Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

Help please! Moneyshop problem


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4795 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

The Money Shop - I am going to keep this as short as I can.

My husband and I both had £250 loans with The Money Shop, then unexpectedly I have been taken ill and only receive SSP, so we have had to put ourselves into debt management. We are managing this ourselves with the guidance of CAB and CCCS so that ALL our expendable income can be divided up between our creditors.

In my case I sent my letters out at the end of January including the moneyshop explaining I am indebt management and with my repayment proposal and asking for Standing Order mandate or relevant details so I can make a pyment before the end of FEBRUARY- I sent letters to both the high street store that I took the loan from and their Head Office. I heard nothing back in wiriting as I had requested but did get alot of harassing threatening phone calls to which I responded I have sent you letters please respond in writing. They did not do this and on one call I was told that because my letter had been sent before my cheques were due to be paid they may not have put them on the system. I logged onto my ebanking and cancelled the cheques. Then I had more calls and finally managed about two weeks ago to get an email address so emailed the money shop regarding this and again asking for payment details. I had no response to my emails. Then BAM £325 went missing out of my bank account, luckily I called the bank and said that I have not given this company my PIN or CSV number the bank said sometimes that information is not necessary to take a debit card payment. So I called the CCCS who confirmed that the law states that no one can take money using my card without my authorisation and I also went through the money shop contract. There is a part int he small print which says that they moneyshop will contact you to advise that they are taking payment - in my case they had failed to do this. The bank refunded the £325 and my new card was sent out.

 

In my husbands case the same occurred, he sent out the relevant debt management letters and repayment plans, they get ignored, he gets constant phone calls,he emailed but gets no response. The only difference is when he took out his loan he had a debit card which is the card the money shop are legally allowed to process for payment. Dispite advising the money shop of debt management on 10th February last week they sent his cheques to the bank, we got these cancelled. Today they went on to take money from a different debit card that is not the one he registeed with the Money Shop and they legally cannot take, unfortunately we cannot stop this transaction.

 

Things you may find useful.

- You do not have to deal with/set up anything over the phone with the money shop. They cannot make you there is no legislation that says you have to deal with them and can only make payment agreements over the phone

- Seek advice from CCCS and CAB they are brilliant

- Speak to your bank and cancel your cheques and if you have given the money shop any card details get those cards cancelled and new ones sent out.

- Make contact with the money shop by letter and email, explaining your situation and requesting that they only communicate with you in writing. This way you have a paper trail. Although they were unresponsive to my wirtten communications, at least you have evidence that you have contacted them in writing to find an amicable solution. If they choose to ignore then continue. Email MONEYSHOPINFO AT DFGUK DOTCOM thsi is a customer service email FD AT DFGUK DOTCOM,

this is the financial difficulties team, the address is Castlebridge Office Villiage, Kirtley Drive, Castle Marina, Nottingham NG71LG

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...