Getting out of a contract due to miss-selling
Discussion
Now I'm unsure if this is in the right area so mods please move if it isn't.
I'm after some advice on how, if possible, to get out of a contract due to being miss sold something. This "something" is a Plumbing course that I signed up for at the end of 2012, you know the whole train4trade type thing. Up until around 8 months ago I was doing the provided work but was always a bit wary and surprised by some of the provided material. They just didn't seem very professional with regular mistakes and conflicting information. I got to a point where, as part of the course, you do regular practical sessions to get "hands on" experience. This was at module 12 of a total of 47. However, before I could attend the practical sessions I had to complete a health and safety assessment, after 3 attempts, 3 fails (the final one tried copying answers from the provided reading material!) and 8 months later I still haven't attended any practical sessions. I've repeatedly asked the tutors for help but they either don't reply or are unable to help.
So I started doing some digging around and it seems I'm not the only people having problems with this company, as well as another, who are all under the same parent company. This is just an example:
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthr...
When the "salesman" came around to sell me the course I was promised that I could leave the contract at any point, that regular help was available from tutors and that I could complete the work in my own time, "it's completely flexible, you take as long as you want". Well it turns out you can't cancel whenever you want, the tutors are a waste of time and there's a 36 month limit on the course, at the end of which if you haven't finished then it's tough.
The course is costing £135 a month, for 42 months, which kind of gives you an idea as to why a bit pissed off with it all. I'm paying via a finance company who have paid for the course in full on my behalf, which I am then paying back.
It may sound like I'm complaining because I haven't got very far with it, but it's so frustrating having incorrect information provided which causes you to fail exams which then prevents you getting anywhere with the course...all while your still paying for it.
I'm just after some advice on which would be the best route to take with regards to cancelling it, even if I don't get back what I've already paid, I just want to stop paying anymore.
Should I go to Trading Standards or the Financial Ombudsman?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
I'm after some advice on how, if possible, to get out of a contract due to being miss sold something. This "something" is a Plumbing course that I signed up for at the end of 2012, you know the whole train4trade type thing. Up until around 8 months ago I was doing the provided work but was always a bit wary and surprised by some of the provided material. They just didn't seem very professional with regular mistakes and conflicting information. I got to a point where, as part of the course, you do regular practical sessions to get "hands on" experience. This was at module 12 of a total of 47. However, before I could attend the practical sessions I had to complete a health and safety assessment, after 3 attempts, 3 fails (the final one tried copying answers from the provided reading material!) and 8 months later I still haven't attended any practical sessions. I've repeatedly asked the tutors for help but they either don't reply or are unable to help.
So I started doing some digging around and it seems I'm not the only people having problems with this company, as well as another, who are all under the same parent company. This is just an example:
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthr...
When the "salesman" came around to sell me the course I was promised that I could leave the contract at any point, that regular help was available from tutors and that I could complete the work in my own time, "it's completely flexible, you take as long as you want". Well it turns out you can't cancel whenever you want, the tutors are a waste of time and there's a 36 month limit on the course, at the end of which if you haven't finished then it's tough.
The course is costing £135 a month, for 42 months, which kind of gives you an idea as to why a bit pissed off with it all. I'm paying via a finance company who have paid for the course in full on my behalf, which I am then paying back.
It may sound like I'm complaining because I haven't got very far with it, but it's so frustrating having incorrect information provided which causes you to fail exams which then prevents you getting anywhere with the course...all while your still paying for it.
I'm just after some advice on which would be the best route to take with regards to cancelling it, even if I don't get back what I've already paid, I just want to stop paying anymore.
Should I go to Trading Standards or the Financial Ombudsman?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
I would suggest the attached forum would be the place to go - seems they have been thru what you have and either found solutions or tactics or come to the conclusion you will have to suck it up - whichever is the final conclusion.
Good luck
- not advice* I wonder what would happen if you stopped the money. I suspect the training co and the finance co are effectively one and the same it might concentrate their minds. if you do, Don't spend it, but keep it just in case. Its a rather clever set up, you find out the course isn't what you are paying for, but you are not paying for the course - you are paying for a loan. So anyone chasing you will be chasing a loan, and your poor service is irrelevant to that.
Good luck
sparkyhx said:
I would suggest the attached forum would be the place to go - seems they have been thru what you have and either found solutions or tactics or come to the conclusion you will have to suck it up - whichever is the final conclusion.
Good luck
I've been reading through various forums like the one I've posted but it's hard to get definitive answers, it's all just ideas of what "could" work.- not advice* I wonder what would happen if you stopped the money. I suspect the training co and the finance co are effectively one and the same it might concentrate their minds. if you do, Don't spend it, but keep it just in case. Its a rather clever set up, you find out the course isn't what you are paying for, but you are not paying for the course - you are paying for a loan. So anyone chasing you will be chasing a loan, and your poor service is irrelevant to that.
Good luck
Although I have see one poster say they checked their credit report and the finance/loan doesn't showup like a normal loan would do. Therefore if you cancel the standing order, it shouldn't effect your credit rating. They say they've receieved letters from a number of debt collectors who have taken on the debt but nothings happened in 6 months.
Maybe something to try?
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthr...
..............success on this page.
like I said its a clever setup, your beef is with the training company but you are paying the finance company, so they play each other off.
"I would like to thank this Forum for providing me the information and courage to fight and beat T4TS and their Directors.
