Thank you @BankFodder. Apologies for not being clear. Here are some further details that might help clarify: The item in question is a replica of a movie prop. I build highly accurate movie props as a hobby and these items are machined by enthusiasts in very small runs (50-100) and once they're gone, they're gone. I missed out on one of these runs but a friend from the community had purchased two and decided he only needed one so offered to sell me his other one. I bought the replica prop from him and asked him to send it to my Stackry address in USA. He is based in USA and I am based in the UK. Had he shipped it directly to me in the UK, due to the size and weight, the shipping would have been expensive. Stackry is a service in the USA that has access to cheaper couriers. I have used it many times before without any issues. I simply sign in to my account when they notify me the package is received, fill out the customs form, and select my home address in the UK, select one of the couriers after receiveing a quote based on size and weight and pay the shipping fee. On this occasion I chose GlobalDirect. I had no idea the item would be handed over to Evri on arrival to the UK. The initial tracking was with DHL e-commerce. The second tracking number on arrival to the UK was with Evri. It was Evri who lost the parcel through negligence. Below is a complete timeline of events. The item made its journey from my friend in the USA to Stackry, USA without any problems. I was notified when the package was received. The item also made its journey via DHL/Global Mail Direct from the USA to the UK without any issues. The problem happened in the UK, with Evri.   I did not take out insurance. The price of the item was £185.01 Shipping from Stackry, USA to my home address in the UK with Global Mail Direct was £17.87. Total £202.88.  The letter of claim is below. The 14 days is not up yet but I have every intention on following through. I have no priror experience with this which is why I came here for advice, but I have found the online claim form on Gov.UK and intend to start there.   TIMELINE:   Item purchased from individual in USA on 26/3/24. Payment made by PayPal. Item shipped to Stackry, USA on the same day. Item advised received by Stackry on 29/3/24. Redirected by myself to my UK home address on the same day. Payment made and selected Global Mail Direct as the courier of choice. Tracking number generated for DHL e-commerce 02/04/24: arrived to the UK and cleared customs 03/04/24: processed at local distribution centre, forwarded to delivery agent (Evri) - new tracking number generated 06/04/24: marked”out for delivery” at 08:52. No delivery attempt made all day. At 21:21 marked “on its way back to sender”.  09/04/24: no further updates since “there’s an issue with your parcel. Contact the sender”. Customer support contact via email almost on a daily basis from 08/04/24 to 23/04/24 to no avail. Letter before claim sent on 03/05/24.   03/05/2024   Letter before small claims court claim   EVRi Parcelnet Limited Capitol House 1 Capitol Close Morley Leeds LS27 0WH   Dear Sirs   Reference: Parcel with the tracking number H01PQD0027409372 / H01PQA0027204793 lost by EVRi   As it has not been possible to resolve this matter amicably, and it is apparent that court action may be necessary, I write in compliance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct.   I have been in contact with customer support numerous times since 08/04/2024. Your driver marked the item “Returning to sender” without a valid attempt at delivery. The package is since then stuck in limbo with no further tracking updates, and as of today 03/05/2024 still says “on its way back to sender”. I have spoken to your representatives many times and they did not offer any help trying to track down the missing parcel or offer me any option for compensation. I have explained that I am both the sender and the recipient, and I am therefore within my rights to claim compensation for this missing item. I have full records of the item from the point of purchase, to its journey with DHL in the USA, and with EVRi in the UK, until it was lost in the system. The value of the item including shipping is £202.88.   From you I am claiming £202.88 paid in full to compensate the price of the item (£185.01) plus international shipping (£17.87).    Listed below are the documents on which I intend to rely in my claim against you: Screenshots of transaction made with the original seller of the item, including photographs of the item and Paypal transaction. Screenshots of the item received by Stackry in the USA and shipping cost via Global Mail Direct to my address in the UK. Screenshots of tracking with DHL Screenshots of tracking with EVRi Email correspondence with various customer support members at EVRi     I can confirm that I would be agreeable to mediation and would consider any other system of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in order to avoid the need for this matter to be resolved by the courts.  I would invite you to put forward any proposals in this regard.  In closing, I would draw your attention to paragraphs 15 and 16 of the Practice Direction which gives the courts the power to impose sanctions on the parties if they fail to comply with the direction including failing to respond to this letter before claim.  I look forward to hearing from you within the next 14 days. Should I not receive a response to my letter within this time frame then I anticipate that court action will be commenced with no further reference to you.    

