Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please do although obviously I don’t know the facts from your side but at least I can tell you how much of a cut and paste job it is.
    • Please check back for a full reply tomorrow. However, it would help if you would introduce pergo spaces into a story full stop it's very long and especially for people with small screens it's very difficult to follow when it is so compacted.   I think this straight has become rather confused because of the third party account which we received at the outset. I think it will probably be helpful if you could repost your story but on a new thread and more openly spaced please.   Then we can start to have a closer look at it. However, as I've already suggested, I think there are two issues. The question of your liability in the accident and the problem of how you have been persuaded to take a rental car at such a high rate.    I would suggest that you hold off telephoneing anyone until we have had a closer look.before you do anything on the telephone. You have obviously had some very important conversations but you don't have any evidence of them. Although the other side may say that they have recorded them, you you may find it difficult to get hold of those recordings if in fact those recordings incriminate them in any way. for instance if they have promised you that you don't have to pay anything for the hire car, that would be an extremely useful conversation to have but you may find that it is difficult to get hold of.   please start a new thread it will be much easier to continue from there                                
    • When I sadly lost my job a while back, i reportd it immpediately to DWP as you are supposed to, but didnt realise at the time that the day I reported to them was the day before I was paid out for the last month. I was actually paid extra whem I left as it was cheaper than redundancy fort the business and at the time it was a good financial move (so I thought).   I was paid on Fri 26th Jan, they paid me out 2 months in one go. I reported to DWP on the 22nd of Han that I was made unemployed, had the letters and evidence. As they spun the story, because of their assesment dates and that, my first payment was on the 1st May and reassured that it works the other way around. That when work starts again, if I dont actually receive money from the company during the assesment period, there wont be an issue as it balances up.   Can I believe this or was it another spun story? I'm concerned that as I'll be paid monthly, (Starting on the 15th paid on the last day of the month), assment ends on the 22nd. Tha they'll take that money into consideration.   I'm just concerned due to the disparity it would cause between 4 odd months I endured with zero income because of how their system works and whatever they ahe in place to counter at this end of the claim.   Anywa, it's just awonder.   Cheers,   Ade    
    • Hi, OP sister here, im going to try and explaine in full details from start to present and see if you have any advice for me on what i can do. on 15/1/2021  at 16:25pm i was traveling along hazlebarrow cresent wich is on my estate at around 30mph, its a tight road with cars parked along the left hand side, as i proceeded through, a van ( which was parked on my left hand side, facing towards me) pulled out from the side of the road, he stopped the van wich resulted in the van being at an angled stationary position on the road. I breaked immediately but the ice and snow skidded my tyers, i skidded into the drivers side of his van, my car bounced off his van and sent my vehicle head first into the back of a parked car ( wich was originally parked at the back of the van before he set off from the side of the road. I will refer to the van driver as MR seddon. ( im going to attatch a street veiw picture and diagram wich will be more helpful in understanding how the accident accured ect) .  The owner of the parked car, which i will refer to as Mr simpson came out of his house. Myself, mr seddon and mr simpson exchanged details and took photos, then i left the scene as my first concern, understandably was to contact my midwife and the hospital. I live just round the corner from the scene of the accident so i slowly drove my car to my property. I contacted Go skippy the next day 16/1/21 and informed them of the accident and gave them all the details ect . by the following monday 18/1/21 i had a call from AX who said they was dealing with my claim as go skippy will not deal with it as i am third party insured. Over the next few days, i complied with their requests ( gave them a written statment of what happened, sent them pictures of the damage to my vehicle and mr seddons van ect). Then on the 19/1/21 AX contacted me again and asked if i need a curtesy vehicle, my first response was ' how much will that cost me?' Of which she replied ' nothing because your insurance covers the cost'. I agreed to the curtesy vehicle and the vehicle was delivered to me on the 20/1/21.  Over the coming weeks, AX and i had regular contact about my claim and updated me in regards to my own vehicle. At one point she said it could be deemed a 50/50 liability. an engineer had collectes my car, deemed in a total loss as the damage was more than 66% of its total value and written my car off . i had a call from a lady from AX and she said they have valued the car and i will be payed out £2200 . i asked when and she said ' we will send you a cheque out for £358 in the post, and the remaining balance will be payed out by Admirel but this may take a few weeks more' .  