Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I think that whatever you eventually do, because you are within 30 days of the delivery of each damaged table saw, you should assert your right to reject them under the Consumer Rights Act. You wouldn't normally need to do this with Amazon – but I think that it is a prudent thing to do in the circumstances and it protects your position in case there is any question arrived in the future. So I suggest for the moment that you send to letters – separate envelopes – to Amazon identifying the items by their invoice reference number or whatever and that they have arrived in a damage date and because you are reacting within 30 days, you are now formally rejecting the items under the consumer rights act 2015 and that Amazon should make immediate arrangements to collect the items from you. As I have said, send the letters separately – but also try to confirm by sending Amazon an email using their contact system and maybe some other email address – keep copies of everything. The letters of rejection should be sent at least by recorded delivery. What is interesting here is that you have spent vouchers on an item which was sold to you at £272. Looking at the link you have posted, it now appears that the price has increased to £359 and so there is no doubt in my mind that you should be entitled to a Bosch table saw even though it is now that price. The objective of contract damages is to put you into the position that you would have been if the contract had not been breached. This means that your expectation at the end of a successful transaction would be to be in possession of a Bosch table saw. If that means that it is going to take £359 to put you into that post-contract position, then so be it. If you are prepared to accept a Bosch table saw instead of the DeWalt one which you apparently now prefer, then even if you found one elsewhere at say, £400, you will be entitled to claim the cost of that from Amazon. It gets a bit more complicated if you singly want your money back. If you want your money back then I think that you are only entitled to the value of the vouchers. If Amazon are unable to supply the saw table then it seems to me that you are entitled to receive the cash – and of course that is where Amazon will grind their heels in to the point where you may have to bring a small claim against them for the value of the vouchers. If this is what eventually happened – that you had to issue a court claim – then I think you are not looking at any resolution in the very near future. I can imagine that Amazon would object and muster a lot of energy to defending the claim. I can imagine that it would go on for at least six months and maybe more. I think you need to factor this delay into your calculations about how to deal with this. So I think broadly the position is that if you want the DeWalt then we can probably help you get your £272 cash which you could use to pay towards the DeWalt – but it will take quite a bit of time. If you are prepared to settle for a Bosch table saw then in the event that Amazon are unable to supply one, I think that you could quite reasonably source one elsewhere and if it was more expensive, one Amazon that this is what you are going to do and that you would be looking to them for the full reimbursement. This also would take quite a few months. I notice that one of Amazon's third-party sellers is selling a Bosch table saw for £429. Of course to buy this quickly, you would have to fork out the money now and then start claiming against Amazon. The problem of dealing with Amazon is that although they are generally speaking excellent, when things go wrong, they become very difficult to deal with. They are so huge that they don't act rationally in an economic kind of way. Amazon are not used to being pushed around and they don't have the mechanism for dealing with things. They don't seem to be able to escalate things rapidly to a responsible human person who will look at the problem and understand the principles. It's all done by procedures and that means it becomes very cumbersome to deal with. I've given a pretty convoluted reply here. Have a look and tell me how I can clarify things that you don't understand  
    • I googled North State and found some views on it. The reviews look pretty damning to me, I'm afraid.   https://www.forexbrokerz.com/brokers/northstate-review   https://theforexreview.com/2020/08/31/northstate-review/   https://www.financebrokerage.com/northstate-io-review/   https://www.wibestbroker.com/northstate-review/   HB    
    • Their own very small print at the end states that this is a high risk inestment and that you could lose everything you put in - and more. They're based in the Commonwealth of Dominica in the Caribbean, so no UK regulator unless I've missed something.   I don't think my view has changed, sadly.   HB
    • I'm going to take a little while to think about what you have told us and the best advice to give you. However, I would certainly caution you not to return either item unless the arrangements have been made by Amazon and you are using their prepaid labels. Do not at some point decide to make your own arrangements to return the items because if they then happen to be lost en route to Amazon, Amazon will disclaim any responsibility and you will have even more problems than you already do. You have paid for only one of them with vouchers. The other one, I gather, has not been paid for at all. Do Amazon hold your credit card details?
    • I'm very sorry that you feel this way. As has been explained by my colleague, the help we give here is completely free that we need help from you to make your situation clear to us and that includes presenting your story in an understandable way not only in the way that it is presented to us for also in the way you explain it. If you follow the advice given by my site team colleague above and you don't get any joy I think come back here and we will help you through the next step
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

