Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They wont take you to court. I'm not sure what they'll do about the letters and if they will or wont send you the letters from their retail prevention company, but you can ignore those letters. You'll be just fine don't worry.
    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
  • 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

FSA To Review Waiver


crfx250
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5953 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 479
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Did anyone else have a 45 min blackout on this site

The Waiver is an FSA Conspiracy with the banks against the consumer - Complain to your MP and the FSA about their shameful act!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like site was down for maintenance or an outage. It remained on network, but it was inaccessible for as you say, about 45 mins.

  • 04/04/07 - £104 exit fee refund - Portman BS
  • Halifax Current a/c 20yr (closed) - in progress - all 20 years statements recovered!
  • Halifax Platinum Card 15 yr - Court Action Commenced - all 15 years statements recovered!
  • A&L Current a/c - You're next..

Write to your MP and

COMPLAIN about the ANTI-CONSUMER way in which the OFT Test Case is being handled!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't sure if it was my PC.

 

Thanks

 

MacBoy

The Waiver is an FSA Conspiracy with the banks against the consumer - Complain to your MP and the FSA about their shameful act!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

 

Been out tonight, and couldn't get in at 6 ish because of the maintenance or whatever it was.

 

Anyway, Macboy, DoS, et al, thank you very much for the input - I should have just asked you guys to write it for me in the first place :D but at least I tried!

 

Will email the editor tonight - no time like the present! I am also going to send it to the Daily Mail - they seem to be in our corner, so why not!?

 

Thanks again all - watch this space, as they say!

 

Jo xx :)

Six Nations Champions 2009

Triple Crown 2009

Grand Slam 2009

:cool::-D:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Both letters sent - got an auto-response from DM regarding the number of letters they receive, can't publish them all, etc etc, but heyho I am trying. :D

 

No witty responses to that thanks! ;)

 

Jo xx :)

Six Nations Champions 2009

Triple Crown 2009

Grand Slam 2009

:cool::-D:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Order!.... Orrrr-derrrr!!

:D Good morning everybody!

 

We're starting the day out with 46 of 646 MPs! written to in the 'List Of MPs' thread.

 

That's JUST 600 TO GO! Let's see if we can get that up to 75-100 today!

  • 04/04/07 - £104 exit fee refund - Portman BS
  • Halifax Current a/c 20yr (closed) - in progress - all 20 years statements recovered!
  • Halifax Platinum Card 15 yr - Court Action Commenced - all 15 years statements recovered!
  • A&L Current a/c - You're next..

Write to your MP and

COMPLAIN about the ANTI-CONSUMER way in which the OFT Test Case is being handled!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wrote to my MP/MEPs using an edited version of Destinyofsouls' letter (thanks for that), and I've had a less than satisfactory reply from one of the MEPs. I would like to respond, but would like some comments/advice first. Am I allowed to post the reply on here, and if so should I remove the name etc? There are some interesting comments in the reply.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adamat47 - see my post here ;)

reallymadwoman - yes you are OK to post the reply on here - it's a good idea to 'de-sentisise' it of any of your personal information first, however.

 

As for the unsatisfactory reply from the Euro MP - can't say I'm surprised, myself... :roll:

  • 04/04/07 - £104 exit fee refund - Portman BS
  • Halifax Current a/c 20yr (closed) - in progress - all 20 years statements recovered!
  • Halifax Platinum Card 15 yr - Court Action Commenced - all 15 years statements recovered!
  • A&L Current a/c - You're next..

Write to your MP and

COMPLAIN about the ANTI-CONSUMER way in which the OFT Test Case is being handled!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Order Order let the man speak. I like it MacBoy, the image is very formal and reassuring.:D

The Waiver is an FSA Conspiracy with the banks against the consumer - Complain to your MP and the FSA about their shameful act!

Link to post
Share on other sites

kog - I hope no one thinks it's a self-portrait :lol: Order!....would the Right Honourable gentlemen care to sit down, please?

  • 04/04/07 - £104 exit fee refund - Portman BS
  • Halifax Current a/c 20yr (closed) - in progress - all 20 years statements recovered!
  • Halifax Platinum Card 15 yr - Court Action Commenced - all 15 years statements recovered!
  • A&L Current a/c - You're next..

Write to your MP and

COMPLAIN about the ANTI-CONSUMER way in which the OFT Test Case is being handled!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the reply from an MEP, with names etc removed.