Good luck everyone, go out and beat these ****** rogue traders
How to beat T4TS and CDF
1 Write to the Finance Company cancelling the contract between yourself and T4TS
2 Await reply and threatening letter
3 Write to the Finance Company cancelling the contract between yourself and T4TS but now with the 30 day payback clause as per s.77(6) of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
4 Await reply and threatening letter
5 Finance company now assign a Debt Collection Agency
6 DCA write and phone asking for total amount owed for the whole contract – you deny any liability
7 DCA threaten a visit by their debt collectors within the next 28 days
8 You write to DCA asking for proof of any Fully Signed ( by both parties ) Credit agreements, Statement and Letter of Assignment from Finance company to DCA. Also take Finance company to small claims court ( MCOL ) and threaten DCA to take them as well - https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome
9 At MCOL make your case clear and precise, stating that through Directors associations and assignment that the contract between you and T4TS is actually between you and the Finance Company. The Finance Company therefore has absolute assignment due to these associations. Make sure you claim back ALL monies paid to Finance Company and ALL court costs
10 Also send to the Court ( via email ) and Finance Company ( Registered letter to Finance company ) all copies of previous letters
11 The court gives the Defendant – Finance Company, 14 days to respond
12 Keep checking your MCOL account and case number
13 The Defense – Finance Company, will fight the case stating that the contract is between you and T4TS
14 Keep to your rights and fight these ******s until you have won
15 I actually got the Court case assigned to a county court near my home and not Luton, where they wanted it
16 Good Luck and take as much info from the below letter I sent to the Court, which made the Finance Company relent on their defense and I WON my case and the FULL claim was awarded to me the Claimant
I also have included the Director Associations taken off Companies House records and the Consumer Rights Act at the bottom of this document.
My Main Letter (sent by email) to the Court:
Sir, With reference to your order dated XXth July 2013 regarding Claim Number 3QTXXXX
You require me to “clarify on what basis he says the defendant is liable – apparently for the ‘false statement’ of Train 4 Trade Skills (T4TS)”
As per my attachment “CDF-T4TS Director Associations.doc” you will see that there are numerous associations between four of the directors of the companies illustrated.
This list was compiled from the official Companies House website and is not exhausted as there are further associations with these people.
CDF therefore have absolute assignment due to these associations
.
As such, The T4TS Salesman stated thatCity & Guilds courses 6129 and 6089 were the most up to date plumbing courses available at the time, and as soon as my son had pasted the courses, he would walk into a senior plumbing role with any company, This has been found to be a false statement, as City & Guilds had already phased out the 6129 and 6089 course and replaced them with City & Guilds 6189 Diploma and external plumbing companies have stated they would require at least 2 years post course experience before they would employ anyone with the 6129/6089 certificates.
So the course sold by T4TS and financed by CDF Ltd is not fit for purpose, as per the Consumer rights Act in respect of misrepresentation for goods or services.
In the case of an absolute assignment, CDF are a creditor as defined by s.189 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
They are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties”.
I also point out the 1974 Consumer credit act says under section 2 that if you receive unsatisfactory goods provided by the finance that you can sue provider and finance company.
Also, Pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
CDF Ltd has never provided me with:
A true copy of the credit agreement relating to the course with T4TS, together with all other documentation the Act requires you to provide and as below;
A Second signed copy by both parties of any agreement.
Cancellation rights with proof these letters were generated and sent out.
Copy of the letter that should have been sent with the date the “loan” was advanced to T4TS together with all proof of payments to T4TS.
“Borrowers and hirers are able to ask creditors to send them information about their credit agreements. If information is not provided within 12 working days, the debt becomes unenforceable until they get the information they asked for.
Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 outline the information creditors must provide to debtors under fixed-term, running account and hire agreements.
Under these sections a debtor can pay £1 to get:
•a copy of their agreement
•copies of some of the other documents mentioned in their agreement
•a statement of account.
If this information is not provided within 12 working days the debt becomes unenforceable”
Therefore:
I expected CDF Ltd to comply fully and properly with my requests of the letter dated XXXX2012, within the 30 day time limit. ( the £1 fee was not paid as they already had over £2000 from me )
They should also be reminded that they failed to comply with my request, the provisions of s.77(6) should apply.
Regards
Lloyd6899
Associations between directors of CDF, T4TS and other Limited Companies
Specifically Jan Telensky, Michael Head and Deepak Shamdas
CAREER DEVELOPMENT FINANCE LIMITED
Directors and Company Secretaries
Eddie Copeland
1 Apr 2011 24 May 2012 (1 Year )
Director
Hugh Davie
1 Apr 2011 28 Feb 2013 (1 Year )
Director
Demitios Foti
8 Sep 2003 21 Nov 2006 (3 Years )
Director
Anthony Fox
22 May 1995 28 Feb 2000 (4 Years )
Company Secretary
Michael Head
1 Mar 2001 14 Apr 2010 (9 Years )
Director
Robert Jollands
1 Dec 2012 Present day (7 Months )
Director
Malcolm Smith
