Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
  • 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

kennythecelt v Barclaycard on behalf of


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6089 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

Barclaycard have today responded to my LBA on my wifes visa, within timescale.

 

Claim is £880. They have offered goodwill gesture of just over £300, being the difference between a £12 charge and what they charged. They have previouly stated that they have given me all statements but interestingly these only go back 1 month over 6 years, so I don't believe them.

 

Decided that FOS will get a complaint on this, before court action as that is agreed procedure on CAG. Credit cards not affected by waiver, in theory at least although there are instances arising elsewhere.

 

Interest amounts to £206 at 8%. However, now that Moneyhelp and me have the CCI spreadsheet, I think I will try that and see what happens. Reason for that is Visas incredibly high interest rate charged on the fees which has been paid by us already.

 

So shall I accept this "goodwill gesture"........................................

 

 

A phrase I've used before- OK, but I quite like it, taken from the last battle scene in Independence Day

 

"In the words of my generation............... ......................... ..................

 

UP YOxRS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are also charges for both payment protection plan and accidental death cover. These are a large amount. Anyone any success with these??:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Nuno, how are you?

 

The waiver should apply to bank charges as thats what the OFT case is about. The ombudsman should deal with cc charges. I am going there more to see how they deal with it.

 

Some courts are staying credit card charge claims, treating them the same as bank charges- they are not seeing the difference but see the similarity.

 

However, Barclaycard have made this offer after the OFT announcement.

I will post the spreadsheet to your thread. No probs. Glad to help. Pass it around as needed by anyone as they can be hard to track down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just off the phone to Barclaycard.

 

I phoned 0870 154 0154.

 

I asked why statements had only been given for 6 years and not prior to July 2001. She replied that they destroyed statements older than that. I said that I did not believe that and these were delaying tactics designed to deliberately limit charge reclaims.

 

I asked why Barclaycard had not complied and forwarded full banking history including details of contracts for Payment Protection Plan and Accidental Death Cover, to include details of each policy and agreements for same. My wife is adamant that when Barclaycard phoned her to ask if she wished these policies that she thought they were for £5/6 a month and not totalling £30, as it was some months dependent on credit limit.

 

On 7 August, I had again written to Barclaycard, requesting this information as it was not supplied with the statements.

 

She informed me that Barclaycard have paid £305 into the account. (They must have reactivated it as the account should have been closed as we cleared the balance and told them we had no need for it.). Told her to do what they wanted. We wanted full claim and that they werfe only putting people through hoops, not being transparent and treating people differently. The courts and the FOS would take a dim view of prolonging claims designed purely to put people off the scent.

 

We in any case have no way of accessing the £305 as we have no card, it being returned in bits when balance was settled.

 

I will now draft a modified letter of rejection.

Complete complaint form to FOS.

 

Lets see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Kenny much appreciated, I suppose I was given the offer before the announcement also.

 

Ive had success going through the Ombusman so....fingers crossed.

 

Nuno

 

Was this in respect of credit cards Nuno?

My offer from Barclaycard was made after OFT announcement.

 

Thanks for support and advice, good luck!!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

File note for information.

 

Their good will letter has the following para

 

".......................We Believe our charges are fair and transparent, and we make them clear in our terms and conditions, and on the reverse of every monthly statement"

 

The staements they have sent are for items purchased and charges each month, not the reverse.

 

However, I have original statements. One dated October 2000, on reverse under charges

 

"No additional charges if you....

 

make a late payment or if your direct debit isn't paid".

 

Lets see where I can take that. Anyone else used that route!! Any comments, they must have introduced charges some time after October 2000 for some reason. Guess why!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bankcharges

 

I've just got around to posting an update, so sorry but I did not see your post, hence no quick reply.

 

I noticed however that you have posted on your own thread and been given good advice.

 

It can be best to post on your own thread as it means we can all keep a track of progress on your claim. Hope its getting sorted. If not, get back to me with a link to your thread. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had sent non compliance SAR to them re no details provided to us of

 

  • Payment protection plan
  • accidental death cover


Barclaycard have used a possible delay tactic by returning the non compliance letter stating they can find no trace of the account. (I have checked the account number in my letter to them and it is correct.)

 

Remember, they have paid an initial, interim settlement into the account, which is closed and we can,t access. I suspect they are trying to put me off the scent. I am going to total up the 6 year charges for both policies. I have read that these policies were probably "sold" over the phone. However, these calls c/would have been unsolicited and how can you pay attention when they are selling something and it is the busiest time of the evening. Lets see where this goes.

 

I will reply to them again, including a copy statement, and their interim offer letter. I will also draw their attention to the statement from 2000, which says

 

"No additional charges if you....

 

make a late payment or if your direct debit isn't paid".

 

I know these insurance policies are services and not reclaimable as bank charges, but my wife insists she never wanted nor needed them. I am interested in pursuing as it will confirm their process for keeping records on these policies and their selling methods, and may open other avenues.

 

Anyone aware of other cases like this??:)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...