I buy and sell used spin bikes, I was approached by a customer who I had sold spin bikes to previously, they were expanding their spin classes and wanted to know if I had a particular brand of bike, I didn't have that brand at the time so I told the customer that I would be getting more in within 2-3 weeks for £150 each. I called a few of the companies who supply me but they never had any I searched eBay. I found a seller who had an auction ending that day for 10 bikes of the brand the customer wanted all in good working order, bidding was started at 99p, there was no reserve and no bids but there was a 'Buy it Now' option of £1000. (10 bikes of this brand sell for £1500) I contacted the customer back to tell them I had 10 coming and they agreed to buy them all for £1500 On the day of the auction I bid £1000 with 5 mins to go, I ended up winning the auction with a bid of £280, less than an hour after the auction had ended the seller messaged me to say "sorry I thought I had cancelled the auction, the bikes were damaged and disposed of" He then cancelled the auction, there was nothing I could do but report him to eBay and leave the relevant feedback. I called a few other companies that supply used spin bikes but nobody had any of the bikes the customer wanted, unfortunately, I had to inform the customer that I could no longer supply the bikes so they went elsewhere. Weeks later I was contacted by an eBay user who had seen my feedback, they said they were interested in the bikes but forgot to bid, a day after the auction they contacted the seller to say if the buyer doesn't complete they would be interested in purchasing for £850, I was saddened to hear that the seller messaged them back the same day to say the bikes were still available, they even went to view the bikes at the sellers gym that he owns. I've seen all of the messages between the seller and the eBay user so the seller can't deny that he made a false statement to me and then tried to sell at a higher price. What I would like to know is can I sue the seller for breach of contract and seek damages for expectation loss/loss of bargain, £1500 less my winning bid and collection cost etc? If I can sue him for breach of contract, do I sue him as an individual or sue his company as he was using a private eBay sellers account at the time to list the bikes? Thanks in advance

Sorry MH, I had her read it to me over the phone and yes you're right its a copy of notice served on the Claimant! Its dated the 1st Feb, I take it he has until the 11th to get his DQ in??

Ok thanks for all the advise so far...My friend completed the Directions Questionnaire and emailed it back to [email protected] on the day it was due 28/1, She received a standard automated reply but on 7/2 she received a 'General Form of Judgement or Order' saying she failed to file the Directions Questionnaire! Is this normal that her submitted form may not have been entered on to the system in time for the reason why she has now received that form?? What I'd really want to know is how best to proceed? Re- complete another form and hand it in with the £40 fee or call NCCBC and ask them to verify that they have or have not received the email with the attached N180??

He's claiming he lent her the money prior to the sale of her house. He thinks he's clever but his story doesn't add up, surely if you lent someone 5k, you wouldn't ask them to borrow 5k if they haven't paid you back, you would just ask for your money back. She was scared and never told me about the claim when she first received it but she told me that he had asked about borrowing 5k months prior to form arriving. I'm not too sure if she even put in a good defence other than denying his claims that he ever lent her 5k. Is she still able at this stage to counter claim and claim damages, tbh I think all she wants is for it to be over and for him to disappear to a planet far far away.

Just trying to get some helpful advice regarding a false claim against my friend through Small Claims Court for money a former so called friend says she owes him. Basically he's a convicted fraudster and found out my friend had sold her house and came into a little bit of money so he kept asking to borrow 5k (I believe by email) she told him no on several occasions and stopped communicating with him. Then one day she received a claim against her for 5k that he claims he lent her and says he has a witness which is all a pack of lies. I know you shouldn't judge someone on their past but in this case this is his normal M.O he's just using the Small Claims Court to falsely claim money he has never given to my friend, trying to scare her into paying him the money, repeatedly telling her his Solicitor and Barrister have looked at the case and believes he will win because he has a witness and she doesn't. I wouldn't be surprised if he has withdrawn 5k at some point to corroborate his story. My friend has sent the form off to defend herself and has now received another form, should this not be a police matter?? blackmail, fraud, perjury??? How can she prove that he did not give her 5k? Is it just his word against hers? Any help will be much appreciated

