Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

Apex regarding a hugely disputed card debts with TSB


sosumi
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5848 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

Okay, I'm having flashing lights before my eyes and need to sleep, but we had a letter from Apex regarding a hugely disputed debt with TSB. Basically TSB admitted in writing that they have no credit agreements for either of our TSB credit cards. Despite being in dispute they sold one (looks like) to Credit Security Limited (dealt with, not heard from again) But this morning, we had a letter from Apex regarding the other.

 

I hate Apex. They were BCW in Stratford before they 'rebranded' and BCW (same address) started our dispute with TSB last year.

I don't even want to reply to them, but what I want to say is this:

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY

You have written to me apparently regarding an account which is very much in dispute with Lloyds TSB. You state a figure and a reference number I do not recognise. You state you have received instructions from the 'above named client' to initiate formal debt collection proceedings.

Please inform me, by return of post, how you came by this information.

Please provide proof of your authority to write such a letter.

 

You have, in writing this letter, provided the final piece of evidence I shall be taking to the Office of Fair Trading.

Please consider this reply to you as the first step in a formal complaint about you, above and beyond the complaint I shall be submitting to the OFT about Lloyds TSB's conduct.

I require your complaints procedure by return of post.

I require proof of your authority to write such a letter.

I require a full explanation of your letter, with regard to the OFT's Guidelines for Debt Collection (OFT 664).

Alternatively, I shall wait for a copy of your Complaints Procudure and itemise your several breaches, point by point. I shall enclose the OFT 664 for your reference.

Notwithstanding the complaint which I now have with you, I shall be enclosing your letter for submission to the OFT and various other statutory/regulatory bodies as I see fit. It is in your interest, therefore, to respond to this letter by return of post.

Stick it up your jumper,

Sosumi

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am so cross.

It's the same firm that sent me the 'tippex file' - probably the same people, except they were calling themselves BCW then. Feel very very tempted to go to Stratford and ask a policeman to witness me handing them the letter!

- all of everything I've learnt from here seems to have flown out of the window!! Maybe anger was causing the flashes before my eyes!

Oooh I'll get them. Help! :mad::grin:

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

PS I think I'll add:

"Are you on the OFT's List of Thirteen?

Did you get this information from a Credit Reference Agency?";-):grin:

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that sosumi just needed to let off a bit of steam. I don't think he/she will really put 'stick it up your jumper'

Will you?:confused::D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that sosumi just needed to let off a bit of steam. I don't think he/she will really put 'stick it up your jumper'

Will you?:confused::D

:D No, just steam-letting, as you say!:D

But the letter I had from that office last year - a sight to behold! Lathered in tippex, manufactured date, my address upside-down and re-sealed (by them) with a bit of sellotape.

But that was for another TSB account. Now they're Apex, much posher letter, same old people I bet, same old $%#!

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jackanapes

 

Splendid!

 

 

 

As far as the letter is concerned, a lawyer friend once told me that however tempting, it is always best not to give anything away to the other side. Apex's letter is full of DCA threatspeak - this may happen, and so on.

 

At this stage, Apex (or any DCA), would respond to a complaint by pleading ignorance; that the OC didn't tell them there was a dispute. If they write to you again, however...

 

I favour, whenever possible, brief letters to DCAs. In this case, along the lines of:

 

Dear Curs

 

I refer to your letter dated xxxx. I do not acknowledge any debt to you, or any company you claim to represent.

 

Since this account is the subject of an unresolved dispute with (OC), I am unable to enter into correspondence with you.

 

If you do not understand this letter, you should refer to the Office of Fair Trading Guidance on Debt Collection, or consult a qualified solicitor.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know, when I sent them a CCA request early last year (when they were Buchanan Clark and Wells of Stratford), they went so quiet for so long before the 'tippex file' arrived. I actually worried about them a little... With all the floods last year, I had visions of boxes and boxes of letters from their office bobbing up and down the River Avon...

Not now though ;)

If they write again I'll reply in crayon.

... Never test a menopausal CAG writer!! :D

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are a force for good... good riddance.

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forward it on to the OFT im sure they will be interested as their new investigation into DCAs says they are unhappy about these doorstep threats

 

contacting debtors at unreasonable times and intervals, threatening home visits when debts were disputed

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just woken up - hadn't realised I was still logged in!

Seahorse - I think that's a great reply :D

Yesterday I was high on the OFT news. Today, that letter really got to me.

adamski, I think you're right. I have to do this. I dread it though, as the paperwork does my head in, seriously.

We have two real offenders - Citi and TSB. Every other creditor we're both okay with - dodgy CCA or not, they're being fair(ish) and we want to clear the debts. But Citi sent my account - after they'd altered the numbers - to DLC, and TSB = the above.

Frustrates the hell out of me though, I just want to write my book!!

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your replies yesterday folks. Had a very rough day, and that letter very nearly tipped me over the edge. Am just so glad CAG's here! :) x

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

somedays we wake up and think of all the debts we allegedly owe and it really gets to you , then we log in to CAG and the worlds a much nicer place .

 

 

especially in the evenings when the voddy starts flowing in the bear garden (so I'm told):p

Link to post
Share on other sites

The idiots formerly known as BCW are in breach of your CCA request. As Apex claim to be the all new professional former BCW they should take responsibility for their former namesakes crass stupidity. If as BCW they were unable to comply with your CCA then its highly unlikely that the same empty headed monkeys will be able to produce a valid CCA now.

 

What you have now is the same sh!t on different notepaper. I notice however that they havent purchased a new threatomatic printer as the typeface looks remarkably similar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...