22 May 1995 28 Feb 2000 (4 Years )
Director
Alena Telensky
28 Feb 2000 28 Feb 2013 (13 Years )
Company Secretary
Jan Telensky
22 Jul 1999 5 Mar 2008 (8 Years )
Director
31 Mar 2008 Present day (5 Years )
Director
Temple Secretaries Limited
22 May 1995 22 May 1995 (1 Day )
Nominated Secretary
TRAIN 4 TRADE SKILLS LIMITED
Directors and Company Secretaries
Access Nominees Limited
30 Oct 1997 30 Oct 1997 (1 Day )
Nominated Director
Access Registrars Limited
30 Oct 1997 30 Oct 1997 (1 Day )
Nominated Secretary
Michael Head
30 Oct 1997 Present day (15 Years )
Director
June Head
30 Oct 1997 23 Feb 2008 (10 Years )
Company Secretary
Deepak Shamdas
23 Feb 2008 1 Jan 2011 (2 Years )
Company Secretary
DR JAN TELENSKY
Appointments
Company
Role
Appointed
Status
ARGO DREAMS LIMITED
Director
8 Nov 2011
Active
CAREER DEVELOPMENT FINANCE LIMITED
Director
31 Mar 2008
Active
CZECH MATE LIMITED
Director
23 Dec 1991
Active
EUROPE TRAVEL SERVICES LIMITED
Director
8 Oct 2008
Active
GRAND CHANGE LTD
Director
28 Feb 2000
Active
JT CONSULTANCY LIMITED
Director
22 Jul 1996
Active
LETHEBY & SONS LIMITED
Director
22 Oct 2002
Active
MULTIMEDIA (UK) LIMITED
Director
12 Feb 1997
Active
RADIO TATRAS INTERNATIONAL LTD
Director
4 Jan 2005
Active
RAPID 2D LIMITED
Director
27 Nov 2012
Active
SKILLS2LEARN INTERNATIONAL LTD
Director
5 Sep 2008
Active
SKILLS2LEARN LTD
Director
6 Aug 2007
Active
SKILLSTRAIN EUROPE LIMITED
Director
9 Feb 2004
Active
THE GREEN ORGANISATION LIMITED
Director
1 Jul 2007
Active
TIGA WORLD LIMITED
Director
1 Jun 2011
Active
TRAIN 2 GAME CHINA LIMITED
Director
22 Nov 2010
Active
TRAINING FOR TRADES LIMITED
Director
6 Nov 2012
Active
UNANIMOTE LIMITED
Director
21 Apr 2011
Active
MR MICHAEL ANDRE HEAD
Appointments
Company
Role
Appointed
Status
CZECH MATE LIMITED
Director
19 Feb 1994
Active
EMAIL MARKETING LTD
Director
30 Jul 2006
Active
TETA TRAINING SERVICES LIMITED
Director
21 Dec 2009
Active
TRAIN 4 TRADE SKILLS LIMITED
Director
30 Oct 1997
Active
TRAIN2GAME LTD
Director
19 Dec 2008
Active
MR DEEPAK SHAMDAS
Appointments
Company
Role
Appointed
Status
CAREER FINANCE 4 TRADE SKILLS LIMITED
Company Secretary
10 Jan 2007
Resigned (20 Apr 2010)
EMAIL MARKETING LTD
Company Secretary
30 Jul 2006
Resigned (1 Jan 2013)
SKILLS4TRADES TRAINING LIMITED
Company Secretary
21 Oct 2004
Resigned (1 Oct 2011)
SKILLSTRAIN EUROPE LIMITED
Company Secretary
9 Feb 2004
Resigned (1 Jan 2012)
TRAIN 4 TRADE SKILLS LIMITED
Company Secretary
23 Feb 2008
Resigned (1 Jan 2011)
TRAIN2GAME LTD
Company Secretary
7 Aug 2008
Resigned (1 Jan 2012)
YARD STICK MEDIA LIMITED
Company Secretary
15 Mar 2007
Resigned (20 Jan 2011)
TRAIN2GAME LTD
Directors and Company Secretaries
Daniel Dwyer
23 Jun 2008 7 Aug 2008 (1 Month )
Director
Michael Head
19 Dec 2008 Present day (4 Years )
Director
Deepak Shamdas
7 Aug 2008 1 Jan 2012 (3 Years )
Company Secretary
Jan Telensky
7 Aug 2008 19 Dec 2008 (4 Months )
Director
SKILLS4TRADES TRAINING LIMITED
Directors and Company Secretaries
Eddie Copeland
1 Oct 2011 Present day (1 Year )
Director
Daniel Dwyer
21 Oct 2004 21 Oct 2004 (1 Day )
Company Secretary
Daniel Dwyer
21 Oct 2004 21 Oct 2004 (1 Day )
Director
Deepak Shamdas
21 Oct 2004 1 Oct 2011 (6 years )
Company Secretary
Roman Skrabala
31 Mar 2008 1 Oct 2011 (3 Years )
Director
Jan Telensky
21 Oct 2004 1 Apr 2008 (3 Years )
Director
CZECH MATE LIMITED
Directors and Company Secretaries
Gillian Bristow
23 Dec 1991 23 Dec 1991 (1 Day )
Nominated Secretary
23 Dec 1991 23 Dec 1991 (1 Day )
Nominated Director
Madeliene Cowlan
23 Dec 1991 23 Dec 1991 (1 Day )
Nominated Director
George Fragner
23 Dec 1991 30 Jun 1995 (3 Years )
Company Secretary
Michael Head
30 Jun 1995 Present day (18 Years )
Company Secretary
19 Feb 1994 Present day (19 Years )
Director
Jan Telensky
23 Dec 1991 Present day (21 Years )
Director
SKILLS2LEARN INTERNATIONAL LTD
Directors and Company Secretaries
Majid Al-kader
5 Sep 2008 ⇒ Present day (4 Years )
Director
Daniel Dwyer
5 Sep 2008 ⇒ 5 Sep 2008 (1 Day )
Director
Deepak Shamdas
5 Sep 2008 ⇒ Present day (4 Years )
Company Secretary
Jan Telensky
5 Sep 2008 ⇒ Present day (4 Years )
Director
ss.5(2), 3(b),6 and 7 of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
PART 2PROHIBITIONS
Prohibition of unfair commercial practices
3.—(1) Unfair commercial practices are prohibited.
(2) Paragraphs (3) and (4) set out the circumstances when a commercial practice is unfair.
(3) A commercial practice is unfair if—
(a)it contravenes the requirements of professional diligence; and
(b)it materially distorts or is likely to materially distort the economic behaviour of the average consumer with regard to the product.
(4) A commercial practice is unfair if—
(a)it is a misleading action under the provisions of regulation 5;
(b)it is a misleading omission under the provisions of regulation 6;
(c)it is aggressive under the provisions of regulation 7; or
(d)it is listed in Schedule 1.
Prohibition of the promotion of unfair commercial practices
4. The promotion of any unfair commercial practice by a code owner in a code of conduct is prohibited.
Misleading actions
5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3).
(2) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph—
(a)if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and
(b)it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.
(3) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph if—
(a)it concerns any marketing of a product (including comparative advertising) which creates confusion with any products, trade marks, trade names or other distinguishing marks of a competitor; or
(b)it concerns any failure by a trader to comply with a commitment contained in a code of conduct which the trader has undertaken to comply with, if—
(i)the trader indicates in a commercial practice that he is bound by that code of conduct, and
(ii)the commitment is firm and capable of being verified and is not aspirational,
and it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise, taking account of its factual context and of all its features and circumstances.
