Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
  • 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
      • 160 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

Co-op threatens sanctions and financial punishment.


Bazooka Boo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3209 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

Received a standard letter template from the Co-op, hopefully attached?

 

However, it wasn't until I re-read their missive that I noticed the wording they used.

 

"Continued misuse of your account means that we can impose restrictions to your banking facilities, including your debit and credit cards, or even close your account"

 

Now considering this is only the second time I have bounced a direct debit, I find their language very threatening, quite how depriving me of £30 is ever going to force me to not "misuse" my account is totally beyond me?

After all, isn't the reason why these DD bounced because I didn't have enough money in there in the first place?

 

No wonder the finance industry is in such a mess, I rang them (Truecall) and spoke to a pleasant enough lady who told me they can only waiver bank fees once in a 12 month period, when I told her that the only payments going into my account between now and their attempted 'charge' of £30 is going to be my benefit money, it sort of fell on deaf ears, 'it's in the terms and conditions' yadda yadda yadda, 'were allowed to take money out of the account' yadda yadda yadda.

 

So letter of complaint is going out first thing tomorrow, along with my thoughts on why I feel their charges are unfair, and if they wish I will send them a letter of appropriation. In the meantime I'm looking for another bank!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever i argue with my bank, i always demand to know the name and employee ID of the person i am talking to, so i can call them as a witness if i need to take court action. You wouldn't believe how fast i get passed to a manager and have my problem sorted.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

'were allowed to take money out of the account'

 

Who do they think they are, some government office or the tax man. They are just another business but one that gets it's stock (our money) for nothing and makes a profit on it, a bit like the waste recyclers but less ingenuous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes she did try and get me to speak to her manager, but I told her I would rather deal with this in writing so I can have a paper trail of evidence.

 

Don't really want to transcribe all the calls..:lol:

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

So, ended up telling them I'll need a £30 overdraft to buy some food for the month seeing as they had taken my benefit money.

 

They ended up giving me a £40 O/D, which I used £30 to buy my food, and took the extra £10 as a means to compensate me for the trouble they had caused.

 

I then opened a new account with a separate banking group, and transferred all payments to it. Leaving Co-oP with a £40.17p O/D.

 

Looking forward to the ensuing influx of deforestation.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Well this has escalated somewhat!

 

Not at all worried mind, truecall is doing a stirling job rejecting all their calls, and recording all their failed attempts to harass me via the phone.

 

Todays post brought me a DN, and a faulty one at that!

Whilst they have learned to give the required fourteen days in which to rectify, and state an actual date, unfortunately the amount they want is the total amount they claim is owing, tut tut, try again, and remove the bank charges you have added and the interest it has accrued on those charges, then come back and we can talk like adults.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

58 calls since the 15th Oct, all expertly rejected by Truecall.

Now correct me if I am wrong, BUT, I have made it clear to them verbally NOT to call me again, (letter to go out this week regarding their harassment, and the charges I will present them with should they continue to ignore my request)

 

I am quite sure that truecall informs the caller that their call is not appreciated and NOT to call again? Can't get much clearer than that, at least they can't say that the five calls in one day they made they didn't understand?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harrison v Link.

 

Hit them where it hurts.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So after sending them a suitably direct letter informing them to remove my number from their database yadda yadda yadda, and to never call me again,

the total number of calls they have now made stands at 83, yes eighty three!

So by my poor maths @£18 per unwanted call = £1494.00 then the fee on top of that plus interest at the stat rate... :typing:

 

So just to inform the 'collections department' exactly where I'm at, I rang them and told them that I issued them a letter of harassment last week, and it clearly stated should they continue in their harassment and intimidation, that I would be billing them for the entire call history they have made. They have continued, so I have again informed them verbally, to remove my number from their systems, only for the silly boy to respond with 'they might contact you again when it gets to our other department'?

 

More fool you if you do!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Just a V.quick update on this, currently paying them £1 a month, they still have ownership of the account and the £1 a month payment is coming off the total owed.

 

They have also refunded the bank charges and interest added to those charges, bringing the account below £180....

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Lovely letter off Co-oP, informing me that Robbersway are now in charge of this account, and all payments blah blah blah must go to them...

 

S/O won't be getting changed, £1 a month is still being paid to the bank direct, looking forward to Robbersway first threat letter.

