Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 1. who knows... 2. not the whole A/C vanishes from your file on the DN's 6th b'day ...already carefully explain this. 3.yes 4.already carefully explain this.
    • if i remember rightly, long ago in one of the first drafts of the old proposed gov't overhauls, there was a listing of recommended 'charges' that inc wrong reg = £20. some PPC's implemented such changes in advance. then later as it looked increasing likely the new code was never going to be implemented after it's 1st review and another set of codes was to be debated they all quietly revert back .......... dx
    • Potentially it may not even get sold on? Just the default left for 6 years then gone? but if it is sold on ill get a letter from the DCA which is the notice of assignment? Sorry what is the different between a default notice and a default cal marker? yes, i may try and work arrangements out with the OCs after the breathing space but I'll see my circumstances then thank you again for all your help and patience, I really appreciate it and apologies If i am too fast or repeating myself.
    • receiving a default NOTICE (forget simple default cal markers) does not mean it will get sold on... OC's very very rarely do court themselves.  if it does you would receive a Notice of Assignment from the debt buyer/DCA.  as for reduced payment if it remains with the OC and they issue a DN, no harm in trying but lets get all your ducks inline first. dx  
    • okay thanks do you know how long it will take for it to get to the DCA or could the OC try and issue a CCJ? even though it's unlikely also for example would the OC agree to a reduction and a small payment over a super lengthy period of time if agreed? Rather than go through chasing apologies again for all the questions, just trying to understand all the possible scenarios.  
  • 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

DCA threatening CCJ - 1st credit & Citi financial


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2840 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

also have a look at the fca rules etc re barred debts, when a crud is notified of a matter being barred.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

After a few more threatening letters

 

, I’ve received a letter this week stating that my account has been passed to 1st Credit’s Legal Department.

 

The account will be held for 10 days

 

. “If we do not hear from you, your account will be subject to a case review that may result in a ‘statutory demand’ being issued, which is a formal step prior to issuing bankruptcy proceedings.”

 

There’s that word ‘may’ again. I’ll wait and see what they do.

 

Epsilon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blimey, this thread must be one of the longest ongoing cases here. I would have thought this would be Statute Barred by now. If so, you could let them know and if they are foolish enough to issue an SD then you can get it dismissed and probably claim some costs too

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

Thanks Sliverfox. Your first sentence made me laugh, which was a nice thing to be able to do.

 

I haven't had to wait very long for their next letter which reads:

 

'We wrote to you recently outlining our intentions to issue Bankruptcy proceedings against you. Having performed a review of your account we have concluded that the pursual of Bankruptcy proceedings against you is no longer a fair and reasonable outcome at this moment in time.

 

It is however our intention to pursue an alternate method of enforcement to secure this debt. You will shortly receive letters detailing the methods that may be pursued.

 

Please contact us on xxx within 10 days to discuss the repayment options available to you based on your current financial circumstances. Should no contact be forthcoming your account will be passed to our solicitors with an instruction to issue legal proceedings once Civil Procedure Rules have been complied with (e.g. after a Letter Before Claim has been sent).

 

Ultimately we do not want to take this course of action and we would prefer to come to a repayment that is both affordable and sustainable for you. If you are experiencing financial difficulties...' etc.

 

As always, any advice on what they may try next will be much appreciated.

 

Epsilon

Link to post
Share on other sites

we have concluded that the pursual of Bankruptcy proceedings against you is no longer a fair and reasonable outcome at this moment in time

unsurprising

 

You will shortly receive letters detailing the methods that may be pursued.

:lol: just wait for their next template then. post back

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...