Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Ok thanks for that, well spotted and all duly noted. Yes they did eventually submit those docs to me after a second letter advising them I was contacting the ICO to make a formal complaint for failing to comply with an earlier SAR that they brushed off as an "administrative error" or something. When I sent the letter telling them I was in contact with the information commissioner to lodge the complaint, the original PCN etc quickly followed along with their excuse!
    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
  • 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

Smiley Scouser 27 v barclays


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6107 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

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Got a letter back within a week, basically saying 'We've got your letter but we won't be getting back to you within 14 days'.

Anyway, the 14 days have gone by, they haven't got back to me so I have sent them a letter before action.

I await their reply by 14th June.

Smiley Scouser v Egg : WON!!!!!:D

Smiley Scouser v Natwest : WON!!!! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Oh Dear. Silly Barclays I got a letter from the court today saying that they've entered a defence regarding my claim of non compliance with the Dpa. They want proof!!! Where do I start? My letter from the ICO? Unbelievable, I have all the proof, they are not scaring me.

Smiley Scouser v Egg : WON!!!!!:D

Smiley Scouser v Natwest : WON!!!! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

UNBELIEVABLE!!!!! I received a letter today from Barclays addressed to a different name than myself, I opened the letter and it said "We are investigating a complaint that you made to The Information Commisioner about us but we cannot trace you by your account number or address, please give us more information".

I have sent a letter back basically saying "The reason you can't trace my name to an account number or address is because you are looking under the wrong name!!!

I have checked my reply from The Information Commisioner and they have used the correct name so if Barclays come back and say that The Information Commisioner sent them the wrong information then i'll just say "Well, isn't it strange that they addressed their letter to the right person!!!".

Smiley Scouser v Egg : WON!!!!!:D

Smiley Scouser v Natwest : WON!!!! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I love it!!! It was Barclays last day tomorrow to file a defence & i've just checked Mcol & lo & behold, they have submitted a defence!!!

I now have to wait for it to be allocated to a court.

BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smiley Scouser v Egg : WON!!!!!:D

Smiley Scouser v Natwest : WON!!!! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I received a notice of Transfer of proceedings today from the court.

It says Case No : 13456

Between : Ms Anon

And Barclays Bank Plc

Before District Judge Murdoch

Sitting at Northampton County Court

 

Without Hearing

 

Date order drawn 12th July 2007

 

 

 

Barclays have put in their standard defence.( I won't bore you with it )

 

I am sending my Schedule of charges to Barclays Litigation Team tomorrow.

What do I send to the court or do I just wait,they haven't asked for anything.

 

HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smiley Scouser v Egg : WON!!!!!:D

Smiley Scouser v Natwest : WON!!!! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send a covering letter to the Court and Barclays, or,

you could just do the one letter to the court and c.c. it to Barclays Legal department level 29, one churchill place london. etc...

and say something to the effect that you are sending a 'further copy' of your statement of charges to the court and to the Defendant, re their defence.

 

Odd, usually the court ask for documents to be relied upon to be supplied 14 days before court date.

Comply with anything you are to do by the court, and in plenty of time. If you are in any doubt you could always ring the court for confirmation/clarification.

 

please note, any advice given is without predjudice and without liability. If in any doubt please consult a qualified legal practitionner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 threads merged. Pleased post all of your progress on one thread as it makes it easier for other to advise, particularly if you have any problems.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh I know it, you know it but i wanna check that the defence doesnt state the crud about the particulars etc..

Ole Scouse may have a 'standard defence' but might be std in the way that they are claiming insufficient POC's

.

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

Point taken... we must be careful... i put a comment on another thread that the POC's that are causing probs are from the other site

Yes ive noticed A LOT coming from the other siteS [not just Lewis's] are cutting serious corners.

Also MCOL are causing huge headaches, either losing or delaying claims......AND. AND the POC's used in MCOL are now deemed unsuitable cos they do not allow enough room to elaborate.

I'd suggest new claimants go straight to N1 forget MCOL.

.

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

lol...yep... but won't it cost £35 to change poc's?

 

I have heard some have been charged the fee but many are allowed to simply update the original, esp if originated from MCOl

 

Cases entered locally

 

If you find you have made an error in your particulars of claim, or you need to amend them for any other reason, after you have started proceedings but before judgment has been entered, you can only do so with either

  • the written consent of all parties to the claim or
  • permission of the court.

.

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

In a Nutshell :

 

1, POC do not provide details

2, POC are summary in nature

3, The defendant is entitled to charge the claimant for unathorised borrowing as per T&C's

4, The defendant's T&C's give the claimant a fair and transparent view of the terms and charges applicable

5, the charges are what the claimant agreed to pay via the T&C's

6, the charges are not in breech of the unfair terms in consumer contracts reg 1999

7, therefore, charges were not unlawfully debited

8, charges were incurred when the claimant went into overdraft without agreement

9, the charges are lawful enforceable

10, if the charges is incorrent then the claimant cannot claim for any charges before 2001 as per limitation act 2001

11 In the alterative and without prejudice to matters stated above, if (which is denied) the said charges and interest or any part thereof are unlawful or unenforceableas alleged by the claimant or at all, and the charges were a consequence of the breach of contract by the claimant, the defendant has nonetheless suffered loss & damage as a consequence of such a breach of contract in allowing the account to go into an unauthorised overdraft. Accordingly, in the event that the defendant is unable to rely on it's express entitlement to enforce the charges as set out above, it will seek to recover to the extent necessary such loss and damage as it actually suffered, which will not necessarily be limited to the value of the said charges, and the defendant seeks to set off such sums against any liability owed hereunder to the claimant.

 

(Very confused by the last bit, that's why i've typed it word for word)

Smiley Scouser v Egg : WON!!!!!:D

Smiley Scouser v Natwest : WON!!!! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...