Leaders united by desire to avoid repeat of credit crisis - Americas, World - The Independent It's official: eurozone collapses into its first recession - Business News, Business - The Independent Car industry gets the jitters over crunch - Business News, Business - The Independent Comet's credit insurance cut back as crisis spreads - Business News, Business - The Independent New Star renegotiates loans and axes jobs as billions wiped off asset values - Business News, Business - The Independent RBS to axe 3,000 jobs as Citi staff braced for more cuts - Business News, Business - The Independent Lehman's bankruptcy '10 times more complicated than Enron' - Business News, Business - The Independent David Prosser: Europe is unravelling but the ECB still doesn't quite get it - Business Comment, Business - The Independent

Osborne: Brown's borrowing risks run on the pound | Business | The Guardian Doubts raised over prospects of success for 'hasty summit' | Business | The Guardian Simon Caulkin: Guess what? Self-interest is bad for the economy | Business | The Observer William Keegan: It's a very deep hole - and Brown needs to find a ladder to climb out | Business | The Observer I think he needs more than a ladder as he's in a very deep hole, a helicopter would be better, although to be fair burying him in the hole is the best idea. Is Darling set for a New Deal? | Business | The Observer Ruth Sunderland: An A to Zirp of being in bad financial shape | Business | The Observer

Hope you can folow these sums??? sparkie If a default charge is added to the balance of say £25 The first month interest compounded would be £2025 plus 2% ===£40.50... ..==£2065.50 next month £2065.50 plus 2% ==£41.31 ====£2106.81 the Act says that simple interest must be applied to the default sum of £25. The creditor would have to show on your statement this calculation Balance £2025 contract interest on £2000.………..£40.00 balance £2040 £25 Default charge interest at 2% ===0.50p Balance owing £2065.50.……. Next month it would have to show Interest 2% 0n balance of £2040 ==£40.80 £2080.40 plus £25.50 ===£ 2105.50 plus 0.50 = £2106.00 Instead of £2106.81 people might say its only 81p extra ...not worth arguing about ….but this is only 1 month on one agreement but remember this increases every month and soon you would be paying £2 to £ 3 a month more than you should be. Consider how much money a credit card bank makes on the thousands who are late…..10 thousand late payers in I month they have made £8000 more than they are legally entitled to

Hi, sounds like you are in a pcikle. Phone the DPS find out if your deposit is registered. then post back here and we can go from there. 3 weeks without hot water or heating is unacceptable and you must be compensated. It would have been a good idea to have involved enviromental health, they would have helped. If your deposit is not held in DPS then I would suggest to your Landlady that she repay your deposit immediatly or you will take her to small claims court for non compliance of TDS and will sue her for 3 x your deposit. Hope this helps.x

As you started this in 2007 i would imagine they have now closed the complaint they usually do after 6 months. All is not lost though as you will have to start again from scratch, Do you have all the statements if so good as this was a co-op/smile credit card the ppi premiums would of been added monthly as a % of the balance all you need is all your statements then you will now exactly how much is to be refunded and can send in a complaint letter straight away. If you do not have all the statements you will need to send of a S.A.R letter to get hold of all the documents they hold on you. For this you will need to enclose with the letter a £10 statutory fee so they can do a search also send it recorded delivery and get a receipt of posting so you have a paper trail and evidence if you need it later on. Also allow 40+2 days for postage for a reply to your S.A.R as that is statutory. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/payment-protection-insurance-ppi/118145-r-subject-access-request.html A link to the PPI template letter is above just edit to suit your needs. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/payment-protection-insurance-ppi/61081-ppi-some-notes-claimants.html Above is a link to some PPI notes that may assist you in your claim. Finally keep at them and post back with your feedback from smile so we can assist you further. Could not read your letter as it was too small perhaps you could upload it to photobucket.com and post the link on here. By my past experience with the Co-op Bank they do tend it fold in easier than many other high street Banks. Good Luck Regards Leon P.S must go now as i have a big bowl of treacle sponge and custard staring at me lol

Great stuff. They so expect you to be scared of them and so often go to court thinking they will walk this one - I love it when a plan falls apart and have been there on more than one occasion:D Power to the people.

I have found some paperwork from click finance.....drop me a PM if you need any help....

sorry to sound so American...but ...SWEEEET:D

Scan 1 in post 1 contains no prescribed terms, and even says the terms are in another document (not acceptable). Scan 2, There is nothing to say this is part of the document you signed, so is irrelevant IMHO.

