Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ah good. changes things then. but you must reply to them within 30days. we'll deal with that later.   now why are you getting this letter if the agreement you said earlier is in your brothers name? should be in his name its also not on that they did that, it was obvious you could not get the credit , so can you clarify please who's name is on the agreement too?   what is also not very nice either is they scammed you into handing the car back under i would assume voluntary surrender, whereby you owe everything, rather than telling you you could voluntary terminate only owing to the 50% mark.   can you expand upon the how the handback came about and what they did and didn't say?   all of the above if true bodes well to p'haps buffing this debt away .   dx
    • Hi dx,   The letter does not have any title but, it does have attached to it a reply pack with an income and expenditure form included.   No problem, I'll scan and upload the agreement tomorrow so you can have a browse. Just as an aside, the agreement does say on the top of the page hire agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. So I was wrong.   Thanks!
    • Thank you both. My defence was as vague as their Claim.   1. I am the defendant in this claim and litigant in person. All allegations made by the claimant are denied.   2. The defendant does not recognise the alleged agreement xxxxxxxxxxx as mentioned in the particulars of claim therefore it is denied that any such agreement exists.   3. The defendant has requested copies of the alleged agreement under Data Subject Access Request, Consumer Credit act 1974 s.77/8 and Civil Procedure Rules 31.4 but to date the claimant has failed to provide a copy of this document.   4.The defendant has also requested copies of the default and termination notice for the alleged account xxxxxxxxx as required to legally enforce the alleged debt, but again the claimant has failed to provide either.   5. In addition the defendant has requested copies of statements for the alleged account xxxxxxx showing the amount of monies allegedly owed to the claimant. To Date these have not been provided.   6. The defendants view is that this claim is vexatious and an abuse of process as the claimant has failed to provide any documentation to support their claim and respectfully requests that the said claim be struck out.   As an aside, I noticed that the 'statement' they did provide had a different figure on it to what they are claiming, so I will hopefully be able to flesh out quite a bit in my skeleton argument.   Spam 
    • 80% refund sounds like a very good deal* as they are entitled by law to deduct an amount from the refund to reflect the use you have had of the item over the 12 months it has been working.   So you could argue that a deduction of 20% for one year indicates that they expect it to last for at least five years, and probably longer.     * Think about it this way - would you pay 80% of the value of a brand new iPad to buy a second-hand one that somebody else has been using for over a year, or would you expect to get it cheaper than that?
    • Hi WoodDD.. Neither Case was cited in the VSC WS... however, MR D form VCS threw in VCS v Ward & Idle for the Judge to consider during the hearing. The Judge did not have time to review this. I believe he may have had a quick scan but decided it wasn't relevant at the time.. By not relevant, he didn't elaborate if it was not admissible or anything else..   Hope this helps..   Regards Tom     
  • Our picks

    • 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
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

The MP's campaign-Responses


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4743 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

ohoh, could you let me know what his name is please, you forgot to give me it, thanks

 

D'OH!!!

 

Andrew Pelling.

 

Sorry!

Six Nations Champions 2009

Triple Crown 2009

Grand Slam 2009

:cool::-D:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Joan Humble MP.

got a reply in writing today, apparrently one of her aids wrote to the oft asking about the situation and all she advised me to do was to read the leaflett she recieved, and that was it. what are we paying them for?, i could have done that!!!!

TOTALLY debt free as of 2007, Fantastic,

Link to post
Share on other sites

baconbuttyman

 

What a derisory response! I'd write straight back to her with that very point. I don't know who else saw it, but Peter Oborne's excellent documentary on C4 last night really brought home where our political representatives' priorities lie :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
D'OH!!!

 

Andrew Pelling.

 

Sorry!

 

Not to worry ohoh, & thank you.

--------------------------------

If you approve of my Post, please tip my scales.

13/07/07 **WON** Halifax

Any advice or opinion I give, is what I have learnt from CAG, If in doubt, please consult a professional.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Joan Humble MP.

got a reply in writing today, apparrently one of her aids wrote to the oft asking about the situation and all she advised me to do was to read the leaflett she recieved, and that was it. what are we paying them for?, i could have done that!!!!

