Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Firstly, I would like to thank everyone for their help in this matter. Since my last post I have received a reply from Plymouth Council Insurance Team concerning my wife’s accident (please see enclosed letter and photo of the offending Badminton post) which they deny any responsibility for the said accident. I feel that the Council is in breach of their statutory duties under the following acts: The Leisure Centre was negligent in its duty of care and therefore, in breach of the statutory duty owed under section 2 of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (the Act) to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all their employees, and others who might be affected by its undertaking, e.g. members of the public visiting the Leisure Centre to use the facilities. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 that requires employers to assess risks (including slip and trip risks) and, where necessary, take action to address them. The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) require the risk to people’s health and safety from equipment that is used at a Leisure Centre be prevented or controlled. I would like some advice to see if my assumptions are correct and my approach to obtaining satisfactory outcome to this matter are accurate. Many thanks   PLM23000150 - Copy Correspondence.pdf post docx.docx
    • Talking to them does not reset the time limit, although they will probably tell you it does, they'd be lying. Dumbdales are the in-house sols for Lowlife, just the next desk along. If Lowlifes were corresponding with you at your current address then Dumbdales know your address. However, knowing that they are lower than a snake's belly, you would be well advised to send them a letter, informing them of your current address and nothing else. Get 'proof of posting' which is free from the PO counter, don't sign it, simply type your name. That way then they have absolutely no excuse for attempting a back door CCJ.   P.S. Best course of action, IGNORE them, until or unless you get a claim form......you won't.
    • A 'signed for' Letter of Claim has been sent today so they have 14 days from tomorrow... Lets wait and see what happens but i suspect judging by their attitude they wont reply 
    • I am extremely apprehensive about burning our files.... I do not know why, so it is becoming an endless feedback loop. Scared to pull the trigger to speak in the desire not to mess up my file. 
    • Hi All, So brief outline. I have Natwest CC debt £8k last payment i made was 7th November 2018 Not a penny since. So coming up to the 6 year mark. Can't remember when i took out the  credit card would be a few years before everythign hit the fan. Moved house 2020 - updated NatWest as I still have a current account with them. Then Lowells took over from Moorcroft and were writing to me at my current address. I did get a family member to speak to them 3 years ago regarding the debt explained although it may be in my name I didn't rack it up then went contact again. 29th may received an email from overdales saying they were now managing the debt. I have not had any letter yet which i thought is odd?  Couple of questions 1. Does my family member speaking to lowell restart statute barred clock? 2. Do you think overdales aren't writing to me because they will back door CCJ to old address even though Lowells have contacted me at current address never at previous? ( have no proof though stupidly binned all letters  ) Should I write to them and confirm my address just incase? Does this restart statute barred clock? 3. what do you think best course of action is?   Any help/advice is appreciated I am aware they may ramp up the process now due to 7th December being the 6 year mark.   Many Thanks in advance! The threads on here have been super helpful to read.  
  • 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

G E Capital/Money anyone?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6649 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

Has anyone attempted claiming back from these evil swines?

I would relish the chance to claim my money back from them but wanted to know if anyone else was in the process or had won. I had a storecard with them and they made my life a misery until in the end I was able to clear it and close it. Now I am wondering if they will provide me with the info on how much my charges amount to.

Any help appreciated.

Sky

BOS - Prelim letter del 19/5/06 LBA del. no response - filed 12/06

Clydesdale Financial Services - Gave them their chances off to court we go!

HSBC - Watch out I'm coming after you next!

 

If you like anything I say click the scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are as vunerable as anyone else. Read the FAQs and Library and then come back with any questions

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go for it!

I had a wrangle to try and get my statements and not pay the 50p for each one! Let us know how you get on.

Sky

BOS - Prelim letter del 19/5/06 LBA del. no response - filed 12/06

Clydesdale Financial Services - Gave them their chances off to court we go!

HSBC - Watch out I'm coming after you next!

 

If you like anything I say click the scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send a blunt reminder

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have an account with them where they charged me late payment charges (£15 per time). I managed to get them to remove one by asking on the telephone but am now in the process of closing the account before I claim the second charge back.

 

Will post separately once action starts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have the address to write to please?

Status:

 

Halifax - DPA sent 03/03/06.

Prelim Letter - Sent 27/03/06 ignored.

LBA sent 10/04/06 - Ignored

Moneyclaim filed - 26.04.06

Acknowledgement received 3rd May. Halifax state they intend to defend.

Halifax Settled in Full - 17 May 2006

 

If you've found this post helpful, I would be grateful if you could click on the 'Scales of Justice' button in the top right corner of this post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Address on back of original agreement is:

 

GE Capital Bank Limited

Trent House

Torre Road

Leeds LS99 2BD

 

T&C's also say that they reserve the right to apply 'reasonable' charges for default and will provide 30 days notice of applying charges (which I personally never received).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for the address. I have never received notice of charges either!

Status:

 

Halifax - DPA sent 03/03/06.

Prelim Letter - Sent 27/03/06 ignored.

LBA sent 10/04/06 - Ignored

Moneyclaim filed - 26.04.06

Acknowledgement received 3rd May. Halifax state they intend to defend.