Bit of an exaggeration there. Yes, rats are not the most pleasant of creatures and yes, they spread disease and must be controlled. So do many other wild animals. The whole point of this thread was to discuss the method of dealing with them. A rat can be killed quickly with a pellet gun or spring trap. There is no justification to deliberately cause any animal unnecessary pain. In fact, it is against the law to do so. (See my earlier post) I am of the opinion that anyone who takes pleasure in extending the suffering of an animal has some kind of psychological problem!

Hello Maggiebroom! Alanalana asked me to pop in to see if I could help with a Template Letter to see off Westcots. I regret I have only skimmed this Thread, but my main impression is that you need to take charge of NatWest. They have acted in a wholly disgraceful way, and they are still sitting in the background smiling. The good news is that I think they are probably stuffed, and know they are stuffed, otherwise you'd have had a County Court Claim long ago. Instead, they have unleashed a sorry crowd of DCAs, from Triton, to Interim Justitia, to Debt Investigations Ltd, to Regal Credit Ltd and now those cheeky chappies at Wescot. At no stage have you been advised when each DCA was instructed, either by NatWest or by the DCA. Some have Threatened Court, and have Threatened nasty things that can only happen after they go to Court and after you default on the Court's Judgement. The fact that every one of the DCAs could not take you to Court anyway, as the Debt was still with NatWest, didn't seem to stop them making these Threats. They'd need an Absolute Assignment to take you to Court in their own name...so all just Threats and in Breach of OFT Debt Collection Guidelines (that you are aware of) and probably also The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. But, all along, the Debt appears to be sitting with NatWest. It never left the building as far as I can see. OK. This may well peeter out, as everyone in this stinky food-chain seems to know they do not have an Enforceable Agreement, so are relying on Threats and intimidation instead. Two main ways to play this I think: (A) Ignore it, log all Calls anyway, file all Letters anyway (for your Harassment Claim/Counter-Claim), and wait until you get to 6 Years from the last Payment, and then its Statute Barred. (B) Send a final stiff Letter to NatWest, then wait until you get to 6 Years from the last Payment, and then its Statute Barred! If (B), then from now on, send anything and everything to The Company Secretary, NatWest Registered Office (I can't check that as Companes House is off-line at the moment, but go to Companies House Tomorrow and find out the NatWest HQ Address from there). Send the above a strong Letter to say they have completely failed to respond to your s78(1) Request, so thereafter they were constrained by virtue of s78(6) from doing anything else until such times as they did. Seems they went ahead to send you a Default Notice, and then Terminated the alleged Account. So, they have shot themselves in the foot I think. Especially so if that Default Notice was invalid. Do you have a Copy of that by any chance? But the fact remains they should not have even issued you with a Default Notice, as s78(6) makes clear. If it's also invalid, then excellent. The issues below are lifted from one of my own Threads (BRW v A Particularly Nasty Bank). You may like to have a read of that, as it could well explain many of the issues that are applicable here: (1) Do they have an Original properly executed Regulated Credit Agreement? (2) Did they comply with your s78(1) Request? (3) Did they have a Right to issue a Default Notice, or were they constrained from doing so by virtue of s78(6)? (4) Did they issue a valid Default Notice? (5) Did they Terminate the alleged Account Lawfully? Fail on any one of the above, and their Donkey is Filleted at PT2537 would say. I think they don't even get past Step One above, which explains the arrogant Letters and string of hopeless f-wit DCAs they have sent to bother you. Next question...is it worth going after the PPI? If so, then I'd consider it. All you have to prove is you Paid it, so if you have Statements showing this, then with Alanalana's help, I'm sure we can create a nice Give Me Back My PPI Letter! But I'd first try and find that Default Notice if you can, because if that is invalid, then they really have blown things. Without that [assuming they can argue (1) and (2) and (3) above are OK] then when they Terminated, they scrapped any chance of asking you for the Balance, because they would need a valid Default Notice to enjoy the benefits of s87. IOW, up until Termination, you only needed to Pay what was due at that time, you didn't need to Pay anything that was not yet due at that time. IOW, the Arrears were due, whereas the remaining Balance was not due, as it was only due in the future. To seek early Payment of something due in the future (the Balance), they would need to have a Default Notice and Lawful Termination...i.e. the very benefits they would enjoy by virtue of s87 if they followed the steps outlined. If they didn't, they don't! The Default Notice is therefore a key Document, and could be the one that kills it stone dead for them, even if they find the Original Agreement, and find it had the Prescribed Terms on the back. So, I don't have a Template Letter, but I can see you understand the OFT issues and the fact that no Assignment Letters have ever been sent despite a crowd of DCAs being fired at you. I think when you read the above, and also maybe check my Thread, you will agree that you do now have all that you need to nail this. Either stand back and wait until it is Statute Barred, or slap NatWest around a bit with a final hard hitting Letter, and maybe then go for PPI if you can find/see an Invalid Default Notice. The main danger of going for the PPI without looking for the Default Notice, is that it may propel them into searching for the Agreement, and they may find it. That's why I say try to locate find/see if there's an Invalid Default Notice, because that will remove the danger of going for the PPI. Even if they Counter-Claim against you for the Balance, they won't get very far if you can show any of the steps above (1)-(5) are flawed. In summary, deal only with NatWest, and send everything to The Company Secretary at their Registered Office. That way they cannot pretend they never received anything. Send them a No Visitors and No Harassment Letter, and remind them about their abject failure to comply with s78(1). Make it clear that any DCA Harassment or Trespass is down to NatWest, and it'll be their CEO who'll be hauled into Court on a Criminal Harassment Charge if they carry on with any more of this Harassment nonsense. You'll be inviting the Press and your MP to come and watch. Then, if any DCAs should pop up on Maggiebroom's Scope, just send them a Copy of the above Letter to NatWest, and c.c. that to NatWest again, always to The Company Secretary. I think all that has gone wrong here is you've been dragged around by a series of pondlife DCAs, when from hindsight it would probably have been better to hit The Company Secretary straight on the bugle from day one, and hit them again, and again, and again, every time a new DCA appeared. I'd better get on, as have a lot to do myself, but hope this helps. Cheers, BRW