OFT v Banks - **Don't panic!!!**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4825 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

Taking Yorkshire Bank to court for my elderly neighbour, not a significant amount just over 400 squid. Recieved a letter today stating Sitting at Northampton County Court

 

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

 

1) Following filing of a defence or holding defence the claim shall be stayed pending judgement in the Office of Fair Trading test case.

 

2) Liberty to apply with an explanation

 

Note: Any Party affected by this order may under rule 3.3 (5) apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed. Such a party must apply under Rule 23.3 within 14 days of service of this order. (The order was drawn on 20 August)

 

So Question Do i apply to set the stay aside? and carry on or as this is a direction for a named District Judge do i leave it and wait till the text case is heard?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 201
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I suppose that would be up to you

There are good templates here to request a stay to be lifted (the application will cost you though) or you could make an application to include a clause that will prevent the bank from imposing any further charges during the duration of the test case (there are a few threads on the site about a recent case in Luton where Barclays was told they could equally not continue to charge the claimant during the test case if they wanted to stay the case)

Or you could just leave it and wait until the test case is decided

 

What would you prefer to do ?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/cases-stayed-pending-oft/108430-stays-info-guidance.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/111856-barclays-customer-wins-freeze.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - just been looking at other posts to see what I have to do - I think I download form N244 off this site and complete and then send in to Leicester court with a fee of £35 ??? :confused: Would you think I should send another schedule of charges with it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as my neighbours are elderly disabled pensioners, there not happy about paying to apply for a stay to be set aside even though their case is in my view (and others) really strong, looks like this ones going to have to be a case of sit and wait..

 

I am tempted to just pay for the stay to be set aside but then all post goes to them and in a sense thats betraying there wishes. I have however written back to the Yorkshire Bank to remind them they are not permitted to take there benefits as charges in accordance with the appropriate Act and Legislation, despite this im sure that Yorkshire bank are not interested in this..

 

Ive even been to the local branch previously witht he legislation to be told by the manager, she never heard of it before lmao (yeah ok) Ive invited Yorkshire bank to thoroughly inspect there income and as the court will see when i produce the bundle (after the test case) the bank have caused additional distress by taking there benefits, pretty obvious thats all the income they get as its clearly stated 'benefits'

 

Anyway, thats just the update lets hope OFT beat the heck out of the banks....

 

On a lighter note, i have a case going through the courts myself.. Halifax Mortgages, with charges etc, had the same letter as my neighbour just worded differently to stress to me that no payments will be made until after the court case, then today a letter saying sign here and we will pay you in full and final settlement... typical halifax not knowing which hand is doing what so ive signed and in effect they have settled, just wish it was as easy for my neighbour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bookworm,

 

I've just started my claim requesting statements for the last 6 years from Abbey national, everyone is tell me that Abbey is the worst for stalling.

Can I continue ? and am I likely to lose the right to get my charges back

due to this new ruling...giving the banks power to put on hold all claims.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Augustus, keep going - they will probably be granted a stay anyway. If your claim is in the system when the test case is heard and if the banks lose, then it makes it easier for you to get your money back.

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

 

What do we think the likelyhood of the banks losing really is?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guys,

 

What do we think the likelyhood of the banks losing really is?

 

Personaly I think they are very likely to lose, and they are just using the time it will take as a delaying tactic, hoping that new claimants will just give up and not bother whilst at the same time finding other ways to rip us off. It is standard business practice that large turnover with small profits generate large profits. Do we see the banks making these charges to the big customers. No, If they are short of cash an immediate overdraft of six figure sums is available, whilst they charge us £39 for going pence overdrawn. The banks are now finding out that the little customers when they all get together ARE as powerfull as the big corparations and this has them seriously worried.