I didnt hear nothing for around 2 weeks so i comtacted AX again for an update, she told me that admirel are refusing liability and there now in dispute. Every time i contacted them they said the same thing ' admirel are refusing liability' i asked them why admirel consider themSelf not liable and she read from the notes ' mr seddon said he was driving along the road, the corsa ( my vehicle) was at high speed coming towards me , i beeped my horn and tried moving out of the way but i couldnt because of the ice and the snow and the corsa hit my van' . the lady at AX said the problem is that the damage to both our vehicles is consistant with both our stories and due to there being no witnesses, no cctv or dash cam footage- no one can prove who is at fault. I then questioned why i had been told i was being paid out £2200 and she said 'well we have to advice you the estimated value' of wich i replied 'no, there was no 'advice' - i was told it was a done deal i was getting paid £2200 and she told me i had a cheque arriving in the post!!!.  The lady then told me she had requested a ' none prejudice payment' from admirel and waiting for a response.   Shortly after this phone call, AX contacted me again and asked if i had the funds to repair my own vehicle or buy another one, ( im.assuming admirel refused to pay the ' none prejudice payment) I told them No i do not as i have a baby due and even if i did have the funds, why on earth would i fork out to repair my own vehicle when i wasnt at fault ?! . she said ok im going to pass this to managment and see what we can do .   I contacted AX again and asked for an update and expressed how unhappy i was with their service as i felt like they hadnt fought my corner, bowed down to admirel and then had the cheek to ask me to repair my own vehicle . again she said ' its still in dispute, admirel are not budging i have to pass this on to management. She then asked me for 3 months bank statements to 'prove' i dont have the funds to repair my vehicle myself. I thought this was ridiculous and stated that even if i had the funds, why would i repair my own vehicle when im.not at fault!? Obviously this has been on going since middle of january, pretty fed up. My brother come to this forum and you guys had mentioned the hire car rates may fall back on me. I contacted AX first thing this morning regarding this. I made it clear that they can collect the vehicle to stop the daily charges as i do not want to be in thousands of pounds worth of debt when i am a lone parent with a new born baby. and the lady told me ' we will try every avenue to recover the cost from Admirel for the hire car charges, if this means taking them to court, even if this is unsuccessful, considering you comply with your hire vehicle contract and you work with us with your claim ( which you have been doing) you will not be liable for this debt and if worst comes to worst and admirel will not pay, we will just wipe the debt off' . i made her repeat several times that i will not be liable for this debt and she said i have told you my name, and these calls are recordered and i am telling you that this debt will not be on you to pay . She then said that if i was to give AX the hire car back now, then it would jepordise everything. And she said ' we gave you that hire vehicle because we beleive your not at fault so you can keep using it as we know you need transport' I then questioned the need for bank statements again and she told me the reason they need bank statements is so if it goes to court - AX can justify why i needed the hire car for so long ( because i didnt have the funds to repair my vehicle or buy another one) and also so they can prove they have tried every root possible.    After the phonecall it got me thinking about how she said ' aslong as you comply with your hire car contract your not liable for any charges for the hire car' . will they find any fault with the contract just to try and lumber me with the debt? , as it seems pretty fishy how they would just ' wipe off' thousands of pounds if admirel refuse to pay.  And also, she said if i gave the hire car back it would jepodise the case . so when the lady rang me the other week asking if i had funds to repair or buy myself a new vehicle , if i had said yes, ill buy a car tomorrow and come collect the curtesy one. Then what? Wouldnt that ' jepodise' the case?    As you can imagaine, my heads spinning. Stressed and dont know what to do. I dont even care about a pay out , i just want to give the hire car back and be completely done with AX . but now im scared if i give the car back i will be lumbered with thousand of pounds worth of debt from the hire car charges.  Tomorow i am going to read thoroughly through the ' hire car contract' . i am going to give them another call and record them saying i am not liable for the debt. Any advice on how i can just give the hire car back to them without me being liable to pay the debt?  Thank you Gemma
    • Pubs in England report high demand bookings from the 12 April opening date for beer gardens. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies
  • Recommended Topics

