Voluntary Termination with Startline

[dx100uk]

who??

don't tell me moneybarn?

[dx100uk]

yes p'haps you should have.

 

but they've shot themselves in the foot here

as they appear to have terminated the agreement without issuing a default notice..opps

bang..shot themselves in the foot.!!

 

[dx100uk]

as an sar is free and 30 days now

why not simply send a new one.

 

I've not confirmed this yet properly

I but I believe this might poss void the whole agreement under the CCA...

 

has she moved since taking this finance out?

[dx100uk]

are you sure this default notice 08/03/2017 giving a date not nearer than 14 days from the date of the DN to satisfy it, thus she did

thus the default notice was rectified within time?

 

have you still got it?

scan it to PDF please

read upload

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

weird lot...

 

1.they default and terminate in march 2017. [correctly as the dn sum was not met by the due date on the DN]

 

2.they then issue another DN nov 2017. [thus we can assume they consider the conditions of the 03/2017 DN was satisfied..thus now dead]

 

3.they issue yet another DN july 2018 and terminate again 10/2018 [thus we can assume they consider the conditions of the 11/2017 DN was satisfied..thus now dead]

 

4. following your 09/1019 VT letter , they then reply stating The agreement was terminated 20 months ago [01/2018] via Termination Notice therefore you have lost the right to Voluntary terminate the agreement. the relevant DN being 07/2018.

 

so it appears they HAVE considered all actions prior 07/2018 DN were rescinded, but that as the DN of 07/2018 was not satisfied , they were correct to terminate this time on 10/2018.

 

so twice previously have considered you met their demands and wiped the DN/TN requirements,

why can't they do this the 3rd time and accept the VT is valid?

 

not very consistent in my mind!!!

 

have you the statements from day one please?

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

2 hours ago, dx100uk said:

weird lot...

 

1.they default and terminate in march 2017. [correctly as the dn sum was not met by the due date on the DN]

 

2.they then issue another DN nov 2017. [thus we can assume they consider the conditions of the 03/2017 DN was satisfied..thus now dead]

 

3.they issue yet another DN july 2018 and terminate again 10/2018 [thus we can assume they consider the conditions of the 11/2017 DN was satisfied..thus now dead]

 

4. following your 09/1019 VT letter , they then reply stating The agreement was terminated 20 months ago [01/2018] via Termination Notice therefore you have lost the right to Voluntary terminate the agreement. the relevant DN being 07/2018.

 

so it appears they HAVE considered all actions prior 07/2018 DN were rescinded, but that as the DN of 07/2018 was not satisfied , they were correct to terminate this time on 10/2018.

 

so twice previously have considered you met their demands and wiped the DN/TN requirements,

why can't they do this the 3rd time and accept the VT is valid?

 

not very consistent in my mind!!!

 

have you the statements from day one please?

 

 

 

 

 

re above...

ta i'll match that up latter and respond

 

dx

 

[dx100uk]

what are all these refund overpayment cheques?

 

did you see them?

 

[dx100uk]

Ok im gonna revisit again to findout what they were made of

i was thinking about all those fees poss

 

but eitherway if they are refunding then messin around again sending out defaults it makes them look totally incompetent

[dx100uk]

sri been busy

get there soon

 

dx

[dx100uk]

only appear to have 1 page of the agreement duplicated several times over the uploads.

have you the rest?

and the T&C's?

 

just gonna checkout why they have issue THREE default notices!! AND TWO TN'S

me thinks they haven't a clue what they are doing

these refunds don't make sense either!!

[dx100uk]

interesting.

 

page nine doc4 

what date is that please? its obscured??

 

they speak of subsequent NOSIA..

have they ever ent any?

 

 

[dx100uk]

getting somewhere.

 

that letter ref'd above where she got £695 - that was because they did not send statutory notices of sums in arrears so they had to refund all the int from the start of their error period and any penalty charges.

I will guess its was dated 03/2018.

it also INVALIDATES any default notices and termination notices sent to that date.

 

so they cant refuse the VT request on the back of the agreement being terminated jan 2018 as that was voided by them.