 

I think I should mark Joan Humble as a (green) Not Interested, & only sending you a leaflet; what good is that ?? I agree wholeheartedly, what are we paying them for ??

--------------------------------

If you approve of my Post, please tip my scales.

13/07/07 **WON** Halifax

Any advice or opinion I give, is what I have learnt from CAG, If in doubt, please consult a professional.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks as though we are going to have to hope & pray that the majority of honest politicians outweigh the corrupt politicians, & that at the end of the day, they will be helping us challenge the banks.

--------------------------------

If you approve of my Post, please tip my scales.

13/07/07 **WON** Halifax

Any advice or opinion I give, is what I have learnt from CAG, If in doubt, please consult a professional.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi olden, it would be great if there were. Unfortunately there seems to be an awful lot of MP's that are retiring just before the next election lol.

--------------------------------

If you approve of my Post, please tip my scales.

13/07/07 **WON** Halifax

Any advice or opinion I give, is what I have learnt from CAG, If in doubt, please consult a professional.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Macboy & Ja-de,

On return from my Hols I have received reply from Joan Humble MP.

 

Dear Mr Croze,

Further to previous correspondence, I enclose for your attention a copy of a letter I have received from the Financial Services Authority in response to enquiries I have made on your behalf.

 

I hope you will find this information helpful and of interest.

 

Blah Blah Blah.

 

Joan Humble.

 

attached is a 2 page letter from Dr. Thomas Huertas that he says he was asked by Hector Sants to send. also attached is a copy of the press release of 27 July.

 

do you want me to scan and let you have a copy of the reply? I am sure that I have read it somewhere else.

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

[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

Hi Stone

 

Welcome back and hope you had a great break! There has been another response from Joan Humble further up the thread (less than impressive I might add :roll:).

 

However, if there's anything different to add then by all means post it - that's what we've had this new thread set up for ;)

  • 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
Joan Humble MP.

got a reply in writing today, apparrently one of her aids wrote to the oft asking about the situation and all she advised me to do was to read the leaflett she recieved, and that was it. what are we paying them for?, i could have done that!!!!

 

 

Me too!!!!

It wasn't Clare Curtis Thomas was it??

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Stone

 

Welcome back and hope you had a great break! There has been another response from Joan Humble further up the thread (less than impressive I might add :roll:).

 

However, if there's anything different to add then by all means post it - that's what we've had this new thread set up for ;)

 

 

I haven`t done this before so lets see if the old dog has learned a new trick.

 

joanhumble1.jpg

 

joanhumble2.jpg

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

[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

Well done you, Stone :D Nicely geek-ed ;)

  • 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
Well done you, Stone :D Nicely geek-ed ;)

 

This response from Mrs. Humble comes after pestering her. Email her at Westminster, wrote to her at constituency office and all so Email to PA at Westminster. So maybe she just got pee`d off whith me!

  • Haha 1

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

[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

Sounds to me like our Joan is anything but humble, stone :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

All

 

Please can you use the correct thread to notify when you've written to an MP?

 

Thanks

Mac

  • Haha 1
  • 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

Welcome back stone, hope you had a nice holiday.

  • Haha 1

--------------------------------

If you approve of my Post, please tip my scales.

13/07/07 **WON** Halifax

Any advice or opinion I give, is what I have learnt from CAG, If in doubt, please consult a professional.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Welcome back stone, hope you had a nice holiday.

 

Thanks Ja-de, yeah we had a great time chillin out, Things are moving on for me now, chack my thread. rearin to go again.

 

stargate6.gif

  • Haha 1

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

[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

Will do, & thank you for the click.

--------------------------------

If you approve of my Post, please tip my scales.

13/07/07 **WON** Halifax

Any advice or opinion I give, is what I have learnt from CAG, If in doubt, please consult a professional.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

stone, the letter is a standard template the FSA sent to all of us mine is exactly the same, they must think we are stupid!! They don't seem to have an inkling about this do they, what the hell is Joan Humble on about, any plans to clarify the legal position ? doesn't she know anything about whats being going on?? about the OFT case??

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...