Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

letter from the Tocatoo / Lowell


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4796 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

hello,

I was wondering if anyone would be able to give me any help or advice.

My boyfriend received a letter today from tocatto ltd stating he owes £37.91 outstanding balance from a 3 mobile contract phone he had 5 years ago.

 

4 years ago this debt went to a Debt collection agency, I think it was moorecroft I cant quite remember, and he agreed to pay £10 a fortnight until it was paid. This debt was paid as I myself went to the royal bank of Scotland and paid the £10 a fortnight until it was all paid.

 

About 2 years later we were sorting through paper work and thought we would no longer need the payment receipts from this debt so decided to throw them away.

A year later , about this time last year, we received a letter from another DCA informing my boyfriend he still owed the outstanding £37.91.

He phoned them and told them that he had paid the debt to which they asked for proof of payment. When he told them he had non as the receipts had been thrown away they told him as far as they were concerned without any proof of payment the debt was still owed.

The person he spoke to was very rude and unhelpful and didn't give a damn and kept insisting he must pay. My boyfriend quite bluntly told them that they would not receive any money from him as the debt was already paid. The conversation kept going round in circles eventually the guy from the DCA put the phone down on him.

We received another couple of letters and each time he phoned the company and told them the same thing. The debt has been paid and they will not get any money. Again they told him without proof then he still owes it.

After about the 3rd letter we never heard from them again or any other DCA concerning this account until today.

 

My partner hasn't rang Tocatto yet and we will probably hear the same cock and bull story from them.

So I was wondering if anyone had any ideas how to get rid of them once and for all without having the pay the debt a second time.

Any help would be very much appreciated

Thx in advance

Bec

Link to post
Share on other sites

firstly

 

NEVER EVER phone a DCA!!

 

they have NO LEGAL POWERS

to do anything bar send threat-o-grams

 

pers i would ignore the fleecers

 

i would suggest you do a bit of reading in this forum

 

you'll soon get the idea

 

as this has been paid-off anyhow

this shows what typically happens in the case of these 'phantom' mobile phone debts

it goes straight to the DCA's pocket without any record being place against your name on the phishing list

 

it get sold on & the next one tries their luck as you've proved to be a soft-touch.

 

the debt [if it ever existed] would have been written off against tax by the OC years ago

thats why the OC have neber asked themselves for the money!

 

well you've learned now - don't get caught again!

 

never ever believe what these fleecers say!

 

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

I have been reading stuff but not quite sure as to what to read or where to start. there is just so much information. Any payments we have made since to anyone we have since kept proof of payment and will do so for a very long time and so far so good with the rest of the debts. Just this one keeps cropping up like a bad aftertaste :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bec,

 

Rant continued....

 

Moorcroft work as follows.....mobile phone company pass your details to moorcroft, they contact you to say hello out-standing amount please pay, you pay, moorcroft say Here you go mobile phone company and thats it....BUT on the occasions were that they/moorcroft "Buy the Debt" they do not sell it on again to a third party.

 

Hope this helps!

 

Hotmamma :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bec,

 

Please take this advice...."DO NOT PAY THEM".....understand! You both know that you have paid and you can either print of statements from your bank via the internet or pay your the bank for copies which will show your payments and even ask the bank to supply you with a copy of the "in full and final settlement". confirmation of the closure of this debt.

Know think of it this way, this and it is a [problem], if this company chases 10 people at what seems to be the average amount of £30,that equals £300, so times that by 100, 1000, 10000.... get the picture, nice little earner. And because it is such a small amount, most people would pay it. But not us, we are out to screw them. Now, Don't forget if they contact you TELL THEM to prove that they own this debt and that they have "12 WORKING DAYS NO LONGER TO SUPPLY THIS" .....OR....THE DEBT IS UNENFORCEABLE!!!!!!

Check out all that has been said about this [EDIT - PLEASE REFRAIN FROM PERSONAL ABUSE]hole of a company and if they are rude to you on the phone, stand up, take control and threaten them, i told them to feck off, but that's me!

 

Oh, and when i spoke to Moorcroft, the guy told me that this sounded very odd and to be aware it could be a [problem] and to call ofsted! what's that telling you???? Keep us all posted, but for your own piece of mind get proof from your bank, also call moorcroft and give them any details regarding the phone contract they should be able to locate it in the past history they number is: 0161 4752858.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...