Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Tangliss, if you can't upload the letter, could you tell us what the heading is please? My understanding is it should say 'Letter before claim' or similar. HB
    • Do you think I should send the CCA request now then instead of waiting? I really can do without the stress. Any advice would be appreciated. Thank you for responding.
    • How was the "receiver" appointed and what is their role? Appointed by the lender under the terms of their security on the loan (sometimes referred to as "LPA Receiver")? Or are they acting for you in insolveny? What's the current role of the agent?
    • Wait for more replies, but that letter to me can be interpreted as a letter before action. Ignoring it can have consequences. The court to impose sanctions for failure in responding to a letter of claim.
    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Rocket Marketing (Buying the Brickie off tv)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2184 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

Hi all!

 

Im posting this question for my parents as i think they have been thoroughly ripped off!

 

My parents were sat watching tv when this advert came on for this Brickie thing that Tommy Walsh advertises and for some reason my parents decide to phone the number and buy one of these things....they are 75 and highly unlikely to be building any walls!

 

The thing was 39 quid, so he's on the phone and orders it, he is abit hard of hearing so he prob couldn't hear what they were saying.

 

Anyway this crappy thing shows up, then they get a ticket delivered to say there is a letter to collect from the post office.

 

As they weren't well they didn't collect it for a few days and when they did it was a 'Savings Pack' from Rocket marketing which i pressume the company that sold the brickie or same company had used my parents details and Card details to open up this savings account for all the special savings they could make.

 

In the letter it said you have 30 days to say if you do not want this savings offer or we will charge you 99 quid!

 

My dad doesnt read to well and my mum didn't bother to read it properly as she hadn't agreed to anything or thought she had signed up to anything so ignored it until the bank statement came through.

 

They had taken 99 quid from there account plus 1.99 for postage for a letter they did not request.

 

They rang them up complaining and basically got fobbed off saying you agreed and set up a pass word which was my dads date of birth.

 

After reading the small print it said you have 61 days to decline and you will be charged 5 quid admin but get back 94 quid they have taken.

 

So we rang them and it was 61 days from the date of the letter not when they recieved it and as they didn't pick it up from post office straight away and they have missed this 61 day thing as they have only recieved the bank statement and realised the money had been taken.

 

They said they will listen to there recorded phone calls and they said it appears to have been a hickup during that phone call and said they will investigate.....they will be intouch...prob sometime never i bet.

 

So can they legally just send you something and then say you now have this and we will take x money if you don't get intouch then take the money off someones swith card?

 

They didn't sign up to anything and only thought they ordered this rubbish item.

 

Is there anyone with advice on how to proceed on this or a letter we can send for robbing pensioners?

 

In the mean time i've told them to stay off phones purchasing things off the tv!

 

Cheers Olliepup.

Edited by olliepup
Link to post
Share on other sites

oh i feel a complaint coming on:

 

Tommy Walsh - Official TV Agent - Arlington Enterprises

 

how about watchdog too!

 

oh and get that switch card cancelled!

 

i would also whilst on the phone to them initiate a chargeback on the card

 

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

This sounds to me very much like unfair trading. I suggest that you make a complaint to the OFT under CPUT and also inform your Trading Standards office immediately.

 

I expect that 100s of other people have been targetted in this way as well.

 

I wonder whether Tommy Walsh knows about this tactic or whether they are simply taking advantage of his good name.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sent the link to this thread to a contact at the BBC.

 

We'll see.

 

However, make all the complaints which have been suggested

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for the feed back!

 

Is it worth writing to them to inform them of what i intend to do?

 

Robbing OAP's is not good, i'll contact my local Trading Standards Monday.

 

Hopefully get the money back for my parents.

 

Thanks for sending the link, more people that know the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no i think this will be big news

deserve all they get

if you tip them off

if they plant an insider etc it will blow it.

 

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

Ive sent an email for starters to Tommys people through your link explaining the situation and thought it was very underhand and fraudulent to take money by deception and the company that did so associates itself with Tommy and his product endorsment.

 

All we want is our money back, but i'll still go ahead and inform all parties ie OFT and TS which i also mentioned in my email.

 

See if i get a reply.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...
Guest MikeW001

FYI

Rocket Marketing are still doing exactly the same shady practices eight years later.

My father has just fallen victim and his bank is not being particularly helpful,

regarding the charge back.

Has anyone else found a purchase remiting £90 odd to Rocket Marketing on their card or bank statement, for a useless catalogue of unwanted and unasked for discounts.

If so, I would love to hear if you were able to secure a refund and how.

Cheers

Mike :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

the bank must do a chargeback.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...