Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you will also need a copy of the CCJ and the particulars of claim on the claimform as... you'll need the particulars of claim as we don't know the judgement sum nor if post judgemental interest was allowed. did you defend it? did you ignore it? did you not get it?  did you know nothing about it?   its very rare on welcome debt either taken to court by welcome (doubtful in 2013) or a DCA (more likely)  i will suggest the debt was already at £18k before the CCJ so nothing bar court charges were added   please advise  i love bashing welcome and DCA but we can't help until we know our actual target and who did what and when.                
    • Janet Yellen confirmed as first female US Treasury secretary in Senate vote View the full article
    • I am sorry not to have responded in time to your thread. I have an awful lot going on.   I am hoping that you still haven't sent off your WS  as I have just seen a copy of Southend Airport  ByeLaws 2020. which will help you no end.     https://d1z15fh6odiy9s.cloudfront.net/files/board-approved-london-southend-airport-byelaws-100220-d14ca659.pdf   If you go to Section 5  the headline reads 5. Prohibited acts on parts of the Airport to which the Road Traffic Enactments do not apply:   In other words the roads on the airport are either governed by the Road Traffic Act or the airport Byelaws- neither of which are classed as relevant land. Therefore PoFA DOES NOT APPLY throughout the airport.   Take a copy for the Court and point out that the VCS WS is somewhat lacking in accuracy. It is inconceivable that VCS have not read the Byelaws since they are operating there.    So looking at their WS it reminds me that a good few years ago it was said about the WSs of  parking companies that they and their lawyers simply do not care about the truth and are content with regularly supplying false information to the courts, happy that they will not produce a witness to defend their porkie pies, and that nothing bad will therefore happen to them.   This practice should stop since were the authors to have to appear in Court and challenged, their perjury would not only be clear to see but it would put a stop to the practice. If they don't turn up in Court they get away with their lies and are able to repeat them ad nauseam. And this WS is full of lies and misdirections -not that you can say in Court they are lies but you can point out where there is contradictions shall we say and let the Judge decide.    The WS says in point 31 that they robustly deny that their sign is prohibitive.    You could point out that  District Justice Glenn  in Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd v Bull & 2 Others (B4GF26K6, 21 April 2016), at the High Wycombe Court said    “If the notice had said no more than if you park on this roadway you agree to pay a charge then it would have been implicit that PCM was saying we will allow you to park on this roadway if you pay £100 and I would agree with Mr Samuels’ first analysis that essentially the £100 was a part of the core consideration for the licence and was not a penalty for breach.   The difficulty is that this notice does not say that at all. This notice is an absolute prohibition against parking at any time, for any period, on the roadway.   It is impossible to construct out of this in any way, either actually or contingently or conditionally, any permission for anyone to park on the roadway.   All this is essentially saying is you must not trespass on the roadway. If you do we are giving ourselves, and we are dressing it up in the form of a contract, the right to charge you a sum of money which really would be damages for trespass, assuming of course that the claimant had any interest in the land in order to proceed in trespass.”   And of course VCS cannot sue for trespass as they are not the landowners.  
    • Send Smart a two-line letter informing them of your new address.  It will save you from the threat of a backdoor CCJ later on.   As for DR+, just laugh at their standard letters.
  • 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
      • 31 replies

Welcome Finance - This company needs to be banned.


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3366 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

Hi postggj - I'm fuming (and not just at the cheating ****** I used to call a boyfriend!! - out my system now :) )

 

You know welscum had adjusted my credit file after my letter well today they have gone in and backdated 4 months worth to overdue and made my agreement 37 months again - Mr P is gonna get it in court!!

 

Also Welcome have said they will not send me the stuff I requested under CPR until discovery is due in 2 weeks time - can they do that??

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 9.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

hi. apologies for going off the point of your thread but need some advice please. if you put a secured wf loan into dispute over ppi then do you have to keep up the monthly payments while it is in dispute?

 

regards, lawrence

Link to post
Share on other sites
hi. apologies for going off the point of your thread but need some advice please. if you put a secured wf loan into dispute over ppi then do you have to keep up the monthly payments while it is in dispute?

