Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If that was the reason then that is good news. The whole reason that being able to charge £100 for breaching private car park rules is because the law Lords decided in a celebrated case that the rogues had a legitimate interest in keeping their car park spaces available for all motorists . {parking Eye v Beavis]. However when the business is closed then there is no legitimate interest in keeping spaces free so to charge £100 is a penalty. As such any Court would automatically throw out the case when the penalty charge is accepted.
    • gives them a feeling of grandeur. dx  
    • yep they can be a bit like the TV licencing lot. for 4yrs ive been getting a series of about 8-10 diff letters that just go round a loop. currently upto 61
    • thread tidied. new thread for the court claim is here  
    • new thread created for this claimform please post here now for anything to do with it now . pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’. Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time. You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID. You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .. get a CCA Request running to the claimant . https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/ .. Leave the £1 PO unsigned and uncrossed . get a CPR  31:14  request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant] ... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ . .use our other CPR letter if the claim is for an OD or Telecom Debt or Util debt]  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ on BOTH type your name ONLY Do Not sign anything .do not ever use or give an email . you DO NOT await the return of ANY paperwork  you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count] ..............  
  • 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

Drew v Amex


andyford2000
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6051 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 andy

 

You can certainly claim any charges they put on your account for late payments. If the charges were a significant contributer to your having a mark on your credit history, you can request for it to be removed at the same time.

 

If you haven't got your statements, send AMEX an SAR for them. If you have them, calcualte the charges and any interest levied on the charges and send a prelim letter off.

 

Everything you need is in the templates librray and there are folks here to help

  • Haha 1

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send SAR to

 

American Express Services Europe Ltd

Data Protection Office

Dept 2007 Amex House

Edward Street

Brighton

East Sussex

BN88 1AH

 

Your name and address(es) should be enough for them to find your account details (they would manage to send you a bill!)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
they said i couldnt claim on my PPI.
It's funny how no one ever seems to be able to claim on PPI!

 

Two suggestions:

 

1) there is a whole forum dedicated to PPI on the main CAG forum page. Look there and see if you can make a claim for the PPI being mis-sold

 

2) claim back any charges for late payment, etc. If the charges are a substantial proportion of the amount you were defaulted for, then put the demand in all your letters that the default be removed. Don't settle until it is. All the template letters in the library have that option in them.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

andy

 

Just stick with the programme - did you expect any other sort of reply?! Give them 14 days from your last letter and then on to teh next stage.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

What they have sent doesn't comply with CCA - if they have taken more than 12 days they can now be considered to be in default and the account unenforceable. If they let that state of affairs continue for anotehr month they committ an offence.

 

If you want the default removed (and the default consisted mainly of charges aor was caused by charges) then carry on with your claim but don't agree to anything that doesn't include default removal. Just stick to it, they will give in in the end.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends what you mean by CCI - if it is the compound interest they charged you on the charges you can calim that an dthen add 8% s69 interest on top. If it is compound interest at their contractual rate as a remedy for the fact they took your money and you were therefore without it, then you just claim that (butit is wise to give the court the option 'in the alternative...' to pay you 8% s69 interest instead.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i used vamps spreadsheet 13 and used a interest of 22.13 added to all charges. was this wrong
No, that's fine but the rationale for claiming it is that that is what you would have had to have paid to borrow money to replace what Amex had of yours. This is a little contentious (less so now) so should claim it but give the court the option of paying 8% instead.

 

i am also looking through my statements and going to claim my PPi back too but have notice deductions for interest applied, what are these
I presume this is just the interest on your balance each month.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
they seem to think it would be ok to charge me £8 for each charge, how would this stand up in court
THis is almost certainly completely academic - it should never get to court.

 

Your claim is on the basis that these charges are contract penalties, so the £8 is irrelevant because that is based on the UTCCR1999 (at least on Amex' interpretation of it).

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...