Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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

Looking for a buddy to help me through Egg bank claim


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6181 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

Hello!

 

I sent off my 1st request to Egg, two weeks ago and have only received a standard we have received a complaint from you letter back. The first letter I sent was from Moneysaving expert and the one here is better. So think I might send the orginal one from here.

 

Just after someone who has won agaisnt Egg to help me really. Would anyone be kind enough out there to be my buddy..?

 

Thanks ConsumerP

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will be fine if you follow the tried and trusted letters and timeframes on the CAg site, but happy to help if you have specific questions - Egg is the same as all the others...

If you think my advice has been helpful, please click on the scales to the left :) thank you!

 

Non illegitimi carborundum

 

 

I wish I was a glow worm,

A glow worm's never glum!

 

How can you be grumpy,

when the sun shines out yer bum?! :p

 

 

Amex * 2 *** WON *** Settled

Marbles ****WON*** In full settlement

Capital 1 ***WON*** In full settlement

MBNA ***WON**** In full settlement

Barclaycard ***WON*** In full settlement

Barclays Bank - ***WON*** In full settlement

Abbey ***WON*** In full settlement

Abbey (Mrs Chorlton) ***WON*** In full settlement

Abbey (Mr and Mrs C) - MCOL submitted 16/5/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

 

Thanks for all your help, I actually recieved a letter this morning so I am feeling a lot more confident now. Was starting to think I was just going to be ignored! Anyway the letter was the same one about the OFT rules and the £12 so a copied a letter found on another Egg post, and have edited it slightly. Thanks very much I think it was from ME V Egg, sorry for just nicking it hope you dont mind!

 

I emailed it over a scanned copy and I am going to post it so fingers corssed Egg will pay out now, seems they paid a few other ones when they recieved this kind of letter.

 

Here is the letter I have just sent incase anyone else needs it, and thanks again to munchkin0110

 

Will hopefully have some goods news shortly!

 

 

 

 

 

Ms Ema Clayton

Customer Relations Adviser

Customer Relations Office

Egg plc

Riverside Road

Pride Park

Derby

DE99 3GG

17 May 2007

Dear Ms Ema Clayton

EGG ACCOUNT NUMBER:

Your Reference:

Thank you for your letter dated 15th May 2007 regarding my request for repayment of charges. However, I do not consider this a satisfactory response.

I have great respect for Egg's Genuine Pre-estimate of £16 and great respect for all future Genuine Pre-estimates that Egg provide. But as a cardholder I am wondering after many years in business Egg has ever tried to reconcile Pre-estimates against Post-event audits.

I am confident that Egg Plc would not withhold evidence from their cardholders, and that Egg will present evidence in court to show the after-the-event costs, as well as before-the-event Genuine Pre-estimates.

I would also like to respond to comments 1, 2 and 3 raised in your letter dated 15 May 2007. I have responded to them in order as per your letter for ease; please find my responses on the following page (page 2/3).

Point 1

Regardless of whether the credit card agreement states that charges will be added to the account if the credit limit is exceeded or fail to make contractual payments, it is the amount of the default charge which is in question.

 

Point 2

You have been charging me charges that are contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Schedule 2 (e) of the said regulations gives a non-complete list of terms which may be regarded as unfair, such as a term that requires me, as a consumer who fails in his obligation, to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation. I believe your charges are disproportionately high and therefore they are contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999.

In addition I believe that your charges are a Penalty. Penalty charges are irrecoverable at common law. The precedent for this was Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79 along with Murray v Leisure Play [2005] EWCA Civ. 963. It was held that a contractual party can only receive damages for an actual loss or liquidated loss. It is clear that your charges do not reflect any actual and/or real loss.

 

If your charges are indeed a genuine pre-estimate of the administrative costs likely to be incurred by you in dealing with defaults then in order to reassure me that your penalties really do reflect your costs, I once again request that you provide me with a breakdown and proof of all costs involved with regard to your actual or liquidated losses involved in any breach of contract to which these charges relate with yourselves and that these charges reflect your true costs in relation to the said charges and are proportionate to the charges levied on my account as defined in Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 Schedule 2 (e). I would expect this to include a comparison of all charges levied against all customers and the actual costs incurred by you when those customers default.

 

Point 3

 

I refer to your comment regarding the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) default charge threshold of £12.00. I am aware that the OFT have stated that;

“where there are exceptional business factors... for example where a card issuer has a policy of requiring customers to pay minimum monthly repayments by direct debits, such as that operated by Egg….it may be able to set a fair default fee at a level above the threshold”.

However, this does not mean that your £16.00 is considered fair. The OFT state that only a court can decide finally whether a term is unfair.

 

Therefore as you have refused to refund the charges in question, I will pursue recovery with a County Court claim, although I sincerely hope that this will not be the route I need to take. I sincerely hope that you will respond positively to this letter in order to avoid court proceedings.

I’d also like to remind you, as you will be aware that should this case be heard in court you could also be liable for 8% statutory interest on the total amount of charges claimed (as of today this amounts to £ plus my costs.

To clarify, a positive response being no less than an offer of full settlement of all charges incurred on my account.

 

I am aware of many cases that you have settled in full out of court to date and I assume therefore that would also be your intention in this case. If that is so, then to allow this claim to get that far may be considered an abuse of the court process. I have enclosed a copy of your letter (encl 2) dated 15 May 2007, as should this result in a court case I will present it as evidence.

Once again, respectfully request that you refund the total amount of charges I am claiming, now totalling £ as per the attached schedule.

I will give you 14 days to respond to this letter before taking the matter further.

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Enclosures

  • Schedule of charges
  • Copy of your letter dated 14 May 2007

vbmenu_register("postmenu_775330", true);

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Consumer

 

I don't mind at all about the letter - it's there to help. Good luck with it and I'm sure you will receive an offer letter for the full amount you are claiming very soon. They sent mine within a few days of receiving that letter and then they paid up quick too. :)

 

Munchkin

Munchkin

 

Egg - settled in full at LBA

Barclaycard - settled in full after defence issued but before hearing date advised

Barclays - settled in full after defence issued but before hearing date advised

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...