 

regards, lawrence

 

 

According to the bright spark at the Welscum LMB, that i spoke to yesterday .. yes!!:lol::lol::lol:

Like i replied..take me to court as you threatened in your recent default notice:lol::lol::lol: she replied yes but we didnt send it from this branch..thats nothing to do with us...:lol::lol::lol:, so why are you wanting my money..you didnt send that letter either...nottingham did:lol::lol::lol:

 

b-o-2

ANYBODY WHO NEEDS INFO ON YOUR LEHMANS MORTGAGE

either SPML/PML/LMC/SPPL; the following are DIRECT tel#s,

of the investigating & prosecuting organisations: DONOT say you are from CAG-only directly affected or a concerned citizen.

 

1. Companies House: Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

2. CH : Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia(MD) for SPML/PML) @ 02920 380 643

3. CH : Mark Youde(accounts compliance) @ 02920 380 955

 

4. Companies Investigation Branch(CIB) : Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108

(part of the Insolvency Service) investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

5. CIB : Jeremy Pilcher('unofficial'-consumer/company lawyer) : @ 0207 637 6231

__________________

File YOUR 'Companies Investigation Branch'- CIB complaint online NOW!!!!

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/complaintformcib.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites
they will tell you yes or ignore you and desimate your credit file in their silence

 

Dont mean to be rude in light of your anger andi_303 but can you be more specific. Even though they do decimate your credit file are they really allowed, and if there not how can you apply to get them removed.

 

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dont mean to be rude in light of your anger andi_303 but can you be more specific. Even though they do decimate your credit file are they really allowed, and if there not how can you apply to get them removed.

 

cheers

 

morally no they aren't allowed but when has Welcome ever cared about morals? and as the CRA's are being paid handsomely by muppets like welcome they are not going to stop them doing it!

 

The only way to get it off is to take them to court for malicious damage of your credit file - conincidently just what I am doing now!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andie,

 

with regards to what you mentioned about malicious damage to your credit file how does that work, I currently have a letter from welcome agreeing a decrease in my payments, however for every month I have paid a lower amount they have defaulted my credit file, in total 6 times.

 

Would that class, also just to clarify the decrease is only £69 a month less than he agreed amount. I tried to post a link to my thread earlier but wasn't able so PostGGJ has done it for me if you wouldn't mind checking it out.

 

Lolly

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lolly1977,

I would start a complaint with welcome and if you don't get anywhere then go to the ombudsman. If they agreed to reduce payments then they should not default your credit rating as long as you pay what they agreed to.

 

Did they tell you reducing payments could affect your credit rating?

 

What fustrates me is that welcome will continue to manipulate the figures to look in a strong position than they are. What about a letter to Delloitte's or Freshfields asking them to explain why welcome continually change the amount of months to 37 from 36?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have changed mine from 36 to 37 5 times now each time I lodge a complaint with experien and it gets altered but only until they update again - they are quite frankly an effing joke. Roll on 12th August as Mr P you are dead in the water!

Link to post
Share on other sites
morally no they aren't allowed but when has Welcome ever cared about morals? and as the CRA's are being paid handsomely by muppets like welcome they are not going to stop them doing it!

 

The only way to get it off is to take them to court for malicious damage of your credit file - conincidently just what I am doing now!!

 

So it is only a moral argument then and not one of law.

 

I thought that once you put the account into dispute, under the CCA it freezes and no defaults are allowed to apply...

 

If they are applied would this count as malicious damage to credit rating...

 

Have i got the jist, or legally are they allowed to default our files.

Link to post
Share on other sites

morning all

 

have a nose at this email

 

Good Morning

 

Thank you for your email.

 

At this stage we are not able to say when the shares will be re listed. Before this could happen we would need to have reached agreement with our banks, notes and bondholders on a financial restructuring. We would then need to get our 2008 accounts audited and signed off. We are not in a position to say how long this will take.

 

Cattles plc

 

 

ITS NOT SO MUCH WHAT WAS SAID BUT WHAT WAS NOT

 

THEY ARE IN A BAD TIME IT SEEMS

Link to post
Share on other sites

"consumers for what ever reason find them selves in the credit doldrums.

 

they miss a few payments from the banks and the banks record default history, this forces people into the hands of companies like cattles. now who are the main share holders in cattles, the banks.

 

so the banks are profiting again on obscene interest rates.