Hi All, Just a quick update...........nothing to report - no contact from ParkingEye or BPA as yet. I am sending a complaint to the ICO today as suggested as the others have had more than enough time to at least acknowledge receipt of my requests / complaints.   Thanks to all. T.

Dear (insert Name) Will you please confirm in writing payment of £xxxxxx is accepted as full and final payment of rent arrears for commercial lease (insert dates) for rental on  property (insert address) and please provide a receipt of payment. Yours Sincerely 

When you get chance please upload a redacted copy of the agreement and also this termination notice included within the LBC.

Hope there is someone who can have a look at this please? 🤞Have to hand it in in like half an hour... THanks!   INTRODUCTION 1.      As a defendant in this case I make this Witness Statement to oppose the claimant application dated 19.09.23 to lift the stay on proceedings, for the defence to be struck out, for the Summary Judgment on the whole claim and the cost order to be made against me, the defendant in view of my Defence submitted to the County Court Business Centre in Northampton on 22 June 2019. 2.      The Claimant confirms that this claim issued through Northampton County Court Business Centre remained stayed since. 3.      Attached is a witness statement and a bundle of documents marked ‘LON2’. BACKGROUND 4.      The defendant confirms she entered into a contract with the Student Loan Company (SLC) under Loan Number ………….. on 28 November 1996. The original loan amount was £2035.00 with APR rate of 2.7%. 5.      The loan was regulated by SLC and during the time SLC was in charge of the account the defendant successfully deferred every year as she was always under the earning threshold. 6.      The defendant acknowledges receiving a copy of a loan agreement enclosed as pages [1 to 2] of ‘LON1’. NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT 7.      As per her defence, the claimant acknowledges receiving Notice of Assignment when the loan was moved over from SLC to Claimant on 22.11.2013. 8.      The Student Loan agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 9.      As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2014 REMEDIATION 10.  Defendant received a remediation pack from the Claimant on 28th August 2014 named Remedy of Account enclosed on pages [1-34] of ‘LON2’.  The cover letter explained that there was an issue under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 that resulted in Defendant’s balance being higher than it should have been so the reduction of £441.47 was applied to the account. 11.  The enclosed replacement documents in the pack showed correct situation compared to the originals with the erroneous Sums of Arrears. 12.   The defendant found this Remediation pack confusing and worrying that CCA 1974 was breached on Defendant’s account, yet the Claimant brushed it off with vague explanation and an apology. 13.  This issue puts shade on the Claimant’s requirement to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed under the Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4), as the Defendant does not admit the allegation. DEFERMENTS 14.  The defendant was granted deferrals for all the years they were with the SLC and continued to be granted deferments by the Claimant when they took over the loan as the claimant was under the earning threshold at all pertinent times. 15.  Defendant was sent and completed deferment forms for 20 years, between 1996 – 2016 without fail and no payments were ever due. 16.  Defendant had not received the 2017 deferment forms 8 weeks before the due date or the subsequent reminder that is customarily sent. 17.  Defendant had not been reminded by email about the deferment. 18.  When the Claimant noticed the Defendant’s deferment form was missing and this was unusual considering they have been at the same address for more than a decade and are on the electoral register, the Claimant did not make an attempt to call or email the defendant to communicate with them about the situation. 19.  The Claimant therefore did not treat the Defendant fairly. CCA REMEDIATON 2018 20.  As mentioned in Defendant’s Defence and not responded to in the Claimant’s Witness statement; the next communication from the Claimant that the Defendant received was the Remedy of Account pack on 1st September 2018 containing missing statutory notices that they are required to send within the prescribed timescales containing correct information to inform the client about their account as presented in pages [35-69] of ‘LON2’ 21.  