Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

CAPQUEST adding interest on unenforceable Beneficial Credit Card debt?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4005 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

Hi,

 

Many many years ago I opened a Beneficial Credit Card (a moisten and seal application) which later was sold to Marbles and then to Capquest.

 

From 2008 I made token payments to HFC (Beneficial) as I was struggling with my finances (due to disability etc).

 

Beneficial were not the most pleasant to deal with, defaulted the debt quite early and sold to Marbles.

 

Marbles were a pain in the ****, and refused to correspond in regards to the debt. I stopped token payments at this point.

 

Marbles did not contact me at all for the whole year they owned the debt, nor provided any statements (as the account was already defaulted) before selling on to Capquest.

 

Then I had the 'experience' from Capquest merry go round of harassment so

 

I CCA'd capquest as well as writing many formal complaints.

 

also SAR'd both Marbles and Capquest and received numerous 'constructed' documents. It was quite shocking.

 

In response to the CCA request, they were unable to attain a copy of my CCA, and stated they were trying to attain a copy from Marbles (good luck there!!).

 

I finally received a copy of the original app form (moisten and seal) dated in the late 90's.

 

Along with some Marbles T&C's which were never applicable as the account was defaulted long before Marbles purchased the account.

 

Capquest then stated they were 'waiting' for further information from Marbles in reference to the account, although not stating exactly what.

 

For the last 3 years I have heard nothing from Capquest, no statements, nothing further on my CCA request etc.

 

No arrears notices. Nothing.

 

However I have just looked at my CRA and they continue to add quite a bit of interest every month.

 

I thought that a DCA was only allowed to add interest if the T&C's permitted them too

- and as they have declined to provide any T&C's relating to when the account was defaulted

or anytime before then I do not believe this interest should be added.

 

I know I shouldn't really worry about this, my CRA is trashed anyway for another couple of years

but I have concerns that if they manage to take this to court then the balance is wrong by over £3000!

 

I dont feel as though I should contact them (sleeping dogs and that) but at the back of my mind this is wrong and I wonder if I should get the reporting stopped?

 

Any advice?

 

MT

Link to post
Share on other sites

what is the defaulted date in the debt summary?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Dx,

 

The default date is early 2009, as defaulted by HFC before selling to Marbles.

 

I think this is why Capquest provided a 'T&C' printed between 'Me_too and Marbles' dated September 2008, which is before Marbles even purchased the debt!

 

It's a little late to read the small print, to see if it allows them to add interest, but as it isn't valid anyway I don't think it really matters if it states if they can add interest.

 

I think I'm fairly confident that this is unenforceable, I seem to recall reading HFC shredded lots of their original documents.

The DN has failings, the CCA is a copy of a 'moisten and seal' application form and I haven't seen any T&C's which relate to the account upon opening or default. If it was enforceable I'm sure I would have been taken to court long before now.

I've just had a look through old statements and there are a few £12 late payments, but not many. Not enough to make a dent in the balance. Also very few PPI charges, as when these were all added to my account incorrectly I made sure they were cancelled straight away.

 

I can definitely vouch that companies added PPI on without permission in the late 90's and early 2000's as I working in the Loan industry and had PPI added when I have never taken it out!

 

But seeing the wrong balance has started me thinking......what if they do take me to court......not a good thing to worry about really. As I said I have a pile of 'we will take court action' letters from Capquest, none of which have ever been followed up.

 

 

Me_too

Link to post
Share on other sites

yea ai've had those on a +£7k debt for 1982!

 

you've got the right idea

 

just ignore them.

 

CQ dont do anything with HFC stuff.

 

its IND and TBI you have to watchout for.

 

shame the default is so late.

 

i'd have expected it to be earlier

hence the asking

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dx and Annie,

 

Thanks for the reassurance.

I thought I should ignore and place to the back of my mind, I think I just needed a little convincing.

 

As always, thanks for the advice.

 

me_too

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...