(4) The matters referred to in paragraph (2)(a) are—
(a)the existence or nature of the product;
(b)the main characteristics of the product (as defined in paragraph 5);
(c)the extent of the trader’s commitments;
(d)the motives for the commercial practice;
(e)the nature of the sales process;
(f)any statement or symbol relating to direct or indirect sponsorship or approval of the trader or the product;
(g)the price or the manner in which the price is calculated;
(h)the existence of a specific price advantage;
(i)the need for a service, part, replacement or repair;
(j)the nature, attributes and rights of the trader (as defined in paragraph 6);
(k)the consumer’s rights or the risks he may face.
(5) In paragraph (4)(b), the “main characteristics of the product” include—
(a)availability of the product;
(b)benefits of the product;
(c)risks of the product;
(d)execution of the product;
(e)composition of the product;
(f)accessories of the product;
(g)after-sale customer assistance concerning the product;
(h)the handling of complaints about the product;
(i)the method and date of manufacture of the product;
(j)the method and date of provision of the product;
(k)delivery of the product;
(l)fitness for purpose of the product;
(m)usage of the product;
(n)quantity of the product;
(o)specification of the product;
(p)geographical or commercial origin of the product;
(q)results to be expected from use of the product; and
(r)results and material features of tests or checks carried out on the product.
(6) In paragraph (4)(j), the “nature, attributes and rights” as far as concern the trader include the trader’s—
(a)identity;
(b)assets;
(c)qualifications;
(d)status;
(e)approval;
(f)affiliations or connections;
(g)ownership of industrial, commercial or intellectual property rights; and
(h)awards and distinctions.
(7) In paragraph (4)(k) “consumer’s rights” include rights the consumer may have under Part 5A of the Sale of Goods Act 1979(1) or Part 1B of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982(2).
Misleading omissions
6.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading omission if, in its factual context, taking account of the matters in paragraph (2)—
(a)the commercial practice omits material information,
(b)the commercial practice hides material information,
(c)the commercial practice provides material information in a manner which is unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely, or
(d)the commercial practice fails to identify its commercial intent, unless this is already apparent from the context,
and as a result it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.
(2) The matters referred to in paragraph (1) are—
(a)all the features and circumstances of the commercial practice;
(b)the limitations of the medium used to communicate the commercial practice (including limitations of space or time); and
(c)where the medium used to communicate the commercial practice imposes limitations of space or time, any measures taken by the trader to make the information available to consumers by other means.
(3) In paragraph (1) “material information” means—
(a)the information which the average consumer needs, according to the context, to take an informed transactional decision; and
(b)any information requirement which applies in relation to a commercial communication as a result of a Community obligation.
(4) Where a commercial practice is an invitation to purchase, the following information will be material if not already apparent from the context in addition to any other information which is material information under paragraph (3)—
(a)the main characteristics of the product, to the extent appropriate to the medium by which the invitation to purchase is communicated and the product;
(b)the identity of the trader, such as his trading name, and the identity of any other trader on whose behalf the trader is acting;
(c)the geographical address of the trader and the geographical address of any other trader on whose behalf the trader is acting;
(d)either—
(i)the price, including any taxes; or
(ii)where the nature of the product is such that the price cannot reasonably be calculated in advance, the manner in which the price is calculated;
(e)where appropriate, either—
(i)all additional freight, delivery or postal charges; or
(ii)where such charges cannot reasonably be calculated in advance, the fact that such charges may be payable;
(f)the following matters where they depart from the requirements of professional diligence—
(i)arrangements for payment,
(ii)arrangements for delivery,
(iii)arrangements for performance,
(iv)complaint handling policy;
(g)for products and transactions involving a right of withdrawal or cancellation, the existence of such a right.
Aggressive commercial practices
7.—(1) A commercial practice is aggressive if, in its factual context, taking account of all of its features and circumstances—
(a)it significantly impairs or is likely significantly to impair the average consumer’s freedom of choice or conduct in relation to the product concerned through the use of harassment, coercion or undue influence; and
(b)it thereby causes or is likely to cause him to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.
(2) In determining whether a commercial practice uses harassment, coercion or undue influence account shall be taken of—
(a)its timing, location, nature or persistence;
(b)the use of threatening or abusive language or behaviour;
(c)the exploitation by the trader of any specific misfortune or circumstance of such gravity as to impair the consumer’s judgment, of which the trader is aware, to influence the consumer’s decision with regard to the product;
(d)any onerous or disproportionate non-contractual barrier imposed by the trader where a consumer wishes to exercise rights under the contract, including rights to terminate a contract or to switch to another product or another trader; and
(e)any threat to take any action which cannot legally be taken.
(3) In this regulation—
(a)“coercion” includes the use of physical force; and
(b)“undue influence” means exploiting a position of power in relation to the consumer so as to apply pressure, even without using or threatening to use physical force, in a way which significantly limits the consumer’s ability to make an informed decision.
(1)
1979 c.54; Part 5A was inserted by S.I. 2002/3045.
(2)
1982 c.29. Part 1B was inserted by S.I.2002/3045.
Misrepresentation Act 1967
Types of misrepresentation
A misrepresentation is a statement of fact (not opinion) which is made by the seller before the contract is made.
If you relied on that statement when deciding whether or not to go ahead with your purchase, and this then turns out to be wrong, you can claim compensation.
There are three types of misrepresentation and your path to redress will depend upon the following:
whether the false statement was made fraudulently
whether the false statement was made negligently
whether the false statement was made innocently
Fraudulent misrepresentation
A fraudulent misrepresentation is a statement of fact made without belief in its truth either recklessly, knowingly or without caring whether it is true or false, with the intention that it should be acted on and, is in fact acted on.
If you enter into a contract as a result of a fraudulent misrepresentation, then you can cancel the contract, claim damages, or both.
The Misrepresentation Act 1967 allows you to base your claim on negligence or on the fraud.
In addition, when a misrepresentation claim is based on negligence, the law states that the person who made the misrepresentation has to disprove the negligence.
In other words, they must prove that they had reasonable grounds to believe the statement, and that they believed the facts represented were true.
Negligent misrepresentation
This is a misrepresentation under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 where a statement is made carelessly or without reasonable grounds for believing its truth.