I don't trade letters with them because they don't read them -they just press button X and out comes the next template. I CCA them, wait for their response (or not), then if they send me another template after that it's straight to their complaints department, bypassing the Stepford Wives who deal with the mail.

hi animal lover long time no see i might be able to help on this one i had the run around by hbos, computer generated you need to send an sar in it, they have to include the default notice they say its computer generated in your sar, you will get a screen shot of the default notice, if any take it from me, a lot of companies default with out the default notice, this is comming back to bite them in the ass this is a typical hog wash response, ( we have not got one ) when we get the sar back, follow the advice above. you just have to fight tooth and nail to get it removed and keep responding to there letters. in the end they will get fed up with me and hbos, got an equifax alert, default gone they did not even notify me of this keep fighting

Hi Spikey. Welcome to CAG. It certainly is the best place to be. I suggest that you spend some time reading the FAQs and the step by step guides. That will answer most of your initial questions. When you're ready, start your own thread in the appropriate forum and you will get the advice and help that you need. Regards, Rooster.

I did not say there was anything wrong with being a tree huger, I would also classify myself as the same. I am an animal lover and would not want any animal to suffer and that is why I offered the advice I did. I have been to rat shows (yes there are pedigree rats out there) and do not have anything against them. I have read that you are never more than 10 ft away from a rat. Can't remember where I read it but the point was that we are infested with these rodents and they do spread disease, though (as mentioned above) can be companions at the same time.

Hi GodMother, I'll try and explain in simple terms but someone who works in accounting or a bank would be best qualified, I'll post a couple of simple sums in a few minutes. sparkie

Schrodingers cat- You'll be please to know that I am compassionate to all animals. Whether it be rats or insects or anything. At a place where I once worked, there was a slightly injured pigeon and facilities asked for someone to kill it. After raising my horror the bird was eventually released into Bushes whereby I felt it had at least another chance. With regards to the rats, the point of humane traps is to not kill them but release them at another time and location many miles from where they were caught. To as you state they then are not released but put into boiling water is a hideous act and could only be carried out by an individual who has a killing instinct! I would make a formal complaint about this at your workplace demanding action! In fact this must be very distressing for you and your other work collegues though some might not admit to it! Gilbert's comment "that if he were to catch Aids" should be addressed also as Aids can not be contracted but the virus hiv can which may or may not lead to Aids.