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4344 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Righto, I'm just in the process of starting everything off with MBNA. Mr Pusters has got two accounts with them and threads will be created in due course when he has got his SAR and CCA info back from them. I on the other hand receieved my CCA through today... here it is.... PudstersMBNACCA1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 357
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right and finally this is the DPA close up.... I consider this is an application form and not an agreement as there are a number of prescribed terms missing......... PudstersMBNACCA3.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Right and finally this is the DPA close up.... I consider this is an application form and not an agreement as there are a number of prescribed terms missing......... PudstersMBNACCA3.jpg

 

 

Hmm Pudsters, sorry, just jumped on quick as I am at work! It does seem to me that this is unfortunately an executed agreement. We were sent an application form and nothing else and it actually says "Application Form" on it with no T&C's or anything. Yours seem fairly comprehensive.

 

How old is this account is you don't mind me asking?

  • Haha 1

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
Hmm Pudsters, sorry, just jumped on quick as I am at work! It does seem to me that this is unfortunately an executed agreement. We were sent an application form and nothing else and it actually says "Application Form" on it with no T&C's or anything. Yours seem fairly comprehensive.

 

How old is this account is you don't mind me asking?

May 2004 - so nearly 3 years old

Link to post
Share on other sites

Corn, aren't the prescribed terms missing such as apr etc? I know they are in the T&Cs on the back but it does say on the front of the form that they can change the type of card if they want to? just wondering...

Link to post
Share on other sites
May 2004 - so nearly 3 years old

 

OK, that explains how they seem to be able to produce. Ours (or rather husband's) is 11 years old.

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
Corn, aren't the prescribed terms missing such as apr etc? I know they are in the T&Cs on the back but it does say on the front of the form that they can change the type of card if they want to? just wondering...

 

I think (although others may disagree) that is is acceptable to have the apr on the back. I think the type of card would be to do with your credit scoring ie : they may give you a platinum rather than a gold, for example with a higher limit and a better rate. In our case, my husband apparently applied for a Gold card but was actually given a Platinum.

 

This is only the second time I have seen something resembling an executed agreement. Can I suggest you post it (or the link) onto the CCA thread. Also, have you asked M55, he's pretty good with these things.:)

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
I think (although others may disagree) that is is acceptable to have the apr on the back. I think the type of card would be to do with your credit scoring ie : they may give you a platinum rather than a gold, for example with a higher limit and a better rate. In our case, my husband apparently applied for a Gold card but was actually given a Platinum.

 

This is only the second time I have seen something resembling an executed agreement. Can I suggest you post it (or the link) onto the CCA thread. Also, have you asked M55, he's pretty good with these things.:)

Yeah I am talking to M55 and Lantana atm on the MBNA thread. Mr Pudsters are also quite recent. Or at least one of them is so as soon as I get anything through will post them on here for everyone to see. Lantana seems to think that this is missing prescribed terms and M55 thinks that some of it is okay... so will wait and see, my battle with MBNA is far from over though! Lol... I will subscribe to your MBNA thread, I probs am already... I have got a new MBNA application form and they have definately changed their tactics though, a lot more information is actually contained in the agreement now,... which makes me think there must have been something wrong with the old ones for them to change it! 8) Just my opinion though...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Yes the agreement is based on the earlier 1983 regs the curent one wil lhave the extra sections in it due to the 1482 ammendments, It may also be a distance agreement which means it will have additional section one info in the key information I notice that there is a sig in the creditors box marked reps name so presumablythis wasn't a distance agement.

 

 

Regards

Peter?

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

Yes the agreement is based on the earlier 1983 regs the curent one wil lhave the extra sections in it due to the 1482 ammendments, It may also be a distance agreement which means it will have additional section one info in the key information I notice that there is a sig in the creditors box marked reps name so presumablythis wasn't a distance agement.

 

 

Regards

Peter?

Hi Peter, this was signed at my local rugby ground, do you think this has the prescribed terms missing? I thought it had to mention the apr, payment term etc in the actual agreement?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

This document is obviously an application form but it is somewhat different to some others I have seen because

it does have all the prescribed terms on the reverse.

 

However, it does not contain all the other required terms and statutory statements so at best it can only be described as an 'improperly executed' agreement and so enforceable on an order of the court only.

 

I have been trying to find a statement that all the prescribed terms MUST be on the front of the document and not just shown on the reverse, but haven't found anything definitive.