A negligent misrepresentation may fall under common law or under the Misrepresentation Act 1967. Financial loss may be recovered in some circumstances.
Innocent misrepresentation
This is where one of the parties, when entering into a contract, had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her false statement was true.
In other words, it is made entirely without fault. This type of misrepresentation primarily allows for the contract to be cancelled.
The purpose of this is to place you and the other party in the same position before the contract had taken place.
However, under Section 2(2) Misrepresentation Act 1967 the court has discretion to award damages instead of allowing you to end the contract if it deems it appropriate. It cannot award both.
This would be judged on both the nature of the innocent misrepresentation and the losses suffered by the victim of the misrepresentation.
Misrepresentation - damages or rescission?
Once it has been established that there as been a misrepresentation and what type it is, then the remedies available can be determined.
There are two types of remedy:
Damages Financial compensation designed to compensate the victim of a misrepresentation for the harm done insofar as money can do this
Rescission The ability to end a contract and the parties are treated as though the contract never existed
The availability of the different remedies is determined by the type of misrepresentation and the stage the contract has reached when the victim discovers the misrepresentation.
Limitations of a misrepresentation
There are certain limitations on the right to rescission.
For example, if you are aware of a misrepresentation but choose to continue with the contract, you will not then be able to go back to the person who made the misrepresentation and end the contract, or indeed go to court and ask them to end the contract.
In law, you would be taken to have “affirmed” the contract.
An example would be, if you purchased a car on the basis of a misrepresentation as to the number of owners and then after discovering the truth you nevertheless continued to use it.
You may find that the court would say that by doing so, you had affirmed the contract.
In other words you could not later go back to the seller to end the contract, asking him to take back the car.
Timely reporting of misrepresentation
Another bar to ending the contract for a misrepresentation is if the lapse of time from discovering the misrepresentation is sufficiently long.
If this is the case, then it may also amount to evidence of accepting the position and this may give grounds for denying you the remedy of rescission.
For example, you book a holiday in October to be taken in August of the following year, and you discover in November that the brochure contains a misrepresentation in relation to the facilities at the hotel.
If you do nothing until the following June, when the balance becomes payable, and then try to claim the right to cancel the booking due to the misrepresentation, the court might say that such a long delay before trying to end the contract amounted to you “affirming” the contract.
Obviously, each case would be considered on the individual facts of that case.
But it's important to always bear in mind the potential bars to your remedies for misrepresentation, which is why it's important to act very quickly upon discovering that you've been a victim of a misrepresentation.
Also remember that if you are a victim of a misrepresentation and a credit card was used to purchase the goods or service, then you may also be able to pursue a your claim against the credit card company under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974."
..............success on this page.
like I said its a clever setup, your beef is with the training company but you are paying the finance company, so they play each other off.
================================================
"I would like to thank this Forum for providing me the information and courage to fight and beat T4TS and their Directors.
Good luck everyone, go out and beat these ****** rogue traders
How to beat T4TS and CDF
1 Write to the Finance Company cancelling the contract between yourself and T4TS
2 Await reply and threatening letter
3 Write to the Finance Company cancelling the contract between yourself and T4TS but now with the 30 day payback clause as per s.77(6) of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
4 Await reply and threatening letter
5 Finance company now assign a Debt Collection Agency
6 DCA write and phone asking for total amount owed for the whole contract – you deny any liability
7 DCA threaten a visit by their debt collectors within the next 28 days
8 You write to DCA asking for proof of any Fully Signed ( by both parties ) Credit agreements, Statement and Letter of Assignment from Finance company to DCA. Also take Finance company to small claims court ( MCOL ) and threaten DCA to take them as well - https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome
9 At MCOL make your case clear and precise, stating that through Directors associations and assignment that the contract between you and T4TS is actually between you and the Finance Company. The Finance Company therefore has absolute assignment due to these associations. Make sure you claim back ALL monies paid to Finance Company and ALL court costs
10 Also send to the Court ( via email ) and Finance Company ( Registered letter to Finance company ) all copies of previous letters
11 The court gives the Defendant – Finance Company, 14 days to respond
12 Keep checking your MCOL account and case number
13 The Defense – Finance Company, will fight the case stating that the contract is between you and T4TS
14 Keep to your rights and fight these ******s until you have won
15 I actually got the Court case assigned to a county court near my home and not Luton, where they wanted it
16 Good Luck and take as much info from the below letter I sent to the Court, which made the Finance Company relent on their defense and I WON my case and the FULL claim was awarded to me the Claimant
I also have included the Director Associations taken off Companies House records and the Consumer Rights Act at the bottom of this document.
My Main Letter (sent by email) to the Court:
Sir, With reference to your order dated XXth July 2013 regarding Claim Number 3QTXXXX
You require me to “clarify on what basis he says the defendant is liable – apparently for the ‘false statement’ of Train 4 Trade Skills (T4TS)”
As per my attachment “CDF-T4TS Director Associations.doc” you will see that there are numerous associations between four of the directors of the companies illustrated.
This list was compiled from the official Companies House website and is not exhausted as there are further associations with these people.
CDF therefore have absolute assignment due to these associations
.
As such, The T4TS Salesman stated thatCity & Guilds courses 6129 and 6089 were the most up to date plumbing courses available at the time, and as soon as my son had pasted the courses, he would walk into a senior plumbing role with any company, This has been found to be a false statement, as City & Guilds had already phased out the 6129 and 6089 course and replaced them with City & Guilds 6189 Diploma and external plumbing companies have stated they would require at least 2 years post course experience before they would employ anyone with the 6129/6089 certificates.
So the course sold by T4TS and financed by CDF Ltd is not fit for purpose, as per the Consumer rights Act in respect of misrepresentation for goods or services.
In the case of an absolute assignment, CDF are a creditor as defined by s.189 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
They are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties”.
I also point out the 1974 Consumer credit act says under section 2 that if you receive unsatisfactory goods provided by the finance that you can sue provider and finance company.
Also, Pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
CDF Ltd has never provided me with:
A true copy of the credit agreement relating to the course with T4TS, together with all other documentation the Act requires you to provide and as below;
A Second signed copy by both parties of any agreement.