Paying prior to appeal flies in the face of justice, if you lose in court and appeal, the judgment against you is automatically stayed and no enforcement can be taken til such time as your appeal is heard the same goes for a local authority, you appeal and only once your appeal is heard and decided then you become required to pay or not to suggest that you should pay prior to appeal gives the company a argument that you do indeed accept liability and removes any defence that you may have, take ASDA for instance, they have a parking policy that says that you cant park in a parent and child bay without child under 12 now i have a Graco car seat which is removable and when i go to asda, i take the baby seat out and put him in the buggy ( anyone who knows the Graco travel system will know what i mean Now i had a ticket the other day for not having a child seat,now if i had sent payment with my appeal, in the words of the company who enforce the site, i would have accepted the ticket and no appeal would have been considered however, where i wrote to them and advised of the situation they did indeed revoke the ticket and issued an apology as their employee had failed to enforce the terms of the site correctly so in the interests of fairness it would be correct not to pay prior to appeal but if your appeal was unsuccessful then that would be the correct time to pay the fine

As requested by whiterose11, I am coming in to give my advice. You should not have to sue the individual, and from the sound of it, if you tried you wouldn't get the money. His wife would have no right to cancel the transaction as it was their joint credit card, thus he had the right to use it. Thereby Paypal had no right to cancel the transaction, and demand the funds from you. The DCA [Robinson Way?] and Paypal are not likely to take you to court, in my experience, because they know they will lose the case. I suggest you write a letter to Paypal which should be sent to; Paypal, Whittaker House, Whittaker Avenue, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1EH In it, demand a satisfactory written response within 8 weeks so that you can take it to the Financial Ombudsman Service. Detail your complaint clearly and succinctly. Make clear that you are disputing the debt, therefore it is - in accordance with the OFT debt collection guidelines - unlawful for them to instruct any DCA. Post a draft copy - minus any confidential information - of the letter up here, and I'll try and proof it for you. Once we've proofed it, send it special delivery [not recorded, as that isn't guaranteed] to the address above, and wait 8 weeks from the date they receive it, or till you receive an unsatisfactory response. Check when they receive it by entering the tracking code [which should begin with 'X' 'Y' or 'Z' and end in 'GB'] on Royal Mail's Track and Trace facility at http://track.royalmail.com/portal/rm/track?catId=500185&mediaId=22700601&keyname=track_home When and if you receive - what will almost certainly be an unsatisfactory response - I'll guide you through the FOS process, and what to fill in the FOS form, which you can download from Financial Ombudsman Service. I suggest you download the PDF version, as the Word version has limitations. I'm not sure if you can save the PDF version with text in on your computer, so download - for free - PrimoPDF from Free PDF Creator - Convert to PDF from Any File You Can Print - PrimoPDF, which will allow you to "print" documents into a PDF file, hence saving a completed PDF form [especially useful for court forms]. That's all for now. The ball's in your court [pun intended] to draft a letter and post a copy here - minus confidential information - to Paypal.

Only a PPC could come up with what is frankly a laughable answer. You try to justify your questionable methods with nonsense, hoping it will fool others. So you have people appealing who are not genuinely appealing? Are they falsely appealing? Are they appealing for the fun of it? Do they even know why they are appealing? Perhaps you should have a quiet word with yourself, and consider how riddiculous your post reads. Do you not see that by asking for money up front, at best your actions would be viewed as suspicious? Are you suggesting then, that everybody who appeals Council issued parking tickets, because payment is not required up front, is not genuinely appealing against their ticket? Imagine the uproar if Councils insisted on payment before an appeal would be considered.

Hi Made a few suggested changes for you to consider

Dear Sirs, Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 Thank you for your recent letter sent to me, the contents of which are noted. I appreciate your quick response to my original letter. However, the reply received by me does not fulfil your requirements under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Act demands that I be supplied with a true copy of any properly executed credit agreement that exists in relation to the above account. I may ask for this on demand providing that a fee of £1.00 is paid. This fee was sent with my original letter. My request remains outstanding. A statement of account with no personal details on it, like the one you sent in your reply, does not constitute a true copy of any credit agreement that may or may not have been signed by me on the opening of this account. A statement of account neither confirms that I am liable for any alleged debt to you, nor gives me any chance to evaluate whether any original agreement was ‘properly executed’. I still require you to send me a true copy of the original credit agreement that you allege exists. As you will know, under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a judge is not permitted to make any enforcement order unless the creditor can provide a true signed copy of the original credit agreement. This means that unless you can produce such an agreement, this alleged debt is not enforceable in law. You had until xx/xx.2008 (12+2 working days after the request was made) to provide me with the true copy I requested. You are now in default of my request. Any account I hold with you is now in legal dispute. Whilst the account remains in dispute, you are not permitted to ask for any payment, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you. Furthermore, whilst the dispute remains, you are not entitled to charge any interest on the account, nor make any further charges to the account. Additionally, you are not entitled to register any information on this account with any credit reference agency. To register information with a credit reference agency, you must have written consent from the customer to collate and share such information. This consent is given in the form of a signed credit agreement, so until you produce such an agreement, you may not do this. The requirement for consent to share data is a clear requirement of the Data Protection Act 1998. any such attempts to share my data without my consent will be met with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office The time limits, which are laid down in the Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations 1983 are clear. You must supply an executed credit agreement within 12 + 2 working days of a proper CCA request. If you fail to comply with a legitimate request the account enters a default situation. To sum up, I will not be making any further payments to you until you provide me with the document I have requested. Whilst you remain in default of my request, you are not permitted to take any action against this account. This includes adding further charges and passing any information to the credit reference agencies. I expect you to write to me confimring that the account has been closed and no further action will be taken. I look forward to your reply. Yours faithfully Ida x