I purchase a property under the 'Right to Buy' scheme in 2003. I received a 'Offer Notice' under Section 125 of the Housing Act 1985 from the council before completion which stated under the heading ‘Structural And Other Defects’ a list of defects know by the council to affect the property..It also stated in bold "No structural survey has been made in connection with the following valuation, nor have the services been tested. Moreover, those parts of the property which are covered, unexposed or inaccessible, including the roof space, have not been inspected and the Council’s Valuer is, therefore unable to report that such parts of the property are free from insect infestation, rot, or any other defect, apart from those listed below. It is for the intending Purchaser of the above property to satisfy himself or herself as to the condition of the property. An intending purchaser is strongly advised to obtain a full survey of the property." Bearing in mind that it states under S125(4a) Housing Act: (4A) The notice shall contain a description of any structural defect known to the landlord affecting the dwelling-house or the building in which it is situated. The defects listed were:- Replace metal framed single glazed windows when necessary. Replace lead riser (water pipe) *Repoint minor cracking* Investigate/treat woodworm Last year it was brought to my attention by a surveyor that my property had previously suffered subsidence, he pointed out a 25mm vertical crack that ran from the roof line to the porch. It had been pointed with mortar and there were also 2x 2.5m helical bars that had been bedded into the mortar joints horizontally to hold the property together. I told him that I never been aware of that crack and it was the first time it had ever been brought to my attention, I told him that I had purchased the property from the council. As he had surveyed properties for the council before he asked me if I had the 'Offer Notice' After viewing the paperwork and looking around property he could not find any other cracks or any that needed repointing accept for the one he had identified to me. He told me that the crack that the council had referred to as 'minor' was in fact a substantial crack and he told me to notify my insurers immediately as it was evident that the property was still moving. It is of the opinion of the surveyor and a structural engineer that the property was never repaired properly and will need underpinning to stabilise it. It's no surprise to me that my insurers are only willing to do minor remedial repairs as it is evident that the subsidence is historical and was present prior to me taking out my policy with them which really voids my policy. I understand that I should have had a full structural survey at the time of purchase but I also understand that the council failed in their statutory duty to disclose all known defects known to them that affected the property at time of me receiving my 'Offer Notice'. What I would like to know is, would this also be classed as an actionable misrepresentation under s.2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 as the information they documented on the ‘Offer Notice’ was wholly misleadingly and they should have known that if the crack of that magnitude needed repointing 'again' then the property was still showing signs of movement after the work ‘they’ had carried out (prior to me becoming a tenant in the property) and a defect of this nature would required remedial work in distant future. I’m not actually too sure 'IF' there was in fact a contract between myself and the council but had the subsidence been disclosed to me at the time of sale, I would never have entered in to a contract with my mortgage company. Any help or suggestions will be greatly appreciated at this point.

CAB only GOD could tell me where they get their prehistoric information! The advice they have gave me in the past was absolutely shocking! In 2008 they told me I would NEVER find a solicitor who would be willing to take legal proceedings against another solicitor regarding professional negligence they said it was unheard of! I'm sure they do a lot of other good work but I personally would never rely on what they told me and I would never think of recommending them to my family or friends, I'd only recommend them to my worst enemy.

Thanks Toymaker. Maybe Egg have not sold the debt to Cabot after all. I was just reading this thread Saddler10, Cabot and Egg and it looks like Cabot may be telling me BS!! The letter I received is exactly the same as Saddler10. I will not be writing to egg to confirm the letter I received, I guess I've anwsered my own question I will just be dealing with Cabot with contempt. At least this gives me and everyone else reading this thread a heads up on what tactics Egg and their dca’s will try, makes no difference to me what they do as of now as far as I'm concerned Egg have terminated my agreement untill they or one of their dca's takes me to court they wont be getting a dime.