=======================================================================================================

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

Halifax Won £1180.00

NatWest Won £876.00

Halifax 2 N1 submitted 20/07/07 stayed 24/08/07 N244 Application filed 31/08/07 hearing set for 12/11/07 rescheduled for 29/01/2008. Application dismissed stay still in place.

Charity Group £200 compo for lost passport.

HM revenue & Customs; demand for WTC overpayment £632.12. Disputed, their error. Did not have to repay.

All opinions expressed are my own and have no legal standing and no connection to CAG

 

All errors/typos etc are not my fault the blame lies with the spelling gremlins

 

<<<<<< If any of this has been helpful, PLEASE click my scales

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bookworm,

 

I've just started my claim requesting statements for the last 6 years from Abbey national, everyone is tell me that Abbey is the worst for stalling.

Can I continue ? and am I likely to lose the right to get my charges back

due to this new ruling...giving the banks power to put on hold all claims.

 

 

Hi Augustus

 

For a claim against Abbey, it could be well worth your while having a read of GaryH's posts here -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/111571-abbey-court-hearings-important.html

 

and here -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/111050-abbeys-new-service-charge.html

 

Hope that helps - Adam.

I do my best to be helpful, but at the end of the day I'm not a professional - please seek further advice if you're not sure. On the other hand, if I have helped, please click my scales - thanks ;)

 

Current Claims (all for friends!) -

 

Abbey - over £4k - Court claim issued & AQ filed ('Tish vs Abbey'). Alloc'n Hearing 21 Sept - Claim stayed 29/8/07.

Cap One - just under £2k - WON (just over 2k!)('Tish vs Cap One')

Cap One - just under £1000 - WON (just over £1k) Nov 07 (JimmyBoy vs Cap One)

Lloyds TSB - £3.5k - Court claim issued, defence rec'd and AQ filed; Alloc'n hearing 7th Sept Claim stayed 29/8/07! (JimmyBoy vs Lloyds')

MBNA - over £1k for mis-sold PPI - WON - approx £1500(IpswichWitch vs MBNA . . .)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seeing as my neighbours are elderly disabled pensioners, there not happy about paying to apply for a stay to be set aside even though their case is in my view (and others) really strong, looks like this ones going to have to be a case of sit and wait..

 

I am tempted to just pay for the stay to be set aside but then all post goes to them and in a sense thats betraying there wishes. I have however written back to the Yorkshire Bank to remind them they are not permitted to take there benefits as charges in accordance with the appropriate Act and Legislation, despite this im sure that Yorkshire bank are not interested in this..

 

Ive even been to the local branch previously witht he legislation to be told by the manager, she never heard of it before lmao (yeah ok) Ive invited Yorkshire bank to thoroughly inspect there income and as the court will see when i produce the bundle (after the test case) the bank have caused additional distress by taking there benefits, pretty obvious thats all the income they get as its clearly stated 'benefits'

 

Only just seen this, but wanted to point out that if they are on benefits, they don't need to pay court fees; indeed if they have paid fees to issue the claim already, or an AQ fee, they can apply for them to be refunded. They can do this now, incidentally, no need to wait for the case to conclude. Just ask the Court for form EX160 or download it from the Court Service website.

 

Hope that helps.

If I've helped, please tick the scales at the bottom left of this message!

 

17th Sept: Found this site! :)

 

Lloyds TSB

 

22 Sept: Subject Access Req.

3 Nov: statements arrived. Charges calulated at:

A/c 1 - £2,178.01 + int of £1,206.54 (18.4% authorised)

A/c 2 - £206.11 + int of £211.07 (18.4%)

7 Nov - prelim.

3 Dec - LBA

13 Dec - £750 offered

23 Dec - £750 credited

28 Dec - rejection letter

2 March - issued

16 April - complained at court failure to forward defence

 

Halifax

 

22nd September: Subject Access Request.

4th November: No reply so LBA giving 7 days.