Cancellation rights with proof these letters were generated and sent out.
Copy of the letter that should have been sent with the date the “loan” was advanced to T4TS together with all proof of payments to T4TS.
“Borrowers and hirers are able to ask creditors to send them information about their credit agreements. If information is not provided within 12 working days, the debt becomes unenforceable until they get the information they asked for.
Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 outline the information creditors must provide to debtors under fixed-term, running account and hire agreements.
Under these sections a debtor can pay £1 to get:
•a copy of their agreement
•copies of some of the other documents mentioned in their agreement
•a statement of account.
If this information is not provided within 12 working days the debt becomes unenforceable”
Therefore:
I expected CDF Ltd to comply fully and properly with my requests of the letter dated XXXX2012, within the 30 day time limit. ( the £1 fee was not paid as they already had over £2000 from me )
They should also be reminded that they failed to comply with my request, the provisions of s.77(6) should apply.
Regards
Lloyd6899
Associations between directors of CDF, T4TS and other Limited Companies
Specifically Jan Telensky, Michael Head and Deepak Shamdas
CAREER DEVELOPMENT FINANCE LIMITED
Directors and Company Secretaries
Eddie Copeland
1 Apr 2011 24 May 2012 (1 Year )
Director
Hugh Davie
1 Apr 2011 28 Feb 2013 (1 Year )
Director
Demitios Foti
8 Sep 2003 21 Nov 2006 (3 Years )
Director
Anthony Fox
22 May 1995 28 Feb 2000 (4 Years )
Company Secretary
Michael Head
1 Mar 2001 14 Apr 2010 (9 Years )
Director
Robert Jollands
1 Dec 2012 Present day (7 Months )
Director
Malcolm Smith
22 May 1995 28 Feb 2000 (4 Years )
Director
Alena Telensky
28 Feb 2000 28 Feb 2013 (13 Years )
Company Secretary
Jan Telensky
22 Jul 1999 5 Mar 2008 (8 Years )
Director
31 Mar 2008 Present day (5 Years )
Director
Temple Secretaries Limited
22 May 1995 22 May 1995 (1 Day )
Nominated Secretary
TRAIN 4 TRADE SKILLS LIMITED
Directors and Company Secretaries
Access Nominees Limited
30 Oct 1997 30 Oct 1997 (1 Day )
Nominated Director
Access Registrars Limited
30 Oct 1997 30 Oct 1997 (1 Day )
Nominated Secretary
Michael Head
30 Oct 1997 Present day (15 Years )
Director
June Head
30 Oct 1997 23 Feb 2008 (10 Years )
Company Secretary
Deepak Shamdas
23 Feb 2008 1 Jan 2011 (2 Years )
Company Secretary
DR JAN TELENSKY
Appointments
Company
Role
Appointed
Status
ARGO DREAMS LIMITED
Director
8 Nov 2011
Active
CAREER DEVELOPMENT FINANCE LIMITED
Director
31 Mar 2008
Active
CZECH MATE LIMITED
Director
23 Dec 1991
Active
EUROPE TRAVEL SERVICES LIMITED
Director
8 Oct 2008
Active
GRAND CHANGE LTD
Director
28 Feb 2000
Active
JT CONSULTANCY LIMITED
Director
22 Jul 1996
Active
LETHEBY & SONS LIMITED
Director
22 Oct 2002
Active
MULTIMEDIA (UK) LIMITED
Director
12 Feb 1997
Active
RADIO TATRAS INTERNATIONAL LTD
Director
4 Jan 2005
Active
RAPID 2D LIMITED
Director
27 Nov 2012
Active
SKILLS2LEARN INTERNATIONAL LTD
Director
5 Sep 2008
Active
SKILLS2LEARN LTD
Director
6 Aug 2007
Active
SKILLSTRAIN EUROPE LIMITED
Director
9 Feb 2004
Active
THE GREEN ORGANISATION LIMITED
Director
1 Jul 2007
Active
TIGA WORLD LIMITED
Director
1 Jun 2011
Active
TRAIN 2 GAME CHINA LIMITED
Director
22 Nov 2010
Active
TRAINING FOR TRADES LIMITED
Director
6 Nov 2012
Active
UNANIMOTE LIMITED
Director
21 Apr 2011
Active
MR MICHAEL ANDRE HEAD
Appointments
Company
Role
Appointed
Status
CZECH MATE LIMITED
Director
19 Feb 1994
Active
EMAIL MARKETING LTD
Director
30 Jul 2006
Active
TETA TRAINING SERVICES LIMITED
Director
21 Dec 2009
Active
TRAIN 4 TRADE SKILLS LIMITED
Director
30 Oct 1997
Active
TRAIN2GAME LTD
Director
19 Dec 2008
Active
MR DEEPAK SHAMDAS
Appointments
Company
Role
Appointed
Status
CAREER FINANCE 4 TRADE SKILLS LIMITED
Company Secretary
10 Jan 2007
Resigned (20 Apr 2010)
EMAIL MARKETING LTD
Company Secretary
30 Jul 2006
Resigned (1 Jan 2013)
SKILLS4TRADES TRAINING LIMITED
Company Secretary
21 Oct 2004
Resigned (1 Oct 2011)
SKILLSTRAIN EUROPE LIMITED
Company Secretary
9 Feb 2004
Resigned (1 Jan 2012)
TRAIN 4 TRADE SKILLS LIMITED
Company Secretary
23 Feb 2008
Resigned (1 Jan 2011)
TRAIN2GAME LTD
Company Secretary
7 Aug 2008
Resigned (1 Jan 2012)
YARD STICK MEDIA LIMITED
Company Secretary
15 Mar 2007
Resigned (20 Jan 2011)
TRAIN2GAME LTD
Directors and Company Secretaries
Daniel Dwyer
23 Jun 2008 7 Aug 2008 (1 Month )
Director
Michael Head
19 Dec 2008 Present day (4 Years )
Director
Deepak Shamdas
7 Aug 2008 1 Jan 2012 (3 Years )
Company Secretary
Jan Telensky
7 Aug 2008 19 Dec 2008 (4 Months )
Director
SKILLS4TRADES TRAINING LIMITED
Directors and Company Secretaries
Eddie Copeland
1 Oct 2011 Present day (1 Year )
Director
Daniel Dwyer
21 Oct 2004 21 Oct 2004 (1 Day )
Company Secretary
Daniel Dwyer
21 Oct 2004 21 Oct 2004 (1 Day )
Director
Deepak Shamdas
21 Oct 2004 1 Oct 2011 (6 years )
Company Secretary
Roman Skrabala
31 Mar 2008 1 Oct 2011 (3 Years )
Director
Jan Telensky
21 Oct 2004 1 Apr 2008 (3 Years )
Director
CZECH MATE LIMITED
Directors and Company Secretaries
Gillian Bristow
23 Dec 1991 23 Dec 1991 (1 Day )
Nominated Secretary
23 Dec 1991 23 Dec 1991 (1 Day )
Nominated Director
Madeliene Cowlan
23 Dec 1991 23 Dec 1991 (1 Day )
Nominated Director
George Fragner
23 Dec 1991 30 Jun 1995 (3 Years )
Company Secretary
Michael Head
30 Jun 1995 Present day (18 Years )
Company Secretary
19 Feb 1994 Present day (19 Years )
Director
Jan Telensky
23 Dec 1991 Present day (21 Years )
Director
SKILLS2LEARN INTERNATIONAL LTD