Due to a system error between 2016-2018 the Claimant did not comply with this requirement and the correct statutory notices were not sent. 22.  This system error coincided with the dates the deferment forms were not received by the Defendant. 23.  The pack included annual statements some of which mentioned Sums of Arrears, much like the ones SLC used to send the Defendant in error – which was corrected by Claimant in 2014 as mentioned in points 9-12. The defendant was confused and googled the Remediation issue and found a - nothing to worry about – type of explanation on the Claimant’s website as it seems many accounts were affected. 24.  Claimant’s website stated: “What is remediation? During ongoing quality checks/reviews of our accounts, we identified an issue relating to communications that we are required to send customers as prescribed by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended) (CCA). Additionally, our review identified issues with the data on some of our customers’ accounts. Having reviewed all accounts for issues, along with rectifying the issues identified above, we are now in a position to resume our normal processes. We have begun writing to our customers who have had arrears on their loan(s) since 9 December 2015 (when Erudio took over the day to day management of the loans from the Capita Group). This is to ensure they have had all the required CCA notifications and their account data is accurate. This will involve sending the corrected documentation to affected customers and corrections to the data on customers’ accounts. If your account has been affected, you will receive this documentation where applicable. Any interest incurred since these issues arose will be deducted from your account balances. What does it mean for me? You don’t need to do anything. If you have been affected by any of these issues, you will receive a letter from us outlining what we have done to fix it. We will provide you with corrected regulatory letters for the period affected by these issues and inform you about any adjustments to your account balance or payment as a result of the removal of interest added to your account during that period.” 25.  The defendant concluded this error must be also why the deferment forms were not sent and trusted that the Claimant would fix the error and send the documents with an apology, after all, if there was a problem, the Claimant would have called or emailed to let the Defendant know. 26.  The Claimant was in breach of the CCA 1974 rules in letting the Defendant know about the arrears on the account, and subsequent actions taken were unenforceable as this was the Claimant’s error. LETTER OF CLAIM AND COURT DEFENCE 27.  However, Defendant was served with a Letter of Claim which was a shock. She had never been to court before and did not think she had a choice but go to court as the other option was to succumb to unreasonable offer by Dryden’s Fairfax lawyers representing the Claimant. 28.  Defendant therefore submitted defence to court. 29.  The Claimant’s witness statement has not addressed the CCA 1974 breach that was stated in point 15 or 16 of the Defendant’s defence. ADMINISTRATIVE STAY OF PROCEEDINGS July 2019 – May 2024 30.  As the Claimant’s Witness Statement reads, during the almost 5 year administrative stay, the Defendant was contacted by Drydens Fairfax layers representing the Claimant with offers to settle the ‘debt’, however the Defendant found the letters had a violent undertone, each one threatening with a CCJ unless the Defendant complied with demands. It was therefore unwise  to enter into any kind of relationship with such bullies who were well aware of the Defendant’s defence and that their client made serious mistakes and a breached CCA 1974 rules. 31.  As a result of these continual threats but the case still on administrative stay the Defendant experienced continual nightmares and stress related gut problems. She has seen the gut specialist who advised her the mind body connection and trauma can be connected with her type of gut issues and the defendant’s GP followed by referring her to trauma psychotherapy. 32.  On 8th of June 2021 the Claimant sent a letter with the statutory documentation they failed to send the Defendant even though her postal address had not changed. Again this was another CCA 1974 breach. 33.  On 16th December 2021 the Claimant sent another letter apologising for and error made in charging the Solicitor’s fees incorrectly, continuing with a series of blunders.