 

XXXX MEP has asked me to thank you for your email and to reply

as he is currently travelling. He was sorry to hear you were caught in

the midst of this dispute.

 

In fairness to the OFT, they have led the way for compensation by

forcing the banks to concede this in the last few years.

 

However, as I understand it, there are complex legal issues involved and

there was the danger that if the courts ruled in favour of the banks the

OFT would find itself on the wrong side of the law. In addition there

is the risk that some people would have to pay back compensation

previously given.

 

All parties therefore agreed that the matter ought to be finally settled

via a test case which would clarify the law. This is to everyone's

benefit as it lifts uncertainty and resolves all the outstanding

disputes. It strikes me that it probably is the best solution.

 

In your case you cannot be certain you would have been given any

compensation and may have wasted a great dela of effort and time

pursuing a claim. At least now the matter will be settled without you

needing to do this.

 

Best wishes

 

XXXXX

Assistant to XXXX MEP

 

I was actually complaining about the fact that whilst we have no means of pursuing claims the banks are continuing to charge and to insist on repayment of debts entirely comprised of charges. In my case I will be claiming about £7000 but in the meantime, whilst on benefits, I have to repay a £3000 overdraft.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking of replying with something along these lines.

 

Dear XXXX

Thank you for your prompt response (about 12 hours). I agree that the test case is necessary, however I am complaining about the fact that consumers are being prevented from taking any action whilst the case progresses, which could take years, but in the meantime the banks are allowed to not only continue with charges which will almost certainly be found to be unlawful but also to continue taking money from someone on benefits due to disability to repay a debt which is far smaller than the total charges applied to the account.

If the banks were so sure of their grounds, why have they settled so many claims, often on the steps of the court, instead of allowing cases to be heard and decided in court? I have absolute confidence that when my case is allowed to proceed, I will be as successful as the other thousands of claimants, but in the meantime I believe that the banks should be placed in the same position as consumers in that they should be prevented from applying further charges and also from pursing debts comprised of charges. This would at least balance the scales somewhat.

 

Any comments or suggestions?

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, some |MP's will take the banks side, but not all.

 

As to the MP's reply it is clear he's not in possession of the full facts on this issue.

 

The poor man was probably rushed off his feet play croquet with his fiends.

The Waiver is an FSA Conspiracy with the banks against the consumer - Complain to your MP and the FSA about their shameful act!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest the template letter, be further refined.

 

It should be a little more forceful, something to the effect

 

 

I am a constituant in XZY and have voted for xyz... I consider this issue very strongly as do many of my friends and family.

 

 

In other words do something (other than playing croquet) or you lose my vote!

The Waiver is an FSA Conspiracy with the banks against the consumer - Complain to your MP and the FSA about their shameful act!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin lewis is on ITV at 11.25. You can e mail questions to him @ itv.com

 

And perpetuating the 6-year Statute of Limitations myth I see.. :roll:

  • 04/04/07 - £104 exit fee refund - Portman BS
  • Halifax Current a/c 20yr (closed) - in progress - all 20 years statements recovered!
  • Halifax Platinum Card 15 yr - Court Action Commenced - all 15 years statements recovered!
  • A&L Current a/c - You're next..

Write to your MP and

COMPLAIN about the ANTI-CONSUMER way in which the OFT Test Case is being handled!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thumbs up to Martin - pitty he couldn't get more in, he did try though:D

The Waiver is an FSA Conspiracy with the banks against the consumer - Complain to your MP and the FSA about their shameful act!

Link to post
Share on other sites

had a lovely reply from my MP Phil Hope today ,, also said if you have knowledge of any individuals who are constituents of mine and are adversely affected by the delay in this case , please suggest they contact me personally and i will be happy to write to the FSA on their behalf and provide further advice ,, yeyy think he may be on our side lol .. so if my court case gets stayed i know where im heading ,, he gave me a list of his surgeries ect,, what a nice man smile.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a nice reply from my MP, Patrick Hall - Bedford, yesterday. I hope people who look on the roll call of MPs thread do not get put off contacting their MP because they are already on the list. The more letters individual MPs receive the more seriously they are likely to take it.

 

Chrissie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Chrisieo

 

Come on people keep complaining to the FSA, MP's FOS and the OFT. If you have already complained, job well done, but if all who have already complained try and get at least one other person to do the same and so on and so on, we'll really get this ball rolling.

The Waiver is an FSA Conspiracy with the banks against the consumer - Complain to your MP and the FSA about their shameful act!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...