is sound advice from someone who used to work in Banks for many years

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest louis wu

Sorry AJG, but I have to disagree to one part of your post.

 

From personal experience, Abbey would not engage in a reasonable discussion, let alone entertain a reasonable offer. In fact, they made it clear that nothing less than a full agreement, by me, to a full payment within 28 days would result in default.

 

This is what we are up against, the old rules of compromise have gone as far as the banks are concerned, its either their way or the default way. Maybe I just had a bad experience, but if it happened to me, you can bet your life it is happening to others.

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

AJG

 

Noone is advocating hiding behind anything here and indeed he has mentioned

 

They are asking me to enter into a repayment agreement.

If my charges were repayed this would not be needed.

 

I understand and respect your position from working in the industry. However, he has ANOTHER option than the one you advise. it is OBVIOUS this debt is in dispute and by the sounds of it he has every right. My point is he needs to protect himself as much as possible by infoming his bank that he is disputing the debt, which as a consequence will give him more time to sort things out without being hounded! You will obviously be well aware what it says in the banking code about disputed debt.

 

Yes a small payment plan is an option but it has to be agreed and the banks version of what I can afford and mine might be different. The debt is acknowledged the reasons for the debt is being fought (charges)!!!

 

As an aside I find a comment like

You hide behind what ever you want but it will catch up with you
particularly pointed and not that helpful. Is it not better to present a rounded view of the options available rather than funnel someone into one particular way just because you, I or the next person would take that particular route or believes that to be the best way forward? give the options and let him make an educated decision

 

Or do old habbits die hard?

 

Again this is my personal view and in no way meant offend.

 

Gooders

If I have helped tip my scales:)

 

I am not a legal eagle, professional accountant, [problem] artist or axe murder so please bear in mind that my advice is just that advice from someone in the same boat as you.......

Claims:

Lloyds TSB Acct 1 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d/Statements received/£2500ish to be claimed + contractual interest

Lloyds TSB Acct 2 - *WON* over £5K won with compond CI at 28.9%

Lloyds TSB PPI *WON* - CCA'd/They cant find agreement/£2650 awarded

Halifax TSB Closed account issues*WON* - £610 in compensation for an account closed with £10 in it!

Student Loans - 20 Feb 07 CCA'd/on back burner for now

 

Hmmm seems Im on the right end of winning, God that feels GOOD!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair comment

 

However what is a default these days or a CCJ (Banks are collecting enough of them)

 

Does a default stop you from opening a bank a/c, getting a credit card, getting a loan, mortgage - The answer is no

 

If it goes to court then Judges would see a reasonable offer and rule on it

 

You are better to fact the debt than hide behind the Code of Banking Practice, after all the banks do not use it and break it every hour of every day

Link to post
Share on other sites

AJG

 

Om glad you are not taking offence as again none was went. "no matter what you say...." doesn't help with the discussion. I understand your point and AGAIN he is not hiding from the debt and by actively claiming what is rightfully his is facing things head on!!!

 

You will notice in my initial post I agreed with your point of aranging small payments but you HAVE to agree there are ther ways to fight this battle. the facts are the important part here, much more than peoples experiences .... whatever they may be. IMO a biased argument is flawed from the outset.

 

Gooders

If I have helped tip my scales:)

 

I am not a legal eagle, professional accountant, [problem] artist or axe murder so please bear in mind that my advice is just that advice from someone in the same boat as you.......

Claims:

Lloyds TSB Acct 1 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d/Statements received/£2500ish to be claimed + contractual interest

Lloyds TSB Acct 2 - *WON* over £5K won with compond CI at 28.9%

Lloyds TSB PPI *WON* - CCA'd/They cant find agreement/£2650 awarded

Halifax TSB Closed account issues*WON* - £610 in compensation for an account closed with £10 in it!

Student Loans - 20 Feb 07 CCA'd/on back burner for now

 

Hmmm seems Im on the right end of winning, God that feels GOOD!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gooders

 

Completely agree

 

However do either of us know the facts??

 

Other than someone is overdrawn, over there overdraft limit and the bank want there money back - we have all been there otherwise this site would not exist

 

You will note my 1st post on this thread asked for more info - so although a difference of some opinion exists - I feel until we know more facts it is hard to give a balanced view

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are better to fact the debt than hide behind the Code of Banking Practice, after all the banks do not use it and break it every hour of every day

 

In your own words....these are the guys we are supposed to trust :confused: and talk to in order to make a fair agreement on paying back a debt or do you cover yourself by going the official route (for what it is worth apparently) and dispute the debt?