Halifax Settled in Full - 17 May 2006

 

If you've found this post helpful, I would be grateful if you could click on the 'Scales of Justice' button in the top right corner of this post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit long winded and plagiarised form the info on the forum but I’ve got this going with GE at the moment. Read from the bottom up

 

"Dear Joanne

 

Thank you for your response. Could you let me know who my comments have been noted with in your organisation?

 

I did n’t say that I was disappointed by your products all I wanted was for you to confirm some transparency in why you would seek to impose disproportionate charges on your card for, inter alia, late payments, over credit limit and administration fees for returned cheques. If you could let me know to the contrary then I would have no problem in submitting an application.

 

The account may be run, as you have said, by the terms and conditions. However, included in the contract are other terms which are not written and which the customer has not specifically agreed to? These terms are called "implied terms". They are implied by the Law. GEMoney is obliged by law to give the customer benefit of those implied terms. One of the implied terms is that charges may not be more than the actual loss caused by the customer transgression. In law you (GE) can recoup the actual loss from the customer. There is no argument about that as it is your legal right. You are not however permitted to make profits out of penalties. I am sure that you (GE) are aware that the laws to which I have referred to as they are more than 100 years old and they have been strengthened by modern consumer laws passed by Parliament.

 

Given this could you therefore please confirm the actual cost to GE of processing late payments, over credit limit (for which you will charge interest), administration fees for returned cheques by giving me a breakdown of how each is made up? My opinion is that they are disproportionate to the actual cost you are legally entitled to recover in the event of default. I would estimate that the actual cost to GE would be no more than a few pence as the process is automated and occurs many thousands of time per day/week/month based on the information on your customer database which contains details of all the transactions. As a customer I would have no argument with paying the actual cost to GE for delinquency on an account after all the charges would then be considered reasonable in the eyes of the law and your company would not be breaking it so frequently.

 

Your reply seems “scripted” if you don’t mind me saying. If you are not in a position to give me a definitive reply then maybe you could pass this onto Brad Cooper or William Cary and they could put me right. Are these people the ones who set the charges?

 

I look forward to your prompt response.

 

 

 

EricTheRed

 

________________________________________

From: ~GCF UK, Your Questions (GE Consumer Finance) [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: 16 March 2006 16:26

To: EricTheRed

Subject: RE: GEMoney MasterCard

 

Dear Mr Duree,

thank you for your comments.

 

I am disappointed to hear you feel this way about our products and your comments have been noted. I would like to take the opportunity to point out if the account is run appropriately and according to the terms and conditions, you can enjoy the benefits of the card with no additional charges, which we believe is a significantly better package than some of our competitors.

 

However, GE Money does and will continue to work closely with the regulatory bodies and will endeavour to meet and invariably exceed their requirements.

 

Regards

Joanne

 

GE Money

CDM/e-Contact

 

Notice: This e-mail, together with any attachments, is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail or telephone. Please then delete it from your computer without making any copies or disclosing it to any other person

GE Money is a trademark of General Electric Company and a trading name of GE Capital Bank Limited, Registered Office: 6 Agar Street, London WC2N 4HR. Registered in England No. 1456283

-----Original Message-----

From: EricTheRed

Sent: 16 March 2006 12:26

To: ~GCF UK, Your Questions (GE Consumer Finance)

Subject: GEMoney MasterCard

I’m not a customer of yours but was going to apply for your credit card. I’ve changed my mind.

 

Are you aware that your charges for late payment, over credit limit, administration fee for returned cheques are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law. Further, as a disproportionate penalty they are invalid under the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Para.8 and sch.2(1)(e). In the event that the charges are not a penalty then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15.

 

If you could justify these charges to me then as to how they are not disproportionate to your actual loss in the event that a default is triggered by a any of the above on the account I would think again about my decision to apply for your card.

 

I look forward to your prompt response.

 

EricTheRed

This e-mail is confidential and privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please accept our apologies; please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Please inform us that this message has gone astray before deleting it. Thank you for your co-operation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had this from GE Capital

 

Dear EricTheRed

 

Thank you for your recent email.

I am sorry that I have been unable to provide the answer you were hoping for and that you find my answer scripted.

 

I feel that I am unable to add anything further other than to state that, at GE, we feel our fees are representative of the costs involved and therefore entirely lawful.

 

If you wish to take this matter further, for example escalate it to Brad Cooper, I would suggest you put your questions and comments in a letter to the following address;

 

Mr Brad Cooper

Executive Office

GE Money

PO Box 700

LEEDS

LS99 2BD

 

Once again please accept my apologies for not being able to assist any further via email.

 

Regards

Joanne

 

Joanne Scargill

GE Money

CDM/e-Contact

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what are you going to do next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would recommend attacking their integrity.

Integrity is a HUGE by-word within American based companies and the mere hint that theirs may be in question in some way tends to rattle a few cages. Link it to the fact that a huge multinational company is riding roughshod over UK contract law - an integrity issue if ever there was one, so make it clear you consider it to be just that.

I don't know how their charges compare to other banks, but if they're similar then you could ask the question why a company which so actively embraces and promotes the concept of lean six sigma methodologies for driving down cost and increasing productivity seems unable to harness this powerful tool for the benefit of its customers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/06/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

BOS - Prelim letter del 19/5/06 LBA del. no response - filed 12/06

Clydesdale Financial Services - Gave them their chances off to court we go!

HSBC - Watch out I'm coming after you next!

 

If you like anything I say click the scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6649 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

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...