 

However I have found this section of the OFT doc on cancellable agreements which I think (in a round about way) gives the answer:

 

Statements of customer’s protection and remedies

 

Statements about the main rights of customers provided by the Act must be included in the agreement in the form set out in Appendix 1. The statements about termination and

repossession of goods, in the case of hire-purchase or conditional sale agreements, must be shown together as a whole with the financial and related particulars described on

pages 9–12 and not interspersed with any other information. (See statement 4 in Appendix 1.) Alternatively these statements can be shown elsewhere (for example, on

the reverse of the agreement) as long as a reference to them is included with the financial and related particulars.

 

This means that if these statements are on the reverse, then your attention to them must be drawn (grammer?) on the front - and included with the 'financial and related particulars', so these 'particulars' would HAVE to be on the front also!

 

IMO this is an unenforceable document, whether it is deemed to be an 'agreement' or not.

 

I would send the same '2nd chance' letter to the creditor as I advised on the Credit Agreement thread.

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Hey guys, Mr Pudsters has got two MBNA alleged accounts... got sum strange letters from MBNA the other day, neva been sent them before... quite contradictory. One says that they are going to write off his account to bad debt and the other says he must make a payment straight away otherwise full balance is due... i'm confused... don't know what they are up to... cheers... can scan and post them if needed. They provided application forms one identical to the one above and one almost identical... have been disputing the CCA since.

 

Pudsters14

x x x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree that this is an application form (so is a pre-contractual document).

 

Obviously MBNA don't have a clue what they are doing with these account. Are the letters from seperate departments? The letter asking for payment is more likely to be a computer generated response.

  • Haha 1

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh I recieved a letter last week asking me to call them and sort out an arrangement at lower payment... WTF!?!?!?

 

I think Ill scan and post all the letters recieved in a new thread...

  • Haha 1

Barclays :- Settled March 07:o

 

RBS:- Acct Discharged May 07 :o (chase for more and CRA deletion???):confused:

Barclaycard: - CCA recieved 24/1/07. WOW! :o (GITS!!!) :-|

Link to post
Share on other sites

MBNA are in a real mess. I got a letter on Saturday saying thank you for advising them of my financial difficulties (I didn't as their agreement is unenforceable, so I've just told them I won't be paying). It thanks me for making token payments (I haven't) but says they need a small increase to avoid further action. It says they cannot continue to suppress interest and fees if I don't increase payments (funny that, as they are still applying interest and fees) and says they really want to help me but I must ring them (don't think so).

 

They obviously don't know what they are doing at the moment.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the first page is says 'I understand this is an application for a credit card'????

  • Haha 1

Abbey - *SETTLED IN FULL!* ;)

-£445 refunded after one phonecall

HERE

 

Lloyds - Reclaiming Charges ***WON!***

-09/05/07 - Prelim delivered

-22/05/07 - LBA sent - no response

-11/07/07 - Filed at court

- 26/07/07 - Full settlement offer!!!! Donation made ;)

HERE

 

Next - Trying to Sue us with no agreement! :lol:

-29/06/07 - Defence filed

-16/08/07 - AQ filed

-19/09/07 - Claim struck out!! :p

HERE and continued HERE

 

PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES IF I'VE HELPED!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed that as well monopoly, it also has date of application on it.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Ompletely dissagree with Pam

Nothing unusual ther then

This is an agreement

Is it enforceable Yes as long has it has been signed

all the prescribed erms are ther although not in the right place,unfortunatlythe positioning of these is not a prescribed term.

You could say it was enforceable by court order only.

The only possibillity of making it unenforceable is the cancellation rightes diid you recieve ae after the agreement was executed if not you could go for unenforceability under section127(4).

IMO

 

Peter

  • Haha 1

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Peter, I've never seen the cancellation rights as far as I'm aware, not sure at all. I thought that all the prescribed terms had to be in the signature doc? I'm very new to all this and as far as i was aware the document abv is precontractual and it doesn't draw my attention to the financial particulars. I just don't understand these letters i'm receiving either now, i'll try and post them on 2mrw for you to see.

 

Hi Rory, They are from exactly the same dept but are from two different ppl. They really haven't got a clue.

 

Thanx everyone else for your comms, need all the help i can get atm! lol.

 

Pudsters14

x x x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI

Yes the regulations do state that the terms have to be together in one block.

