Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Participants can get £50 - but must permanently consent to the retailer using their personal data.View the full article
    • Documents arrived today dated 27th March.  This is a cc taken out a long time ago (2008) and they don't seem to have been able to provide a copy of a CCA agreement, just reams of print outs of lines of texts from old bank statements, default notices etc.   
    • Documents finally arrived today from PRA group.  New day have sent me lots of paperwork, copies of default letters and statements, print out of what looks like a CCA that would have been completed on online, IP address as signature.  This debt is not too old, so possible this is the true copy of agreement ?  Not sure what my defence would be beyond irresponsible lending. 
    • pers i wouldn't.. all you need to know is in the posts of that thread....that being section 127(3) of the CCA refers. if under a CCA return, the 'creditor' claims its a recon, it must not contain any details like a sig, tickbox, or typed name (whether you signed physically or by online tickbox) 1. those are not necessary in a recon, so why inc them? (faked??) 2, it cant thus be a recon!!, it must be a copy of the 'original' from the original creditor, not from a debt buyers filing cabinet. they shouldn't not be 'mixing' some original docs from the OC with crap from their filing cabinet, claiming its ALL a recon! because some of it is faked. just remember there are far more docs like NOA and a DN that are as equally important to a court claim of 'this debt is enforceable'. never rely solely upon the dodgy agreement argument.
  • 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
      • 160 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

Oft Test Case


girlie12
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6086 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

Does anyone else feel so upset like me??? I literally feel sick with worry.:(

Most of us have tried so hard to scrimp & scrape the Court costs together.

Does anyone know how long this test case is likely to take?

I know this isn't easy money but when Nationwide have been paying out like they have, you start planning what debts etc to pay off.

My 28 days are up in the middle of August but I presume now Nationwide are going to hold off paying.

Can't even get onto Moneyclaim Online as it is permanently down since the test case announcement, to see if a defence has been filed

Link to post
Share on other sites

don't panic,

listen to what the site helpers and moderators are saying, EACH court will more than likely continue as normal, the backlog of cases will become such a burdern that as in the most cases the banks have shown their hands by not turning up and this is blatent disregard for authority and timewasting for the judges who sit and wait for these represenataive to turn up and can't be bothered. If me or you couldn't be bothered to go to court for something do you think the judge would act in our favour?

Listen there are too many scaremongers entering these forums and maybe they are putting doubts into peoples minds, maybe some of them are acting on behalf of the banks have you ever thought of that.

The whistleblower was an employee of a bank, who's to say there is'nt somebody trying very hard to influence people like you and me into stopping these claims, well you won't stop me, 'I WANT MY MONEY BACK' :mad:

 

eat that mr/mrs bank manager and all your greedy partners.:mad:

 

best regards as always lol

chris;)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

...eat that mr/mrs bank manager and all your greedy partners.:mad:
Least we all NOT forget that Nationwide is STILL a Building Society + as such, its Customers are legally deemed to be Members (...or for want of a different word, PARTNERS) who are supposed to 'share' in the Mutual benefits that their Membership rewards them!!!...:wink::-D
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Totally agree with all what is said - Nationwide had until saturday to enter a defence in my case. The Nationwide site does say they will ask the judge permission to suspend the case until the court case is resolved but there are no guarantees the judge will say yes..........so I will be very interested what happens with mine and certainly will let the site know what the judge says!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sit tight, CAG will be waiting for feed back from claimants as to what is happening in the real world. Cases may be stayed but, you can apply to remove a stay.

Donate to keep this site open

 

Any help or advice is offered as just that, help and advice without any liability. If in doubt consult a legal expert or CAB.

 

Make Cash Flow Forecast

Link to post
Share on other sites

For my daughters case NWide had until 17th July to submit a defence. By Friday 28th July according to MCOL thay hadn't submitted anything. So I pressed the 'judgement' button and it was accepted.

 

I am now waiting to see what will happen now this test case is pending.

 

Can't access the MCOL site at present.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I too submitted my claim on 12 th July. They acknowledged the claim and stated they are going to defend and gave the name and address of the solicitors. This was on 19th July...before the OFT case started on the 27th July. (Acoording to their website). So now I sit and wait and see whether they will pay up or suspend the case. They have until 11th August.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to all for your replies - feel only a little desperate now!!!

 

Just think the Office of FAIR Trading isn't very fair to us as consumers as the Banks/Building Societies knew about this test case & we were kept in the dark. :evil:

 

Why couldn't OFT have advised us this was going to happen so we could have decided whether to proceed?

 

Surely the test case is between OFT & the banks & shouldn't involve us as we were not a party to it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i have been trying to submit my claim via MCOL since friday without success, i rang the helpline and they claim that as far as they are concerned it is business as usual, we shall see once i fainally manage to get my claim submitted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to all for your replies - feel only a little desperate now!!!

 

Just think the Office of FAIR Trading isn't very fair to us as consumers as the Banks/Building Societies knew about this test case & we were kept in the dark. :evil:

 

Why couldn't OFT have advised us this was going to happen so we could have decided whether to proceed?

 

Surely the test case is between OFT & the banks & shouldn't involve us as we were not a party to it?

The Office of Fair Trading: OFT launches test case on unauthorised overdraft charges

 

They did tell everyone, but the BBC etc. can't have thought it was newsworthy.

 

Good luck with your claim,

 

Kelly :)

Kelly

Settled: Nationwide £372.55

Before you do anything read this:

Guide to Reclaiming Bank Charges

 

Most questions can be answered by checking out these links:

Frequently Asked Questions

Step by step instructions

Letter Templates

And don't forget to use the search facility! Chances are your question has already been answered on another thread. Good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

CARRY ON AS NORMAL, YOU MUST FILE AS PER COURT RULES AND REGS.DO NOT FALL OUT OF SYNC A S YOU WILL FALL INTO THE HANDS OF THE PARASITES DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

MTM,

thanks for that:o thing is if we are supposed to 'Share the mutual rewards' then does that mean I am benefiting from taking my own money off me in the means of an unlawful charges?:confused: because so far, since opening my account with them in feb2006 it's cost me over a grand and I haven't seen any returns yet, maybe when I get my charges back then I should class that as my 'Mutual Rewards' sort of a delayed savings account:D

 

keep em coming MTM:p

 

regards as always

chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

...keep em coming MTM
Simply put...

 

If U don't like the way that Nationwide is run, as a Bona Fide Member, U have a Legal Right to vote a NEW Board in that reflects your views + oust any Board Members that DON'T share your views about how a 'Mutual' Building Society should be run for its Members benefit.

 

If enough Members vote the same way as yourself...U will get the type of 'Mutual' Building Society that U wish for....;)

 

Ain't Democracy wonderful eh??!...lol...:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

MTM, nice to hear from you again,

I did recently vote but I voted against the current board, not that it matters as they will just appoint somebody else with the same ideals as the last. (peer prejudice);)

 

Onwards and Upwards. Don't panic Mr Mannering.. lol

 

regards

chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...