Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim 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. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. 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.
  • 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

Barclays use devastating anti-charges claims tactic!!


BankFodder
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6230 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

It seems that they are now sending out some statements with the charges figures crossed out!!! :lol::D:lol::D:lol::D

 

Will their cunning and sophistication know no bounds? They have obviously got themselves a new and very hotshot lawyer to have thought this one up.

 

 

Have you ever seen a judge laugh himself to death? We will let you know when the DPA claim is listed

Link to post
Share on other sites

What planet do these people come from?

 

I am picturing an office staffed entirely with little people who all look the same as the aliens in the old Cadburys Smash adverts.

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I think that is the way they look at us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking....well actually, not really! Thanks for sharing BF :)

Crash

 

 

 

 

DAY 1: 12/09 - S A R to British Gas

DAY 45: 27/10 - Data Non-Compliance sent off

DAY 67: 18/11 - N1 Deemed served

DAY 114: 03/01 - Judgment served £60 cheque rec'd; Prelim sent for overpayment refund of £393.06

24 Days: E2Save Settled in full £70

59 Days: Barclaycard claim Settled in full £134.39

162 Days: Halifax Settled in full £1543.80

179 Days: Barclays1 Settled in full £2450.45 + £447.02 in costs

254 Days: Barclays 2 Settled in full £1450.91

 

Advice & opinions offered are personal, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

..... Perhaps we should start sending our SAR requests with a cheque with the £10 figure crossed out ?! ! ;)

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard people allude that banks were sending out info incomplete with charges missing, i never though banks would be that stupid>

 

Oh how wrong i was.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what that means Book but if is true then surely the Information Commissioner will come down on Barclays like a ton of bricks and drag their sorry ass through the courts.

 

As to the implications of this will be we can only wait and hope.

 

Serves them right!

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont know about SoLA but good possiblilty of failings in Freedom of Information act Section 4:

4. Information that has been deleted or amended

4.1 The right of access applies to information held by LJMU at the time the request was received. Information must not be deleted or amended after the request has been received in order to avoid complying with the FoI request. Altering, defacing, blocking, erasing, destroying or concealing information in these circumstances may constitute a criminal offence and an individual committing the offence may be held personally responsible.

 

 

Freedom of Information (FOI)

.

http://www.findmadeleine.com/

http://news.sky.com/skynews/madeleine

 

If I dont reply to a direct question please feel free to PM me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets just hope that the people that Barclays have sent these statements to report them to the authorities.

 

How can a Bank as big as Barcalys be so dumb?

 

A few years ago maybe it might not have been looked at in an unfavourable light but bearing in mind the current high profile of these issues what must they have been thinking when theys ent these out?

 

I can almost hear the floodgates beginning to open.

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont know about SoLA but good possiblilty of failings in Freedom of Information act Section 4:

 

 

 

Freedom of Information (FOI)

[/size][/indent]

 

Just looked up the actual act, and sorry, but it appears it only applies to Public Authorities, Government bodies and institutions such as colleges, hospitals etc.

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure the DPA says they can blank out the information if it's a Trade Secret.

 

Is it any secret that they charge £30? :lol:

  • Barclays: WON!!! It took four months but was totally worth it!
  • Cabot: I'm still waiting for an enforcable agreement, more than a year after requesting it. Go on, Uncle Ken, take me to court if you dare. You know you want to!
  • Elephant.co.uk: VICTORY - they admitted there was no debt!
  • Ashbourne Management (gym membership): Finally got my default removed and out-of-court settlement; I'm not finished with them yet!

<--- If I've been helpful please remember the scales ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

lol.. can't be though as it's in the terms and conditions.. although yhou may get some historical ones wrong but surely they would just correct them in court if they disagreed? Or would they try to use to strike out?

 

Glad i got all i need from them.. Barclaycard however is a different matter.... eeek

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they refuse to disclose the information, would it be unreasonable to "assume" that all the charges are at the current rate (£30)?

 

Many of mine were as low as £20 six years ago, bless 'em!

  • Barclays: WON!!! It took four months but was totally worth it!
  • Cabot: I'm still waiting for an enforcable agreement, more than a year after requesting it. Go on, Uncle Ken, take me to court if you dare. You know you want to!
  • Elephant.co.uk: VICTORY - they admitted there was no debt!
  • Ashbourne Management (gym membership): Finally got my default removed and out-of-court settlement; I'm not finished with them yet!

<--- If I've been helpful please remember the scales ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, not really thought this one all the way through, but my thinking on SOLA was along the lines that if the charges are deliberately concealed (and obviously they are if crossed out) then the 6 yrs no longer apply. Whether the fact that they are concealed on less than 6 yrs could be used as an argument to go on the attack for charges older than 6 yrs, I'm not sure... But why not? Concealment is concealment...

 

Just threw that idea in the pot, feel free to tear to shreds and demolish if it doesn't stand up... That's how we'll defeat them in the end, by working out the best ways to go after them.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

i think their concealment comes under the heading of 'fraud', I'm pretty sure there is no specific section in the DPA that covers this with the exception that they have in effect failed to comply with relevant sub-sections of Sec 7 and are therefore guilty of an offence

 

it would also seem to me to open the doors for claims for damages even wider if they have deliberately concealed data.

 

I think the concealment under the SOL is a non starter in this context, they never concealed the charges per se, only the lawfulness of them, and concealing the fact that charges have been levied later would only be relevant in the context of SOL if in fact they never told the claimant in the first place IMHO.

 

So the fact (in my claims at least) that they put the charges in writing at the time and in their terms and conditions, would negate the later concealment i think in the context of S.32 SOL and the crossing out of the charges in the data supplied. Edted

 

As i said earlier people have often said 'i am sure i had charges but they don't show on the info provided' and i never believed they would go to the bother of concealing their data. But this confirms some banks have, i also have confirmation that other banks have mislead their customers re data retention in writing too.

 

all in all I'm starting to think that they are stirring up loads of crap for themselves, i am glad i joined this site, even more now i can see their house of cards starting to crumble around their ears.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...