I know others following this thread have had their Terminated Credit Card Accounts passed to dca’s and hounded (thanks to Toymaker they seemed to all disappear when I sent a letter and asked them to “indicate to me the relevant section of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which provided Egg with entitlement to terminate my Egg credit card agreement”) but has Egg actually sold your account to a dca? Yesterday I received a letter from Cabot Financial introducing themselves (I think they are trying the nicely nicely approach I wonder why) with with an attached letter from Egg saying: We hereby give notice of the transfer of the debt due to us from you in respect of the balance of £****.** outstanding on your Credit Card account. On 1 October 2009 your account was sold to Cabot Financial (UK) Limited Any further communications and payments must therefore be addressed to Cabot Financial Group. 1. Is the enclosed this letter from egg a notice of assignment (proof that Egg have sold my debt to Cabot) 2. Does this now mean that the balance with Egg is Zilch? 3. Should Egg have sold the debt while it was in dispute? Not that I’m bothered. 4. I’m not naive I know Cabot will now try and hound me too for the full balance of the "Terminated Account" What I would like to know do I deal with them in the same way I responded to with Moorcroft, Westcott and others by sending letter and asking them to “Indicate to me the relevant section of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which provides Egg with entitlement to terminate my Egg credit card agreement” I understand that Cabot have brought my “terminated account” from egg for pennies but from reading Debt sold on to DCA - help please? am I right in thinking that I don’t actually have any contract with Cabot so they will try enter a contract with me over the phone (not that I ever speak to dca’s over the phone anyway) I would like to know how I should respond to them and if I should respond to them at all.

I have just received a offer from a DCA too although they wrote to me last month saying they had closed the account on their system. Anyway I am not going to be accepting any offers.

After sending my letter to Egg and a copy to CapQuest with regards to my "Terminated Agreement" asking egg to indicate to me which specific part of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is considered by Egg to provide legal entitlement to terminate my Egg agreement when my account was not in default. After CapQuest received my letter they then sent me a letter saying "it is apparent that you have not responded in away that is acceptable, to make necessary arrangements to settle your account" then going on to say the have continued legal proceedings with a view to one of the following enforcement methods charging order, statutory demand, attachment of earnings order. I then sent CapQuest this letter ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE Reference Number xxxxxxxxxxxxx Dear Sir/Madam With regards to your letter dated XXXXX it is quite clear from your response that you have chosen to ignore my letter that I sent you (on XXXXX ) and have decided to continue collection activity. I have made both you and your client fully aware of my reasons for disputing this debt in my letter. I have since received a letter from Egg dated XXXXX which I have enclosed a copy of, they have indicated to me that they are investigating the matter of my disputed debt. Should you not be aware paragraph 2.8 k. of the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance of July 2003 (updated in December 2006) makes it very clear that collection activity must cease whilst investigating a disputed debt. Should you chooses to ignore my dispute and continue to breach the OFT Collection Guidelines, I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action. I hope that this will not be necessary. I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter and I look forward to the results of your client’s investigation. Yours sincerely I then received a letter from CapQuest saying they are unable to comment on the dispute and therefore they are closing the account on their system. After receiving a letter from egg it is clear they have not investigated the matter at all. The say they are responding to my letter of the 20th Feb! I did not send them a letter on the 20th Feb. I sent a letter to them on the 10th! Anyway they go on to say that they did send me a "true copy" of the executed agreement What! I asked them to indicate to me which specific part of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is considered by Egg to provide legal entitlement to terminate my Egg agreement when my account was not in default. Not if the agreement they sent me was a true copy or not! Anyway I will now sit tight and await the next DCA's letter.

Conniff thanks for your comments my solicitor is actually doing this on a No Win No fee conditional basis. peterlucas this is what my solicitor is saying that I have not suffered a actual loss with the cost of the diversion which I can kind of understand but on the other hand I am going to suffer that loss. Anyway I have spoken to a solicitor today who happened to be a member of the Law Society Professional Negligence Panel and although this is not legal advice this is what he said to me Although not financial yet he said I am suffering a loss because I am unable to extend my property unless I divert the sewers at cost of 20k+ furthermore had I been able to build my extension the value of my property would have been a lot greater than what is now, he also mentioned about the interest I am paying on the extra funds I borrowed to extend which I am unable to pay back due to the clause in my mortgage conditions. He also agreed had I known about the sewers I would not have purchased the property and would have been re-housed by the council and would now be in at least a 3 bedroom house with the benefit of having separate bedrooms for my children. I am going to relay these points back to my solicitor.