 

it not unsual for welcome to charge 60-70% apr

 

SO WHO ARE THE LOAN SHARKS NOW"

 

 

Postggj.....what a lovely tone of voice you have today :lol::lol::lol:

Beck

"There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. one is by the Sword. The other is by Debt."

 

Barclaycard PPI Refund £4300:whoo:

Barclaycard = Mexican Stand Off

 

TSB = Mexican Stand Off

 

Santander = :mad2: MungyPup is coming to get yahh :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

nice 1 postgg give it to them.....how dare they start telling us about moral issues...when its cattles that have been lying to us and the banks for years.

 

its cattles that have tricked its consumers and taken millions of pounds on false promises...

 

and now they are staying afloat threw funds by the tax payer threw banking bailout....

 

i dont know if anyone knows this but a report came out from a financial paper in america it stated that the financial monies given to bail out the banks £500biliion would have been able to clear the countrys debt to uk institutions..

 

basically all of us would be debt free now all credit cards,bank loans and mortages (uk aggrements only ,not offshore agreements) would have been cleared...instead they have given it to the banks who are still in dire straights..

 

make me prime minister please:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

"they miss a few payments from the banks and the banks record default history.

this forces people into the hands of companies like cattles.

now who are the main share holders in cattles, the banks." (postggj)

 

So will we ever see Cattles fold....it's not in the Banks interest

 

but i have just been reading another thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgages-secured-loans/206470-fraud-act-2006-a-4.html and i think it may apply here,

 

 

any thoughts???

Beck

"There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. one is by the Sword. The other is by Debt."

 

Barclaycard PPI Refund £4300:whoo:

Barclaycard = Mexican Stand Off

 

TSB = Mexican Stand Off

 

Santander = :mad2: MungyPup is coming to get yahh :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi all been offline for a couple of weeks with internet probs but back and playing catch up did we get any news regarding the interest on arrangement fees? personally i have applied to the court for a set aside as i had and attachment of earnings order slapped on me, and never recieved any default notice or any original court docs fingers crossed but the court is busy at the mo and could take a couple of months to sort:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ill Have A Good Look Tomorrow Ghostdebt

 

Hello Postggj,

 

Still not got the figures in the alleged agreement in post #6771 worked out.

 

Did you manage to have a look at it?

 

Many thanks

-

PLEASE NOTE - I am not a legal expert, my comments are based on information learnt or

obtained and from my own experiences.

-

Case 1 - C L Finance - Court Case 'Stayed' :-). Stay Lifted - N149 AQ Received & Filed. Case Struck Out :grin:

-

Case 2 - C L Finance - Defence Filed. N150 AQ Received & Filed. Case 'Settled by Consent' :)

-

Case 3 - EOS Solutions - No Agreement - Account Closed ~£3500. :grin:

-

Advice & opinions offered freely but informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Use your own judgment and seek advice from a qualified and insured professional if you have any doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tigga, I'm new on this but have been going through CCA1974 for my daughter re welcome loan. You should look at section 9(4) which says that an item entering into the total cost of credit (part are the fees, the other is the total interest) shall not be treated as credit. Therefore no interest can be charged on fees. Welcom have done this with my daughter since 2002 and charged another £20/month interest on fees. They dont reply on this at all. What I would like to know is can we suspend payments while it is sorted bearing in mind that the agreement is nonsense anyway and does not conform.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jamesf104,

Great post. That confirms my agreement is rubbish and at a guess I would consider that aprrox 100% of welcome's agreements are rubbish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Tigga, I'm new on this but have been going through CCA1974 for my daughter re welcome loan. You should look at section 9(4) which says that an item entering into the total cost of credit (part are the fees, the other is the total interest) shall not be treated as credit. Therefore no interest can be charged on fees. Welcom have done this with my daughter since 2002 and charged another £20/month interest on fees. They dont reply on this at all. What I would like to know is can we suspend payments while it is sorted bearing in mind that the agreement is nonsense anyway and does not conform.

 

hi james thanks for the reply, we were waiting news from fsa and fos regarding this until such time i wouldnt stop paying them unless you have cca's them even if you have original copy this will cost you £1 and they have 12+2 days to reply if they dont you can then put account in dispute and withhold payments.. good luck as you can see with welcome you need it,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3366 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...