send a letter that refers to your previous request for a CCA and that you would appreciate a reply. Short and to the point.

peternet your arguement only holds water (and only a small amount even then) where you are managing sites where absolutely no unauthorised parking should take place, i.e. someone is also trespassing in order to park in the first place. (and yes that would cover your repetitive example of parking on someone's drive coz you never should be there in the first place.) Many of these invoices are issued in publicly accessable places for stupid "infringements" of apparent rules such as "not fully in bay", "stayed 2 minutes over a 2 hour limit" or as has been posted on these forums "parked in a mother/baby bay without a baby seat in car!" etc etc. You can never justify these type of examples with your "private drive" quote that you keep coming up with.

Oi! No they're not. I put a lot of work into them. There are differing views on whether to use them or ignore them but which way to go is a bit like which is the best way to get to Birmingham from London, M6 and M1 or M40?

Correct....In 2004 the OFT warned all creditors and sent out advises and directives about the coming into force of the New Act and to get their agreements and their Act together, but Swift blundered on and took no real notice of the warnings or the Act, with regard to JOsie8's comment that is quite correct also but Consumer legislations state that in any interpretation of the terms and conditions the interpretation must always be the interpretation in favour of the Consumer, and the new section 140 is a cracking bit of legislation sparkie

Hi, surfer, you have my sympathies i have been in a similar position more than once. First dont consider moving out of your home. Ive thought about people in your situation a number of times, and here is what i would do, 1 Open a bank account with a bank unconnected with ANY of your creditors. setup DDs for your priority bills/secured creditors ONLY not the unsecured ones. This is to stop something the banks do called "off-setting", get back if you want to know more. 2 Contact CCCS, this is a free service, it is funded by the bankers but gives advice based on the banking code of conduct. You can do it online or phone. CCCS will help you do a Income/Expenditure summary to send to each of your creditors, and a pro-rata sum that you will pay them each month. They will make a telephone appointment with you, and ask questions about your income expenditure, be as truthful as possible but dont leave yourself short. This summary is then sent to all creditors, with a request to stop all interest/charges. 3 Once this is all set up and running smoothly, send a CCA request to each creditor to find out if they have an enforceable agreement, get back to us with the replies.

OK, in the meantime you could make a start on the defence forms and I will draft some text for Q.27 of the forms. Ell-enn

Because there is no 'appeals' process A person not familiar with [problem] tickets may think there is some legitimacy due to their apparently being an appeals procedure, and perhaps would actually think they would get their money back. We know a lot of these companies try to pass themselves off as council-like.

Back in the real world, in case anyone forgets where the real problem lies, watch this...it'll be the best 15 mins of your life. This latest banking Recession will soon fall neatly into place: Money as Debt We need to remove bankers from Politics. We need to re-introduce rigid banking Controls to keep bankers from inflating the Debt Bubble until it is the size of Saturn. We need to bring back real Bank Managers, and sack all of the banking drones/Clerks who cannot make a decision to save their lives. We need to scrap the Credit Reference Agencies (CRAs), because once we have Bank Managers with local Authority, able to make local decisions, they won't need to ask a CRA whenever they need to pass wind or cough. We need to see all DCA staff made to wear Girly Pink crotchless peek-a-boo overalls with LED bobble hats. We need to limit Credit Card Interest to a Maximum of 10% over base (unsecured means unsecured if under 25k). We need to limit Personal Loans to a maximum of 5% over base (unsecured means unsecured if under 25k). We need to see s127(3) reinstated, now. We need to see Princess Anne made King (she has the balls for the job)! We need to see Justice for Gurkhas (Gurkha Justice)! If I've left anything out, let me know, and I'll sort it in the morning after my Bacon & Eggs and first glass of Beer. Cheers, BRW