Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks again. Corrections made. Shall I submit now?   The Defendant contends that the particulars of this claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol). The Claimant Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   1. It is denied that details of the tuition fees have been delivered to me. It is denied I entered into any form of credit agreement with Goldsmith’s University.   2. It is denied any sums are outstanding or due.   3. Further on 28th September 2021 I issued a CPR 31.14 Request to Brachers LLP Solicitors requesting the signed Contract or Agreement and any General Terms and Conditions relied upon for this claim. The CPR 31.14 request was delivered on 1st October 2021 by Royal Mail Signed for postal service tracking number GQ-redacted-GB   To date I have not received a reply to this nor have I received any documentation evidencing the validity of the claim from Brachers LLP or any other party.   On the basis that STA and Brachers LLP acting on behalf of Goldsmith’s University have not produced a signed agreement or contract as evidence that I owe this amount I dispute the claim in full.   4. It is denied the claimant is entitled to claim interest pursuant to sec69 of the County Court Act 1984. It is denied that there is any debt outstanding or due.   5. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.   Notwithstanding the above the claimant is invited to disclose all relevant documents in connection to its claim and on which its claim is based. Pursuant to CPR 16 and PD 16 any claim for monies based on a contract/agreement must be disclosed and the original signed contract /agreement are available for any hearing.  
    • they are not the claimant!! delete:  Claimant Michael Ronald Oatham of   5. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.   red bit is for ref only not to be filed   dx  
    • Hi sorry for lack of replies/updates. I’ve been on holiday since 5/10 and only due back home tomorrow 26/10. I didn’t send the snotty letter before I went on holiday, I’m guessing it’s too late to do when I get back? If so what are my options now? apologies once again for not following advice given  
    • I've noticed a pattern with these supermarket cases where the supermarket fobs off the first complaint.  It's only motorists who follow up that get anywhere.   So I suggest you get nasty now.  E-mail them again.  No way is your father going to waste his time with a kangaroo court appeals procedure where the fleecers investigate themselves.  Lidl are the organ grinder.  About time they faced up to their responsibilities as they invited these vermin to infest their car parks.  Your dad refuses to pay.  When court action ensues he will add Lidl as a third party.  The local press will also be invited to court to publicise how Lidl treat a 91-year-old just doing his shopping accompanied by his wife who has Alzheimer's.  The same goes for the fact that Lidl and the fleecers are breaking the criminal law by pretending there is a 1-hour limit when the original planning permission stated otherwise.*  Plus their breach of equality law.  All this unpleasantness could easily be avoided by Lidl calling their dogs off.  Etc.   Now you still might not get anywhere since, as already scribbled, Lidl recently seem to have had a change of policy, but worth a go.   *This is a bluff as you don't know for sure, but it is highly, highly unlikely that the original planning permission for a supermarket only allowed one-hour free parking.  When you get time look up what the original PP was on your local council's portal.  EDIT  I was just about to post this when the cavalry arrived in the form of LFI.  So confirmation that Lidl/the fleecers have defied PP and just made up their own limit.  So, not a bluff at all.  Still look up the original PP though, I bet it was longer than 90 minutes.   Even if the above doesn't work, simply don't pay.  As BN says, if this ever got to court the judge would kick it out in about a quarter of a second on the grace period alone.
    • I think it was/is a fairly unprofessional outfit, so every chance he was a sole trader before registering a company, if he even declared himself as self-employed.   In the text messages he suggested my son was also self employed and that he as a boss didn’t have to pay pension or holidays.    It did cross my mind that if that was the case, maybe my son should just invoice him?   (My son was a 17 year old labourer in his first job since leaving college so he would have been quite naive about the whole situation.)    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

PPI - Two quick questions!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5319 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. I'm new to this site but was impressed by everyone's expertise and general experience in the fields discussed. I am currently concerned by a PPI issue which, with all the current media interest in banking, has begun to concern me.

I took out an unsecured Halifax loan in August 2002 to help towards my Wedding costs. Due to the significance of the money in relation to the purpose for which it was to be used I asked whether taking out PPI would help the application process and subsequent acceptance. I was told it would and, having agreeing to this, was later granted the loan.

Is this allowed and do I have grounds to query the assistant's 'claim'?

Secondly, and more concerningly, approximately 6 weeks in to the loan we figured that we didn't really need the cover as we are both in good, fairly secure jobs. When reapproached to remove this we were told that we would have to reapply for the loan in order to cancel it.

Hearing about other forum members simply requesting to 'cancel' this cover made me wonder if the bank was being deliberately obstructive to prevent me from simply cancelling it, and creating more work than necessary. I was not told about this and the lengths I would have to go to to do this during the original application.

I am beginning to feel that this 'reapplication' situation was a bit of a fib. Can I also query this now?

When I rang the bank today (03/04) to query the amount of PPI I was currently paying each month they seemed deliberately vague saying that they couldn't tell me and that I would have to refer to my original paperwork. Very helpful!

This agreement is due to expire in October 2007 and I can't help but feel that I have been led to repay sigificantly more than I might otherwise have done, having tried to make such changes so early on.

 

Any advice or experiences from others gratefully received. Thanks and best wishes. K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI and welcome

 

This is really not my area of expertise (if indeed i have one!). However i would recommend that you have a read of this link. This is the PPI forum of the site. You will find answers to most of your questions and you can post in there in order to get answers to any questions you cant find answers to.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/ppi/

 

Have a good read of the threads....it really will give you a good insight into what others have gone through and therefre you will be more informed at to whether you have a case.

 

Good luck

All advice is based on my experiences. I am NOT qualified and as such cannot be held responsible for any mistakes. If in doubt...get professional help.

If you like what i have said then make me a star!!

Some helpful links

I have been successful in many cases..here are links to some

Housing Act and deposits: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?266260-Deposit-being-withheld.-Please-advise&highlight=

Against Natwest: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?278646-N-west-v-Mrsfoot-s-Son.-***WON_ALL-CHARGES-REFUNDED***&highlight=

Against Swift Advances: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?46576-Me-V-Swift&highlight=

Against B&Q: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?172878-Me-vs-B-amp-Q&highlight=

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...