 

Cap One

 

22nd September: Subject Access Req.

5th October: Letter saying no record of account!

15th October: Replied telling them to try harder...

22nd October: Subject Access Req acknowledged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I've helped, please tick the scales at the bottom left of this message!

 

17th Sept: Found this site! :)

 

Lloyds TSB

 

22 Sept: Subject Access Req.

3 Nov: statements arrived. Charges calulated at:

A/c 1 - £2,178.01 + int of £1,206.54 (18.4% authorised)

A/c 2 - £206.11 + int of £211.07 (18.4%)

7 Nov - prelim.

3 Dec - LBA

13 Dec - £750 offered

23 Dec - £750 credited

28 Dec - rejection letter

2 March - issued

16 April - complained at court failure to forward defence

 

Halifax

 

22nd September: Subject Access Request.

4th November: No reply so LBA giving 7 days.

 

Cap One

 

22nd September: Subject Access Req.

5th October: Letter saying no record of account!

15th October: Replied telling them to try harder...

22nd October: Subject Access Req acknowledged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

 

I just wanted to know (and I know the this will have been answered 100's of times already but I am a time strapped student and don't have the time to go rifling for the answer so if someone could answer or post the link to the answer I would be most grateful) - for those peeps that have not yet even sent the initial letter to the bank asking for a refund of charges - is it worth still sending the letter or should it wait until after this test case has gone through?

 

This is because several of my friends who I couldn't convince to reclaim their charges when I reclaimed my own over a year ago have now decided they would like to start the process having seen all the media attention.

 

Cheers

HSBC - full refund = £647

Capital One - full refund of £220 + court costs + interest

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glitterari,

Get them to send the letters in. Regardless of the test case, the sooner the process is started, the sooner it will finish!

 

;)

Barclays (2 accounts) WON

Lloyds TSB (Daughter's) WON

 

Cohen's: WON (discontinued)

DLC: Given up, gone away.

Eversheds: Trying!

Equidebt: In default

Intrum J: Return to OC

iQor: Stopped paying.

Link: In default.

ScotCall: Return to OC

Thames: Stopped paying.

 

 

I am NOT a legal or financial expert. There are many CAG members and staff who are better qualified. Please do not make major decisions based on my advice alone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi just about to prepare a letter to appeal against stay - but getting tired and fed up of keep paying court fees not knowing when this will all be settled..keep nudging DG but never had a letter from them or anything - claim was with the court in May before all of this but still been stayed by judge..and hsbc still keep applying charges - in the statement for the N244 [appeal to lift stay] do I add the "overview" at the end about the banks not being allowed to charge until test case is done .. if I cannot have all my charges refunded under that same banner? Also just wondering - will the courts be keeping all the "stayed" cases in one file so if it all goes in our favour [ the customer] will the courts then contact us to recommence the proceedings ??:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

you keep that over view for the actual hearing. you just submit your reasons in part C and leave it at the,......

 

Charlie there is no point in nudging DG . they will nto answer you. they werent before and since the oft announcement the def arent..............

 

all you have to comply with and focus on is keepign court deadlines and prepareing for your hearign when you get the date through............

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that age - but the judge doesn't HAVE to accept the appeal does he? He could say "thought about it and no you can't have stay lifted!!" If that happens do I just have to wait until Leicester court contact me in future re the test case and the results at that time?:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard on Radio 5 news that LTSB are reducing their O/D penalties! Sounded like a pre-emptive move in light of the OFT case. Are the banks on the run!

 

I'm just about to send in my application for removal of the stay. Should I hold off to include something about this?

 

The impression it gives is that Lloyds TSB are worried re the outcome.

 

Thoughts...?

 

Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

Charlie they have to give you either the right to appeal in writing or ask for ahearing. . no they do not havet to grant you the removal or infact them they stay. that is down to the judge............adn it all depends on the legal issues if any of the court cpr have been breached that gives leave to appeal to the high court. so hang in there:)

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

that is kind of what I expected matt, give that it is rumoured they are going to pull out the test case.. I think they are hoping this will prevent them being affected in the long run by the oft test case........

