Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. 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.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • 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

walton v rbos


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4890 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

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Oh dear indeed!!

 

Come on guys, bang some comments on the website

 

David

 

PS I think you just hit that one into the stands!! Shot sir.

 

Methinks there will be lots of comments.

 

Make sure there's links everywhere guys.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

ops lets see them try and explain them selves now.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.....but didn't RBSs Lawters claim in a witness statement submitted into court that all my accounts were accurate and upto date, but confirmed earlier to my MP - "Mr Walton's accounts had been set up incorrectly".

 

I'm not a lawyer but that reeks of intentialy misleading the court.

 

Oh Dear Oh Dear!

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent. What are they going to do now? :D

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

ummmmmmmmmmmmm.......

 

 

Media Centre

 

Contact Media Relations

 

 

 

Media Relations can only deal with calls from journalists. If you have any concerns about an aspect of our service please first contact your local branch. If you still have concerns please contact our Customer Relations Unit on xxxxxxxxxxxxx if you are a customer of The Royal Bank of Scotland or xxxxxxxxxxxxx if you are a NatWest customer. For general enquiries, please call the main switchboard on xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

The Royal Bank of Scotland and NatWest media centre is open from 08:30 to 18:00 Monday to Friday. For out-of-hours media enquiries please call xxxxxxxxxxxxxx for the duty press officer.

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are any of the TV news channels going to pick this up?

 

HAK

 

It's been covered in most of the Sunday paper reviews.

 

I saw it being mentioned early on in The Andrew Marr Show this morning, if anyone would like to iPlayer that program.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be nice if Inland Revenue & Customs picked it up.

 

10 phoney accounts like this @ 100k unrecoverable balance = £1,000,000 write off for taxation purposes. Put money down it's the tip of the iceberg.

 

Wonder how many other institutions copied the RBS [problem], (If indeed it was RBS who dreamt it up to start with).

 

As RBS can't seem to explain to the press for what 'internal accounting' purposes these accounts actually serve, mabey the above should be asking the questions.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you remind us all Paul how yourself and others got hold of this info in the first place?

 

Was it in response to a standard SAR, or was it pursued through the courts or ICO ?

 

Apart from how dumb they were to carry out such practices, I can't believe how dumb they were to actually reveal it all !!

 

.... Some heads are really going to roll over this !!

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

Be nice if Inland Revenue & Customs picked it up.

 

10 phoney accounts like this @ 100k unrecoverable balance = £1,000,000 write off for taxation purposes. Put money down it's the tip of the iceberg.

 

Wonder how many other institutions copied the RBS [problem], (If indeed it was RBS who dreamt it up to start with).

 

As RBS can't seem to explain to the press for what 'internal accounting' purposes these accounts actually serve, mabey the above should be asking the questions.

 

David

 

Maybe HMR&C as well as shareholders.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you remind us all Paul how yourself and others got hold of this info in the first place?

 

Was it in response to a standard Subject Access Request, or was it pursued through the courts or Information Commissioners Office ?

 

Apart from how dumb they were to carry out such practices, I can't believe how dumb they were to actually reveal it all !!

 

.... Some heads are really going to roll over this !!

 

RBSs deceit was exposed after they responded to a standard Subject Access Request and CCA request. It is my understanding that this creative activity was widespread in the nineties.

 

 

I will be forwarding a letter to RBSs lawyers this week to seek clarification that the witness statement they submitted into court confirming that all my accounts are accurate and up to date was correct.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be nice if Inland Revenue & Customs picked it up.

 

10 phoney accounts like this @ 100k unrecoverable balance = £1,000,000 write off for taxation purposes. Put money down it's the tip of the iceberg.

 

Wonder how many other institutions copied the RBS [problem], (If indeed it was RBS who dreamt it up to start with).

 

As RBS can't seem to explain to the press for what 'internal accounting' purposes these accounts actually serve, mabey the above should be asking the questions.

 

David

 

Yes, this is what was discussed on The AM Show - they were talking about how this type of behaviour has resulted in the credit crunch, because the likes of RBS are clearly using accounting techniques to "create" debts that the company relies on, then using those debts to chase debtors, resulting in negative equities all over the place.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be forwarding a letter to RBSs lawyers this week to seek clarification that the witness statement they submitted into court confirming that all my accounts are accurate and up to date was correct.

 

Paul

 

It may be useful to print off the articles from the ST and include those in your letter, Paul.

 

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when that particular time bomb is opened...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had asked the Inland Revenue questions about these router accounts some 9 months or so ago.......they had never heard of them.......I also asked as to how an account (mine in particular could have TWO book debts),,they were not aware of either and couldn't answer the questions ...but also said they could only act if the treasury asked them to..............I had made the Prime minister aware of the facts 12 months ago and the Treasury..............Action taken ......none.

 

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, this is what was discussed on The AM Show - they were talking about how this type of behaviour has resulted in the credit crunch, because the likes of RBS are clearly using accounting techniques to "create" debts that the company relies on, then using those debts to chase debtors, resulting in negative equities all over the place.

 

A debt being an asset when it comes onto the balance sheet.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

The way that I understand it is that an unsecured OVERDRAFT on a CURRENT account is shown as a LIABILITY on the banks balance sheet, but an unsecured LOAN account is shown as an ASSET.

 

We believe this is why our accounts were changed from 'Current' to 'Loan' accounts without our knowledge.

 

D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...