Directors and Company Secretaries
Majid Al-kader
5 Sep 2008 ⇒ Present day (4 Years )
Director
Daniel Dwyer
5 Sep 2008 ⇒ 5 Sep 2008 (1 Day )
Director
Deepak Shamdas
5 Sep 2008 ⇒ Present day (4 Years )
Company Secretary
Jan Telensky
5 Sep 2008 ⇒ Present day (4 Years )
Director
ss.5(2), 3(b),6 and 7 of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
PART 2PROHIBITIONS
Prohibition of unfair commercial practices
3.—(1) Unfair commercial practices are prohibited.
(2) Paragraphs (3) and (4) set out the circumstances when a commercial practice is unfair.
(3) A commercial practice is unfair if—
(a)it contravenes the requirements of professional diligence; and
(b)it materially distorts or is likely to materially distort the economic behaviour of the average consumer with regard to the product.
(4) A commercial practice is unfair if—
(a)it is a misleading action under the provisions of regulation 5;
(b)it is a misleading omission under the provisions of regulation 6;
(c)it is aggressive under the provisions of regulation 7; or
(d)it is listed in Schedule 1.
Prohibition of the promotion of unfair commercial practices
4. The promotion of any unfair commercial practice by a code owner in a code of conduct is prohibited.
Misleading actions
5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3).
(2) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph—
(a)if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and
(b)it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.
(3) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph if—
(a)it concerns any marketing of a product (including comparative advertising) which creates confusion with any products, trade marks, trade names or other distinguishing marks of a competitor; or
(b)it concerns any failure by a trader to comply with a commitment contained in a code of conduct which the trader has undertaken to comply with, if—
(i)the trader indicates in a commercial practice that he is bound by that code of conduct, and
(ii)the commitment is firm and capable of being verified and is not aspirational,
and it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise, taking account of its factual context and of all its features and circumstances.
(4) The matters referred to in paragraph (2)(a) are—
(a)the existence or nature of the product;
(b)the main characteristics of the product (as defined in paragraph 5);
(c)the extent of the trader’s commitments;
(d)the motives for the commercial practice;
(e)the nature of the sales process;
(f)any statement or symbol relating to direct or indirect sponsorship or approval of the trader or the product;
(g)the price or the manner in which the price is calculated;
(h)the existence of a specific price advantage;
(i)the need for a service, part, replacement or repair;
(j)the nature, attributes and rights of the trader (as defined in paragraph 6);
(k)the consumer’s rights or the risks he may face.
(5) In paragraph (4)(b), the “main characteristics of the product” include—
(a)availability of the product;
(b)benefits of the product;
(c)risks of the product;
(d)execution of the product;
(e)composition of the product;
(f)accessories of the product;
(g)after-sale customer assistance concerning the product;
(h)the handling of complaints about the product;
(i)the method and date of manufacture of the product;
(j)the method and date of provision of the product;
(k)delivery of the product;
(l)fitness for purpose of the product;
(m)usage of the product;
(n)quantity of the product;
(o)specification of the product;
(p)geographical or commercial origin of the product;
(q)results to be expected from use of the product; and
(r)results and material features of tests or checks carried out on the product.
(6) In paragraph (4)(j), the “nature, attributes and rights” as far as concern the trader include the trader’s—
(a)identity;
(b)assets;
(c)qualifications;
(d)status;
(e)approval;
(f)affiliations or connections;
(g)ownership of industrial, commercial or intellectual property rights; and
(h)awards and distinctions.
(7) In paragraph (4)(k) “consumer’s rights” include rights the consumer may have under Part 5A of the Sale of Goods Act 1979(1) or Part 1B of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982(2).
Misleading omissions
6.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading omission if, in its factual context, taking account of the matters in paragraph (2)—
(a)the commercial practice omits material information,
(b)the commercial practice hides material information,
(c)the commercial practice provides material information in a manner which is unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely, or
(d)the commercial practice fails to identify its commercial intent, unless this is already apparent from the context,
and as a result it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.
(2) The matters referred to in paragraph (1) are—
(a)all the features and circumstances of the commercial practice;
(b)the limitations of the medium used to communicate the commercial practice (including limitations of space or time); and
(c)where the medium used to communicate the commercial practice imposes limitations of space or time, any measures taken by the trader to make the information available to consumers by other means.
(3) In paragraph (1) “material information” means—
(a)the information which the average consumer needs, according to the context, to take an informed transactional decision; and
(b)any information requirement which applies in relation to a commercial communication as a result of a Community obligation.