 

If you have the time, I would hang fire for 24-48 hours and see if we can find anythingon the web or in the papers about this as it will most def bulk up your case:)

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites
that is kind of what I expected matt, give that it is rumoured they are going to pull out the test case.. I think they are hoping this will prevent them being affected in the long run by the oft test case........

 

If you have the time, I would hang fire for 24-48 hours and see if we can find anythingon the web or in the papers about this as it will most def bulk up your case:)

 

I really can't see that they will be pulling out of the test case and these changes in the charges they will claim are purely for commercial reasons, the other banks will undoubtedly follow suit in the not too distant future

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just heard on Radio 5 news that LTSB are reducing their O/D penalties! Sounded like a pre-emptive move in light of the OFT case. Are the banks on the run!

 

I'm just about to send in my application for removal of the stay. Should I hold off to include something about this?

 

The impression it gives is that Lloyds TSB are worried re the outcome.

 

Thoughts...?

 

Matt

They aren't really on the run, its soley for PR purposes IMO. They are painting the picture of having "listened" to their customers and all that rubbish, plus they are now going to give you notice before they sting you so they can say that if you get a charge its all completely your own fault. It clearly is a pre-emptive move, but its not hugely significant, as Lloyds never claimed their charges to be proportionate to their costs anyway. When and if Halifax and Abbey follow suit then that would be slightly more significant.

 

As for the crazy notion that they are going to suddenly pull out of the test case - sorry, but it just ain't going to happen! (unfortunately)

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with Gary, is also sound business move on their part. Lots of disgruntled bank customers will be moving their accounts because of lower charges, and MORE lower charges add up to bigger PROFITS

=======================================================================================================

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

Halifax Won £1180.00

NatWest Won £876.00

Halifax 2 N1 submitted 20/07/07 stayed 24/08/07 N244 Application filed 31/08/07 hearing set for 12/11/07 rescheduled for 29/01/2008. Application dismissed stay still in place.

Charity Group £200 compo for lost passport.

HM revenue & Customs; demand for WTC overpayment £632.12. Disputed, their error. Did not have to repay.

All opinions expressed are my own and have no legal standing and no connection to CAG

 

All errors/typos etc are not my fault the blame lies with the spelling gremlins

 

<<<<<< If any of this has been helpful, PLEASE click my scales

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether its for commercial reasons, PR or whatever, the inference is surely that there is no need for their charges to be as high as they currently are. Certainly, the removal of the 29% interest rate, is the removal of a very obvious penalty and the considerable reduction in the penalty charges surely suggests that, whilst they have always argued these were fair and reasonable, they can infact be considerably cheaper! Therefore, this surely effects their previous arguement and may effect the judges consideration with regard to stays.

 

The more I think about it, it comes across as an admission that their penalties were not at all reasonable or fair.

 

Whilst I have no idear how to go about it, I feel it would be a wasted oportunity not to use it.

 

Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'm obviously out on my own with these thoughts.

 

I've sent my application for removal of the stay (thanks garyh for the template), but decided not to mention LTSB announcement. I figure I might be able to use this to argue something else later, not putting all my eggs in one basket.

 

Gary, why would it be more significant if Halifax or Abbey follow suit?

Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

Prob because LTSB are a UK bank, whereas the others are International, therefore any ruling against them would be less serious financially.

=======================================================================================================

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

Halifax Won £1180.00

NatWest Won £876.00

Halifax 2 N1 submitted 20/07/07 stayed 24/08/07 N244 Application filed 31/08/07 hearing set for 12/11/07 rescheduled for 29/01/2008. Application dismissed stay still in place.

Charity Group £200 compo for lost passport.

HM revenue & Customs; demand for WTC overpayment £632.12. Disputed, their error. Did not have to repay.

All opinions expressed are my own and have no legal standing and no connection to CAG

 

All errors/typos etc are not my fault the blame lies with the spelling gremlins

 

<<<<<< If any of this has been helpful, PLEASE click my scales

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...