 

I know what I would do......

 

By the way AJG, and not picking on you, you have told the Mods your an Ex-bank employees havent you?

If I have helped tip my scales:)

 

I am not a legal eagle, professional accountant, [problem] artist or axe murder so please bear in mind that my advice is just that advice from someone in the same boat as you.......

Claims:

Lloyds TSB Acct 1 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d/Statements received/£2500ish to be claimed + contractual interest

Lloyds TSB Acct 2 - *WON* over £5K won with compond CI at 28.9%

Lloyds TSB PPI *WON* - CCA'd/They cant find agreement/£2650 awarded

Halifax TSB Closed account issues*WON* - £610 in compensation for an account closed with £10 in it!

Student Loans - 20 Feb 07 CCA'd/on back burner for now

 

Hmmm seems Im on the right end of winning, God that feels GOOD!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. More facts are needed and I welcome the discussion. It just seems some of your comments are harsh, maybe for effect, but if this guy is in a hole, he needs as much balanced advice as possible IMO.

If I have helped tip my scales:)

 

I am not a legal eagle, professional accountant, [problem] artist or axe murder so please bear in mind that my advice is just that advice from someone in the same boat as you.......

Claims:

Lloyds TSB Acct 1 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d/Statements received/£2500ish to be claimed + contractual interest

Lloyds TSB Acct 2 - *WON* over £5K won with compond CI at 28.9%

Lloyds TSB PPI *WON* - CCA'd/They cant find agreement/£2650 awarded

Halifax TSB Closed account issues*WON* - £610 in compensation for an account closed with £10 in it!

Student Loans - 20 Feb 07 CCA'd/on back burner for now

 

Hmmm seems Im on the right end of winning, God that feels GOOD!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gooders

 

Should I have told the Mods??

 

All experiences in life are to share which ever side of the fence you are on

 

Some from being hounded by Banks and some from trying to recover funds whilst in employment

 

so both sides NEED to be considered for a balanced view

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ajg

Hi and yes there is a forum rule for all ex bank (and current ones) to declare their interest. Its not a problem I don't think as all members who contribute a positive view are welcome. There is a section in the main threads at the begining which is titiled "bank employee's"

 

Hope this helps

 

TC

LSTB (business) S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) received 10th Dec prelim + Contractual interest claim sent 10th Jan07 £5k + change

Received partial reduction mount of £5,563 against loan & overdraft of £18k i.e. 30% reduction. Next step PPI's & managed loans. Jan 07

 

LSTB (Girlfriend) prelim sent 10th Jan07 1st account £670

Received partial refund into account of £457 9th Feb, sent rejection letter. donated 5% 10th Feb

LSTB (Girlfriend) prelim sent 10th Jan 07 £1,450

HSBC S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 27th DEC (approx £3000)

Link to post
Share on other sites

AJG,

 

As the capitulator said, its not a problem just part of the terms and conditions you agreed to when you signed up for the site....

 

Surely like me when handed a sheet of T&Cs by someone like a bank or...even a web site you read them fully!!! Easily done isnt it?:razz:

 

Gooders

If I have helped tip my scales:)

 

I am not a legal eagle, professional accountant, [problem] artist or axe murder so please bear in mind that my advice is just that advice from someone in the same boat as you.......

Claims:

Lloyds TSB Acct 1 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d/Statements received/£2500ish to be claimed + contractual interest

Lloyds TSB Acct 2 - *WON* over £5K won with compond CI at 28.9%

Lloyds TSB PPI *WON* - CCA'd/They cant find agreement/£2650 awarded

Halifax TSB Closed account issues*WON* - £610 in compensation for an account closed with £10 in it!

Student Loans - 20 Feb 07 CCA'd/on back burner for now

 

Hmmm seems Im on the right end of winning, God that feels GOOD!

Link to post
Share on other sites

couldnt resist:razz:

If I have helped tip my scales:)

 

I am not a legal eagle, professional accountant, [problem] artist or axe murder so please bear in mind that my advice is just that advice from someone in the same boat as you.......

Claims:

Lloyds TSB Acct 1 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d/Statements received/£2500ish to be claimed + contractual interest

Lloyds TSB Acct 2 - *WON* over £5K won with compond CI at 28.9%

Lloyds TSB PPI *WON* - CCA'd/They cant find agreement/£2650 awarded

Halifax TSB Closed account issues*WON* - £610 in compensation for an account closed with £10 in it!

Student Loans - 20 Feb 07 CCA'd/on back burner for now

 

Hmmm seems Im on the right end of winning, God that feels GOOD!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...