Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It seems to me that you could probably apply for judgement on 30 October. However it's a good idea to keep on checking regularly to see if it is permitted before then. As soon as it allows you, do it.
    • Deemed service on a company is two days after issue. Deemed service on a litigant in person is five days after issue – unless something has changed. I've already said that proposing to send further particulars is generally speaking unnecessary and only complicates matters as you are finding out. However as you have indicated that you are sending further particulars, send them further particulars and simply state in the body of the particulars that you have nothing to add to the particulars of claim contained in the original claim form at this moment. Send that straightaway so that when you apply for judgement you can click the box and say that yes you have done that. It might not have been fatal not to have informed them that it was a laptop – but it is better that you did and the important thing is that they had been told of the item and of the value at the time that you entered into the delivery contract. I think that you will find that laptops are one of their prohibited items – along with almost everything else in the world
    • *Update* turns out Capquest bought the debt from Phoenix Recoveries. We now have a reference number for our solicitor to use. 
    • Ah I thought you meant in the actual MCOL claim, in the ebay listing yes, in the PackLink compensation claim yes as well, in the MCOL claim I made no mention aside from the value of the item.   and just an update:   I am able to request a judgement from the two separately.   The claim was issued on the 13th, plus 5 days and another 14 days = 1st Nov my guess (not accounting for business days)   This was also added:    
    • Okay, so what you have to do is you have to take the money you paid to the garage which I understand is £2000. You've gotta consider that the value of the labour they put in was completely wasted because you had to have the turbo taken out and then refitted – is this correct? However, the turbo itself was useful to you and so you should be required to pay for the cost of the turbo. If this is correct and you have independent evidence that the turbo had been incorrectly fitted then you should sue them for the balance. This means that you have to find out the cost of a turbo – was it an original or was it a pattern part? Anyway, you have to find out the cost of the turbo and deduct that from the £2000 and that should be the value of your claim unless you can tell us of any other losses which you have reasonably incurred as a result of their poor workmanship. Let us know
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

Is this LloydsTSB way of skirting the unfair bank charges?


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4788 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

Just read the new terms and conditions for unplanned overdrafts from LloydsTSB instead of the maximum of £90 a month the charge can be as high as £200 for going £100+ plus a £15 there and then when you go over your limit which of course will tip you even further over your limit

so even though they are stating they have reduced their unplanned overdraft fees they have in fact more than doubled them

 

Monthly fee £15 You will pay this fee if you have an Unplanned Overdraft

at any time during your monthly billing period (even if

your next monthly billing period is only a few days away).

We will charge you a maximum of one monthly fee

in a monthly billing period.

Daily fee Unplanned Overdraft balance is:

less than £25 £6 a day

£25 to £100 £15 a day

more than £100 £20 a day

Please note, an Unplanned Overdraft continues until it is repaid. So, at the start of any monthly

billing period, if you still have an Unplanned Overdraft from the previous monthly billing period,

you will incur a further monthly fee and up to another 10 daily fees (depending on when you pay

it back).

 

hope that makes sense

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are clearly trying to play one game on overdraft 'fees' and another on returned item charges.

 

If they return an item, they will charge you £20 per item, upto a maximum of £60 per day. So if you have 10 items returned on one day (because they haven't cleared, say, a salary cheque) you will pay £60 and if they return just 3 the next day you will also pay £60. They could return 21 items in one day and charge £60 or 21 items over 7 days and charge £420. It is pretty laughable from the point of view of reflecting the bank's actual charges. Either it costs £420 to return 21 items or it doesn't.

 

This is just finger in the air stuff and they are flailing about madly to attempt to sound reasonable.

 

The really serious amounts of money we all know is not around overdraft fees (the media just don't get this, do they?) it is aroung returned item fees. They still skirt round the issue of whether the fees they are charging are fair and representative of the actual costs incurred in each individual charge item.

 

The media have presented this as Lloyds TSB slashes charges. We know it's nothing of the kind. We could all apply the new rules to how our charges arose in the past and we will see we would be paying similar overall penalties, if not more.

 

They seem to be actually setting up 'things to do' when an account might go overdrawn or over a limit to create the impression that it is not automated. They may even have delberately employed more actual people to pretend to be 'doing something' whenever any individual customer/victim presents a Direct Debit or Cheque which would take them overdrawn/over a limit. This is the real game. Is it automated or not?

 

They may have started deliberately to stop automating it because they know they can still make a good margin on it when it's not. They already factored in they can't win the argument at all when it's actually automated and they could end up with zilch. At least the new way makes them make a bit of dosh. Look out for attempts to present the process as un-automated. De-automated, more like.

 

There is no change here from the basics - are the charges fair, do they represent the real loss to the bank? £20 a day, £420 a week?

 

I would love to do a job which earns me £420 per week for dealing with three events each day.

 

As a comprehensive school teacher, I'm afraid my job's a bit more complicated than that! Pays about the same!

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...