Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I apologise if I was being unclear. Where it currently stands is that they will have it repair, placing scaffolding in our garden for 5 days. They have moved fast, but we will still have to postpone our contractors, meaning, we won't necessarily have the work done in time for the wedding and therefore will incur additional expenses for either a marquee or a wedding venue. They are vehemently against having any kind of liability in any regard but continue repeating that they are legally entitled to use our garden for their repairs (I believe this is true unless the work can be carried out using a cherry picker). The neighbour seems either indifferent or oblivious to the fact they can't reach all of the side of the roof from the space where they can place the scaffolding. They have asked their roofer of choice about using a cherry picker but the roofer has said it wasn't possible. It's not clear whether the roofer doesn't want to use a cherry picker or whether there is an issue with it. They have told us it is a problem that we are installing a gazebo as it will prevent them to access their roof from our garden in the future?!?  
    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
  • 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

Natwest CCA response, Help Please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5075 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

That unbelievable Uni

 

It makes you think why they have not read my letter properly and taken me to court.

 

Did you say I can take them to Court for them to Supply the agreement

 

HAK

 

I have taken them to court asking the judge to rule the agreement unenforcable under section 127(3) and I am now going to enter a request for him to order the disclosure of the "original" agreement they allege to have on file.

 

See how that gets em.

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

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Link to post
Share on other sites

So is it a N1 form you get from the court (the same as a small claim form)

 

Also how much does it cost

 

Yep, you can download one.

 

About £75 I think (depending on whether you are claiming money or not!)

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

Thanks Uni

 

I going to follow your post as its getting good and you should have a decion soon.

 

Good luck

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Uni

 

I going to follow your post as its getting good and you should have a decion soon.

 

Good luck

 

HAK

 

Getting good?

 

I really hope a decision is made soon - although we all know the only decision that can be made, so I hope the court stop allowing the bloody bank to eff around.

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

Got a letter today of these jokers telling me my repayment plan is up for review...

 

Do you think they cant read>>

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi HAK. How are you getting on with Natwest? Any news? I started my own thread on my Natwest problems here, very much the same as your problems, http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/125781-natwest-cca-response.html#post1316018 but I suspect I'll probably get the standard letter....

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

HFC, PPI - With FOS

NatWest, Default Removal - In Progress

Intelligent Finance, Default Removal & Charges Claimback - In Progress

HSBC, Default Removal & Charges Claimback - In Progress

Abbey, Bank Charges - In Progress

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

Lloyds, PPI **WON**

Halifax, Charges - Court Claim **WON** Donation Made To CAG

GE Money, Charges - Court Claim **WON**

GE Money, PPI **WON**

HFC, Charges **WON**

Halifax, PPI - Court Claim **WON**

Vodafone, Default Removal **WON**

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I got a letter for Triton Credit Services today. They want full payment with in 7 days.

 

Are Triton inhouse collectors for RBS?

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they are. HAK

 

I had trouble with them, but after letters telling them that Nat West do not have an enforceable agreement they passed it back to Nat West, who have now passed it on to Interim Justitia (DCA) without notifying me.

 

They get the same letters as Triton, but they have shock coming to them as I may be going in another direction which could be helpful to us all.

 

No details as I want to confirm all avenues first. News of this later.

 

maggiebroom. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

UPDATE

 

 

After sending a letter to Triton to basically bog off I today have received a letter of Green & Co Solicitors.

 

If I do not pay in 7 days they are going to take me to Court.

 

Writing letter in a bit. Anybody know who regulates Solicitors and who do you complain about them to.

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Got a responce of Green Solicitors as I made a complaint about there so called illegal actions. The responce is below. Any comments.

 

img123.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you have now had a response from Green & Co which is unsatisfactory, I'd go ahead with a complaint to the Legal Complaints Service.

 

As you will see from the footer, 'Green & Co' are not even a proper firm of solicitors. Ms Green is just a solicitor EMPLOYED by the Royal Bank of Scotland. She is not acting as an independant solicitor advising her client. She is part of the bank trying to enforces it debt unlawfully.

  • Haha 1

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Docman

 

What a good idea I didnt think about that.

 

Do you think I should complain back to them or straight to the Legal Complaints Service

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

HAK

 

You can make a complaint to the Legal Complaint Service if the solicitor doesn't respond within 28 days or if you are dissatisfied with the response.

 

It seems to me that G & Co have just rejected your complaint out of hand and expect that will do as far as you are concerned.

 

It's up to you if you wish to complain about G & Co, but in case you do, the LGS kindly produce a template complaint on thier web site

http://www.legalcomplaints.org.uk/documents/resolution-form.pdf

 

Doc

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Responce from LCS

Not the one was expecting.

 

Thank you for your enquiry.

 

We hope that it will be helpful if we briefly outline the powers of the Legal Complaints Service. The Legal Complaints Service can consider the service which solicitors provide to their clients if such a complaint is raised by the client in question. We can also consider conduct issues for a client.

As the regulatory body for solicitors in England and Wales, the Solicitors Regulation Authority can investigate complaints about solicitors' conduct.

 

If a finding of professional misconduct is made, they can consider applying disciplinary sanctions against the solicitor in question, and in the most serious cases can refer the matter to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. A finding of professional misconduct does not in itself give rise to an award of compensation.

Whilst we can consider complaints about the overall service provided, we are not able to consider complaints about the advice given by a solicitor. Nor are we able to question the way that a solicitor chose to represent a client, or whether a certain course of action was in the client's best interests. Offering an opinion on such matters would in effect amount to legal advice as to how the case should have been conducted, which is not the our function.

We understand that the firm acts for another party in this matter. We can confirm that solicitors are obliged to act in the best interests of their own clients and to follow their instructions. If the firm does not do so, it is open to the client to complain. A solicitor is entitled to rely on the instructions that they are given by their client and, as long as they do not know that they are false or untrue, they have no obligation to apply a pre-trial screen to establish the truthfulness of any instructions.

It therefore follows that we are unable to consider the complaints about the way in which the firm chooses to represent their client. If the matter does go to Court and the Court makes any criticisms of the solicitor's conduct in conducting the matter before it, please contact this office again and the matter can

be reconsidered in the light of any criticism that has been made.

If you have any further queries, you may wish to contact the Legal Complaints Services Helpline on 0845 6086565 and speak with one of our helpline agents. Our lines are open between 8 am and 6 pm Monday to Friday. Please note calls may be monitored/recorded for training purposes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, a regulator (??) with even less teeth. If they won't act, I suggest its a complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority then. Solicitors Regulation Authority - Home

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Miss B wrote to me again (after I reminded her that an agreement without the perscribed terms is unenforcable) telling me that if I dont make contact with Triton before 30th April they will start Court proceedings.

 

Better get my suit dry cleaned:D

 

HAK

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...