(4) Where a commercial practice is an invitation to purchase, the following information will be material if not already apparent from the context in addition to any other information which is material information under paragraph (3)—
(a)the main characteristics of the product, to the extent appropriate to the medium by which the invitation to purchase is communicated and the product;
(b)the identity of the trader, such as his trading name, and the identity of any other trader on whose behalf the trader is acting;
(c)the geographical address of the trader and the geographical address of any other trader on whose behalf the trader is acting;
(d)either—
(i)the price, including any taxes; or
(ii)where the nature of the product is such that the price cannot reasonably be calculated in advance, the manner in which the price is calculated;
(e)where appropriate, either—
(i)all additional freight, delivery or postal charges; or
(ii)where such charges cannot reasonably be calculated in advance, the fact that such charges may be payable;
(f)the following matters where they depart from the requirements of professional diligence—
(i)arrangements for payment,
(ii)arrangements for delivery,
(iii)arrangements for performance,
(iv)complaint handling policy;
(g)for products and transactions involving a right of withdrawal or cancellation, the existence of such a right.
Aggressive commercial practices
7.—(1) A commercial practice is aggressive if, in its factual context, taking account of all of its features and circumstances—
(a)it significantly impairs or is likely significantly to impair the average consumer’s freedom of choice or conduct in relation to the product concerned through the use of harassment, coercion or undue influence; and
(b)it thereby causes or is likely to cause him to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.
(2) In determining whether a commercial practice uses harassment, coercion or undue influence account shall be taken of—
(a)its timing, location, nature or persistence;
(b)the use of threatening or abusive language or behaviour;
(c)the exploitation by the trader of any specific misfortune or circumstance of such gravity as to impair the consumer’s judgment, of which the trader is aware, to influence the consumer’s decision with regard to the product;
(d)any onerous or disproportionate non-contractual barrier imposed by the trader where a consumer wishes to exercise rights under the contract, including rights to terminate a contract or to switch to another product or another trader; and
(e)any threat to take any action which cannot legally be taken.
(3) In this regulation—
(a)“coercion” includes the use of physical force; and
(b)“undue influence” means exploiting a position of power in relation to the consumer so as to apply pressure, even without using or threatening to use physical force, in a way which significantly limits the consumer’s ability to make an informed decision.
(1)
1979 c.54; Part 5A was inserted by S.I. 2002/3045.
(2)
1982 c.29. Part 1B was inserted by S.I.2002/3045.
Misrepresentation Act 1967
Types of misrepresentation
A misrepresentation is a statement of fact (not opinion) which is made by the seller before the contract is made.
If you relied on that statement when deciding whether or not to go ahead with your purchase, and this then turns out to be wrong, you can claim compensation.
There are three types of misrepresentation and your path to redress will depend upon the following:
whether the false statement was made fraudulently
whether the false statement was made negligently
whether the false statement was made innocently
Fraudulent misrepresentation
A fraudulent misrepresentation is a statement of fact made without belief in its truth either recklessly, knowingly or without caring whether it is true or false, with the intention that it should be acted on and, is in fact acted on.
If you enter into a contract as a result of a fraudulent misrepresentation, then you can cancel the contract, claim damages, or both.
The Misrepresentation Act 1967 allows you to base your claim on negligence or on the fraud.
In addition, when a misrepresentation claim is based on negligence, the law states that the person who made the misrepresentation has to disprove the negligence.
In other words, they must prove that they had reasonable grounds to believe the statement, and that they believed the facts represented were true.
Negligent misrepresentation
This is a misrepresentation under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 where a statement is made carelessly or without reasonable grounds for believing its truth.
A negligent misrepresentation may fall under common law or under the Misrepresentation Act 1967. Financial loss may be recovered in some circumstances.
Innocent misrepresentation
This is where one of the parties, when entering into a contract, had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her false statement was true.
In other words, it is made entirely without fault. This type of misrepresentation primarily allows for the contract to be cancelled.
The purpose of this is to place you and the other party in the same position before the contract had taken place.
However, under Section 2(2) Misrepresentation Act 1967 the court has discretion to award damages instead of allowing you to end the contract if it deems it appropriate. It cannot award both.
This would be judged on both the nature of the innocent misrepresentation and the losses suffered by the victim of the misrepresentation.
Misrepresentation - damages or rescission?
Once it has been established that there as been a misrepresentation and what type it is, then the remedies available can be determined.
There are two types of remedy:
Damages Financial compensation designed to compensate the victim of a misrepresentation for the harm done insofar as money can do this
Rescission The ability to end a contract and the parties are treated as though the contract never existed
The availability of the different remedies is determined by the type of misrepresentation and the stage the contract has reached when the victim discovers the misrepresentation.
Limitations of a misrepresentation
There are certain limitations on the right to rescission.
For example, if you are aware of a misrepresentation but choose to continue with the contract, you will not then be able to go back to the person who made the misrepresentation and end the contract, or indeed go to court and ask them to end the contract.
In law, you would be taken to have “affirmed” the contract.
An example would be, if you purchased a car on the basis of a misrepresentation as to the number of owners and then after discovering the truth you nevertheless continued to use it.
You may find that the court would say that by doing so, you had affirmed the contract.
In other words you could not later go back to the seller to end the contract, asking him to take back the car.
Timely reporting of misrepresentation
Another bar to ending the contract for a misrepresentation is if the lapse of time from discovering the misrepresentation is sufficiently long.
If this is the case, then it may also amount to evidence of accepting the position and this may give grounds for denying you the remedy of rescission.
For example, you book a holiday in October to be taken in August of the following year, and you discover in November that the brochure contains a misrepresentation in relation to the facilities at the hotel.
If you do nothing until the following June, when the balance becomes payable, and then try to claim the right to cancel the booking due to the misrepresentation, the court might say that such a long delay before trying to end the contract amounted to you “affirming” the contract.
Obviously, each case would be considered on the individual facts of that case.
But it's important to always bear in mind the potential bars to your remedies for misrepresentation, which is why it's important to act very quickly upon discovering that you've been a victim of a misrepresentation.
Also remember that if you are a victim of a misrepresentation and a credit card was used to purchase the goods or service, then you may also be able to pursue a your claim against the credit card company under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974."
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff