Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • 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 
        • 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

Provident Door Step Collections


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2724 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

Good Morning!

 

Does anyone know how I can stop a door collection agent from Provident attending my home?

I missed a payment collection date and was unable to notify the agent as my phone died.

The agent then attended my property 4 times that evening knocking loudly from 9pm.

 

Has anyone dealt with Provident before?

The whole doorstep collection process for the sake of £100 loan is getting ridiculous.

If I can come to an arrangement and deal directly with them that would be ideal.

 

Any advice would be appreciated!

 

Thanks very much.

 

Kind regards

 

P

Link to post
Share on other sites

The agent should not be calling after 9 anyway. I suspect this is all about the commission the agent will earn and the penalties for not collecting amounts due.

 

If the agent comes again after 9, try and record them and mention that they shouldn't be calling at that time.

 

Regarding the debt. Contact Provi direct not through the agent and explain your circumstances and moan about the agent as well.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could use that "Notice of Removal" Thingy :p Oh wait, no you cant :p

 

Seriously though. A simple letter to PRovi telling them you will only deal in writing could work but at the same time SF is completely right.

You should beable to deal direct with Provi. But its up to you.

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The money Provident loans out is mostly to people on welfare.

 

 

This is Government Tax Payer money supporting the UK social net..

Welfare people have to sometimes get a loan to rent a property and can not get money else where.

 

 

Money that you get from Social programms definatly do not pay to this Company.

They have an army of women making the collects.

If they knock on the door tell them to xxxx and not come back and you will only deal with Provident in writing.

Make 10 pound a week till you pay off the debt.

If you do not have that 1 pound if they will take it.

 

The trouble is the UK Government will not or does not want to pass "usage laws (high rates of interest".

 

 

Usage rates of interest are unenforceable in a UK Court of Law.Overseas USA Washington has a cap of 12% on interest rates that can be charge at all levels of loan. Other States too..Middle East under Sharia Law charging any interest at all is against the teachings of Allah and Koran.

 

A class action suit, like PPI which has been flogged to death, could be brought against Provident for usage interest rates and using welfare money.Best bet is not use them at all. Aviod them.You have to be desperate if you use them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree, provident as an organisation issue credit cards as in Vanquis. I have one with a credit limit of £3000. They also have a loan company called Satsuma in their group. Being on any sort of benefit does not force you to use provdent door step collections. All applications are credit checked on affordability. The reason with Provident use doorstep collection is that people have adverse credit history and cannot get a bank account for Direct debit.

 

I object to the term supported by welfare. Welfare is an anti social american term that gives the impression something for nothing. People pay into that system, it is called national insurance contributions. Collectors on doorsteps are not predominantly women. People do it on a commission basis to suplement regular income. Male or female so how you can say is is government tax payers money is beyond me. provident is a private commercial company

 

And one final point, people on low income do not use money from the likes of provident to secure social housing. They use a thing called the deposit guarantee scheme run by local authorities and housing associations

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree, provident as an organisation issue credit cards as in Vanquis. I have one with a credit limit of £3000. They also have a loan company called Satsuma in their group. Being on any sort of benefit does not force you to use provdent door step collections. All applications are credit checked on affordability. The reason with Provident use doorstep collection is that people have adverse credit history and cannot get a bank account for Direct debit.

 

I object to the term supported by welfare. Welfare is an anti social american term that gives the impression something for nothing. People pay into that system, it is called national insurance contributions. Collectors on doorsteps are not predominantly women. People do it on a commission basis to suplement regular income. Male or female so how you can say is is government tax payers money is beyond me. provident is a private commercial company

 

And one final point, people on low income do not use money from the likes of provident to secure social housing. They use a thing called the deposit guarantee scheme run by local authorities and housing associations

 

They didnt check for affordability with me

I got a loan missed a couple of payments they then offered to roll it up in another loan

My payments ended up being £75 a week and after a few missed or not enough payments the agent stopped calling

Link to post
Share on other sites

The money Provident loans out is mostly to people on welfare.This is Government Tax Payer money supporting the UK social net..Welfare people have to sometimes get a loan to rent a property and can not get money else where.Money that you get from Social programms definatly do not pay to this Company.They have an army of women making the collects.If they knock on the door tell them to xxxx and not come back and you will only deal with Provident in writing.Make 10 pound a week till you pay off the debt.If you do not have that 1 pound if they will take it.

 

The trouble is the UK Government will not or does not want to pass "usage laws (high rates of interest". Usage rates of interest are unenforceable in a UK Court of Law.Overseas USA Washington has a cap of 12% on interest rates that can be charge at all levels of loan. Other States too..Middle East under Sharia Law charging any interest at all is against the teachings of Allah and Koran.

 

A class action suit, like PPI which has been flogged to death, could be brought against Provident for usage interest rates and using welfare money.Best bet is not use them at all. Aviod them.You have to be desperate if you use them.

 

I do find this a most unusual first post to make and I would like to correct some inaccuracies.

 

1 It is not Government Tax Payer money. Remove the Government and then we are about right. Provident do not lend out taxpayer money. They get it back as payments for a loan but only if the debtor is on benefits. Even people in well paying jobs sometimes struggle to get credit after a bad time. For some, it is convenient having someone call round.

I agree that if you are struggling then make arrangements to pay less but never £10 per week. A month perhaps.

 

2 There is no such thing s 'Usage' laws. You should be referring to this as USURY and while the Government do not get involved as such, the FCA hobbled the Pay day market by not allowing them to charge more than double the original loan plus many other rules to reign them in.

 

There is no point discussing the USA as it has absolutely no relevance here in the UK and as for a class action, I doubt there would be enough interest to start one especially as they don't use Usury. The do charge high interest but the customer has the right to say no. Any charges added however may be challenged but on an individual basis.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

hi new to this forum i work part time as a collector at similar company to provident i know its awful job but need the money to pay bills,its right they shouldnt be calling after 9 p.m. and you can speak to provi ask collector for buisness managers number or head office quoting your account number and you could pay dd or maybe pay over the phone every week/ month with debit card

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...