Truecall will hopefully start logging their failed telephone harassment calls, lets see how many the bank can rack up this year, as it is ultimately their responsibility of any

third party they choose to employ, they can carry the can!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Ok, need to pick some brains here.....mine is defunct!! :frusty:

 

To date, Robbersway have sent me three missives, last one being yesterday, gave em a little toot, wanted to bait them for a while, anyhow..

 

This account has now gone through the whole, default and termination process twice, first was figures WITH fees/charges/int second one was WITHOUT

all of their fees/charges & Int, plus Int was stopped before they terminated.

 

A GOGW was made by me as a result of their GOGW to refund all fees etc, of £1 a month, they obviously wanted a I&E form filling in, 'computer say's No!'

just set up a S/O to maintain monthly payments, however......

 

On telling robbersway that I was paying the bank direct, they insisted that the bank hadn't received any payments since June, so checked online banking and sure enough, they were returning my S/O the day after it had left my bank..

 

I'm just putting a letter together of my own to send the bank to question them as to the legality of what they are doing.

Now as I understand it, when the agreement is terminated, that basically means that the agreement no longer exist (Y/N?) therefore unless there is any express permissions written into the agreement, interest, charges, fees etc can no longer be added as the agreement which allowed them to do so has been terminated by themselves? (Does that make sense?)

 

Therefore, the part that says they ''may pass your account onto a third party debt collector to collect on their behalf'' is surely unfair/unlawful?

 

And IMO the only way they can get around this is by selling the account under the LOPA giving the 'new' owner the debt to chase, but surely they would need you to make a new contract with them in order for you to pay them?

 

Or am I really really confused?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isnt there a law or regulation that says a creditor cannot refuse a valid form of payment towards an outstanding amount owed?

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your right, there was one somewhere with the OFT DCG, time for some digging.....

.

.

.

.

A ha!

[Note: paragraphs 3.9c of DCG and 3.48 of DMG](2) unless the credit agreement requires payments to be made to a third party, refuse to accept a payment tendered to the firm by the customer or by a person acting on behalf of the customer;

http://fshandbook.info/FS/html/handbook/CONC/7/12

 

I think I might be understanding it a little better now......so whilst the 'agreement' has been terminated, the actual 'contract'' has not.....? :noidea:

 

Time to start reading the small print I think, back in a week!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

So CooP have now sold the ''ACCOUNT NUMBER'' only? to 'Asset Link Capital (No.5) Ltd (ALC5) Who have 'appointed' Link Farcical Outsourcing Ltd (link) to manage this account on their behalf??

 

Confused, yep me too?

 

I'm going to hold off baiting them for a while, just until I can do some research and then ring them, only to laugh you understand.....:phone:

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the only payments into the account are clearly marked as benefits

then BCOBS should kill the debt dead.

 

 

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?414497-Success-with-Satans-bank-using-BCOBS

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

Sorry attempted to post up the two scanned letters that Link sent, one they allege to be from the bank, but in the same font, and on the same paper as their own begging letter.

 

I know they use others letter headed paper, but I've already lodged a complaint to the bank using the word, 'fraudulent use of' and am leaving link farcical to their own devices for the time being, lets see how much rope they need to hang themselves...

Edited by Bazooka Boo
Brain fart and can't post up scanned missives??

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

With a little luck, the attachments should show the latest missives from, link,

 

 

and the fake letter from the Co-oP bank,

 

 

both sent in the same envelope,

 

 

both with the same font,

 

 

and both using the very same paper,

 

 

yes I really do inspect these missives that closely!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly the debt buyer are permitted

to use the OC's logo's etc.

 

 

in a NOA.

 

 

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

Hmm, but I'm thinking along the lines of SLC and their use of fake DCA's etc......

 

Surely this is misrepresentation?

 

Doesn't really matter to be fair, as I don't deal with DCA's, unless I want to bait them....I don't know, these are the second

clowns to chase for this, surely they know they're :deadhorse:

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

The latest missive in this somewhat tedious saga.

 

I note that they claim to have sent me correspondence before, they've not, this is the first begging letter they've sent.

 

I also note that they claim that the debt is registered for six years or until the balance is cleared!

 

Maybe they know something we all don't?

 

Ha ha, my bad, school boy error! Convert jpeg to pdf.....

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

begging letter

 

 

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

begging letter

 

 

dx

 

I know, I rang them and told them I wouldn't be paying them anything, as I was previously paying £1 a month direct to the bank who kept on refunding

the payment to my account before selling it on.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...