 

now since then they have sent DN  07/2018 and TN 10/2018

however they have also issued a like refund  05/2019

and i will guess she had NOT had any notice of sums in arrears sent to her since 03/2018?

 

so, i bet they are the same No NOSIA refunds - so even if they state opps we made a mistakes,

DN/TN in 2018 are invalid too

 

so her VT is valid, they cant refuse it.

 

HTH

 

dx

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

AFAIK there is no such thing as a termination notice without a valid DN?

a default notice must be issued, a TN is merely a letter confirming the DN's actions have been implemented should the debtor fail the conditions stated in the dn?

 

ref the attached doc

have you got the NOSIA letters now they said they would send on?

need to know the period this failure covered please

 

also, go we have all the SAR up here now 

or is there a comms log or account log whereby they are showing their internal notes about the agreement and how you conducted yourself?

 

dx

 

refund letter.pdf

[dx100uk]

they say in letter dated 20/01/20 that the agreement was terminated on 30 July 2017 and cannot be terminated twice, so your VT request is invalid.

 

startline issued termination or Default notices on the following dates:

……………………..

 

Letter: 08-03-2017  Default Notice
refs a dn dated:31/05/2016 - there is no such DN in an SAR return.

 

nature of breach: instalments of £211.73 on 30th each month.

action to remedy: payment of arrears £438.46  by 29-03-2017

other info:
on or after date 29-03-2017 we shall terminate, withdraw possession and recover sums due upon termination.

total paid: £1532.11
outstanding: £11246.99
less rebate: £3224.03
Amount Due: £8022.66

 

if you act before 29-03-2017  and have paid £4613.25 you can VT.

 

……………………………...

 

letter: 30/03/2017 termination notice 
liable for payment:
arreaers to date : £365.38
the balance of: £10,586.50
total: £10,951.88
7 days notice else ROG+sums outstanding.

.......................

Letter: 11/12/2017 Default Notice
nature of breach: instalments of £211.73 due 30th each month.

action to remedy: payment of arrears £449.23 by 30-12-17

other info:
payments to date: £5226.91
outstanding: £9351.89
less rebate: £2251.41
Amount Due: £7100.48

if you act before 30-12-17 and have paid £7056.90 you can VT.

............

Letter: 27-07-2018 Default Notice
refs a dn dated:31/05/2016 - there is no such DN in an SAR return.

nature of breach: instalments of £211.73 on 30th each month.

action to remedy: payment of arrears £226.73 by 15-08-2018

other info:
on or after date 27-07-2018 we shall terminate,withdraw possesion and recoversums due upon termination.

total paid: £6250.91
outstanding: £7647.28
less rebate: £1590.47
Amount Due: £6065.81

if you act before 15-08-18 and have paid £7056.90 you can VT.

........................ 

letter: 01-10-2018 termination notice 
liable for payment:
arreaers to date : £325.06
the balance of: £6079.75
total: £6404.81
7 days notice else ROG+sums outstanding.

……………………...

 

 

NEW ORDER STATEMENTS.pdf Doc1.pdf

[dx100uk]

Why is it not unlawful rescission, a breach of CCA 1974 87 (1) - they cannot terminate without serving a DN first.

[dx100uk]

doh how did i miss that 1st dn..updated my list..

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

you mean a return of goods order.

 

dx

 

[dx100uk]

next hearing could be fun then..

 

has she kept paying or did she stop as over 50%?

 

i have a feeling the DN they rely upon is invalid anyway as to their own admittance via the NOSIA's refunds, the sum on the DN was not correct.

and ofcourse all the sec 140 stuff.

 

i'd be inclined to point that out too them. 

accept the VT or lets goto court.....

 

why did the judge refuse the ROG? can she remember?

 

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

yea good though...estoppel ..and as you say, they repeatedly issued subsequent default notices, why issue several when the agreement in their belief was already terminated...they sort of run together to further the thought they don't have a clue what they are doing...bit like moneybarn..they make it up as they go along.

[dx100uk]

about right

no real law to demand the car so uses abuse to get their way

i suspect starline haven't a clue what they are doing..like i said ..just like moneybarn...fleecers united.

 

dx

 

[dx100uk]

What happened?

 

Dx