In 2003 my mortgage company appointed a Conveyance solicitors to act on my behalf with regards to a 2 bedroom council property I wanted to purchase under the "Right To Buy" scheme Which I had planned to extend in to a 3-4 bedroom due to having a young family of 2. My Mortgage company confirmed in writing to the solicitor that I would be borrowing additional funds to extend the property. I received letter from the solicitor requesting me to pay £200 for search fees which included £40 for a drainage and water search. The amount requested was paid in full. The solicitor then wrote to the local Borough Councils solicitor and confirmed the amount I was borrowing and notified them also that additional funds I was borrowing were to extend the property; they also enclosed a quotation that I had forwarded to my mortgage company from my builder. The solicitors then carried out their searches. On completion of all the searches I received a property report along with other paperwork from my solicitors. Before signing any paperwork, myself and a family member went through everything and there was nothing in any of the paperwork that would suggest that I should not go ahead with the purchase of the property. The only thing I recall is a warning about radon gases. The purchase of the property was completed in August 2003. In May 2004 I proceeded to extend my property as originally planned. I instructed an architect and plans were drawn up and then submitted to the planning dept. My Plans were passed but when my application got to building regulations it was then flagged up. Building regs dept notified me that there were 2 main sewers running through where my proposed extension was to be. It was my understanding that these sewers should have been picked up not only by my architect but at a much earlier stage from the drainage and water search that was carried out by the solicitor. I contacted the solicitors in question and was told that I should have received paperwork for the drainage and water search. I checked all paperwork again that I received and could not find this paperwork nor can I ever recall receiving it. There is also nothing in the report that they complied that made me aware that 2 main sewers were running within the boundary of my property. Under drainage and water section in the report it just says we can confirm that you drainage is adopted by *** water company. I made contact with the solicitor and asked them if they could send me a copy of the drainage and water search that they carried out. After calling back I was told that they could not find the paperwork in question. So through a solicitor I requested my complete file to be sent to my solicitors direct. On receiving my file my solicitor confirmed to me that there was no drainage and water search paperwork contained in my file. The solicitors in question had also confirmed in writing that they could not find the paperwork. I contacted the company who originally carried out the search on behalf of the solicitors and they have confirmed in writing to me a search was carried out back in 2003 and that 4 main sewers! were found within my boundary. The water company who own the sewers will not let me build over them and will only allow me to divert them which is going to cost 20k+ I have now instructed my solicitor to bring a case of negligence against the solicitors in question because had I known these sewers were there in 2003 and that they would stop me from extending my property I would not have purchased the property knowing that my boy and girl would be sharing a room. I would have put in for an exchange to a 3 bedroom instead. At the moment the total losses that I have suffered amount close to 1.5k I still need to extend my property but can’t because of the sewers. Should I be able to claim damages for what it's going cost to me to divert the sewers? My solicitor says I can’t as I have not yet forked out the 20k and suffered an actual loss. Any help would be appreciated

I had sent a CCA request to CapQuest and after receiving my agreement I think that it is enforceable or would have been enforceable if my agreement had not been terminated. However I will post in the relevant forum for confirmation of this. I sent a letter to both Egg and CapQuest purely because I knew I would just get a standard response from CapQuest and wanted to see what egg would have come back with. From now on I will just deal with CapQuest. Thanks for the reply toymaker1

I have sent my letter to Egg regarding this matter on the 10 Feb. I also sent a copy to Capquest who are persuing me for the terminated Egg Acc. In the letter to Egg I have requested Egg to indicate to me which specific part of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is considered by Egg to provide Egg with legal entitlement to terminate my Egg agreement. I also mentioned that Until Egg could provide clarification to me; I considered the account to be in dispute. Today I received a letter from CapQuest stating that the letter I sent them is not acceptable and unless I pay in full or come to some arrangement to pay by 26th Feb they will enforce one of the following methods, charging order, statutory demand or attachment of earnings. I have not even heard from Egg yet and based on the replies others have had on this thread I really doubt they are going to give me an acceptable response. The thing is I know CapQuest just sent me a standard letter and probably did not even consider the points I raised in the letter. Should I write back to the Capquest and remind them that the account is in dispute? What about the interesting points raised by BigEddieChek should I include them in the letter too?