However the possitioning of the prescribed terms is not in itself a prescribed term, and cannot therfor be used under 127 to make it unenforceable.

 

REgards

petr

 

Regards

Petr

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya Peter, i'm not disagreeing with you but trying to get my head around it all.

 

If the prescribed terms are not in the signature doc, don't they have to print a statement in the financial & related particulars to draw your attention to the prescribed terms? that is how i understood it and have been advised before. The terms and conditions on the back are purely that, terms and conditions... surely the prescribed terms have to be included in the application or 'agreement' itself... they are not meant to spread them into the other T+Cs coz isn't that confusing/unfair? It kind of defeats the object of having prescribed terms coz they could print an essay and expect you to have read all of it?!?

 

Also as you stated b4, if it is only enforcable with a court order because it is improperly executed... what does that mean for me?

 

As i said peter i'm not trying to disagree and am literally bouncing ideas off you because im not really sure who else to ask...

 

Thanx for all ur advice and comms it is much appreciated...

 

Pudsters14

x x x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barclays :- Settled March 07:o

 

RBS:- Acct Discharged May 07 :o (chase for more and CRA deletion???):confused:

Barclaycard: - CCA recieved 24/1/07. WOW! :o (GITS!!!) :-|

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hiya Peter, i'm not disagreeing with you but trying to get my head around it all.

 

If the prescribed terms are not in the signature doc, don't they have to print a statement in the financial & related particulars to draw your attention to the prescribed terms? that is how i understood it and have been advised before. The terms and conditions on the back are purely that, terms and conditions... surely the prescribed terms have to be included in the application or 'agreement' itself... they are not meant to spread them into the other T+Cs coz isn't that confusing/unfair? It kind of defeats the object of having prescribed terms coz they could print an essay and expect you to have read all of it?!?

 

Also as you stated b4, if it is only enforcable with a court order because it is improperly executed... what does that mean for me?

 

As i said peter i'm not trying to disagree and am literally bouncing ideas off you because im not really sure who else to ask...

 

Thanx for all ur advice and comms it is much appreciated...

 

Pudsters14

x x x x x x

HI

Don't worry about dissagreeing i could be wrong and if nobody pointed it out i would carry on in a fools parridise.We are all friends here.

 

The prescribed terms are placed at various points in the agreement and have their own heading (usually like payments or credit limit.etc)

They should however be in one block and on the same page of the signature block. In post 2004 agreements they should be contained within the Key finantial information block.

Any other information about t and cs can be refered to in the text.

Yes the Prescribed terms do have to be with the signature doc and should be in the same block as the signature. The regs just say

"section 61(1)(a) of the Act, containing all the prescribed terms of the regulated agreement,

and of the information contained in that document for the purpose of conforming to these

Regulations shall—

(a) apart from any signature, be easily legible and, where applicable, be of a colour

which is readily distinguishable from the background medium upon which the

information is displayed; and

(b) apart from that inserted in handwriting, be of equal prominence, except that

headings, trade names and names of parties to the agreement may be afforded more.

 

The actual placing of the individual terms set in Scedule 1 of the regulations.

 

Not sure whether that answers your question or not.

In short the prescribed terms should be readilly legible and contained within the same document you sign, reference to another document that is with the agreement would be aginst the form requirements of the cca but would IMO not render it unenforceable, reference to anther form that is not with the agreement would render it unenforceable.Clear as mud

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 11 months later...

Hi guys, quick update for everyone.

 

Carried on battling with MBNA with many letters going back and forth.

 

They have now passed it over to Link Financial, with whom I queried this immediately, the broke data protection by discussing an alleged account my husband has but did however agree to put a hold on the alleged account as I explained it was in legal dispute.

 

Today however I have received court docs from Northampton bulk processing centre and need some advice.

 

I haven't CCA'd link yet, it this an option? I would also like to complain about the data protection act breach... The balance they are quoting is probably made up of heavy charges too? but as Im not acknowledging the debt how does this work?

 

I know I need to send my acknowledgement of service and then file a defence? could anyone help me with this as I'm a bit lost!

 

In short I need help! and asap... if anyone feels that they can give me some advice please post asap. Im in my final year at uni and this is the last thing I need at the moment....lol....

 

Thanks

 

Pudst.

xxxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...