Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you both, I will make those changes. I have also downloaded the compensation list to add to the evidence and complete the protection bit off their website.  I am going to court next Thursday to deliver the bundle; I will confirm this on Tuesday. I have been to court a few times to represent the military when a soldier is in court, but I will be going. Thank you for all the additional advice. Once I have the whole bundle, I will email it to the admin email. Ill be honest, this is not about the money for me, I do not mind losing that, so I will not be signing a confidentiality agreement.   You guys are amazing
    • Actually there wasn't a massive amount of work to do on the WS.  The "meat" was there because of the great work you'd already done. Here is a version which I think is nigh-on finished. However, with Easter there are a few days for the other regulars to suggest tweaks. Defendant WS.pdf
    • Hi all, We bought a part to fix our washing machine approx 13 months ago direct from the manufacturer of the washing machine via phone. This part then failed 13 months later, as confirmed by their own engineer, who was sent by the manufacturer (who is also the retailer for the part) FoC. The engineer actually installed a replacement part, the machine came back to life, but they then removed the part used for testing (and ours reinstalled) as "we would be charged for it". The retailer are refusing to replace the part, stating that they only warranty parts for 90 days. When I stated that I believed the Consumer Rights Act gives me longer than that, they insinuated that it did not, and this was repeated by many representatives. AIUI for goods bought more than 6 months ago, I need to get an engineers report to confirm the part has failed? Or that it has failed due to manufacturing issues? Or would the companies own engineers report suffice? Also, does anyone have any other decent contact details for Hotpoint (or the Whirlpool group)? Thanks, GH
    • Thank you for that "read me", It's a lot to digest, lots of legal procedure. There was one thing that I was going to mention to you,  but in one of the conversations in that thread it was mentioned that there may be spies on the Forum,  this is something that I've read quite some time ago in a previous thread. What I had in mind was to wait for the thirty days after their reply to my CCA request and then send the unenforceable letter. I was hoping that an absence of signature could be the Silver Bullet but it seems that there are lot of layers to peel on this Onion.  
  • 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

Re: Default Removal Successes


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3640 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

OK, so I don't seem to be able to start a new thread where I would like to (perhaps privileges issue but was able to in the past). So instead I will put up details here and then happy for mod to move it to suitable location under thread title "VICTORY OVER DCA - DEFAULT REMOVED".

 

I need to be a little careful here so won't mention any names, but at this stage I have not signed the proposed full and final settlement offer from the DCA in question at the time of writing this - if I choose to sign then I may be required to remove this post(s).

 

With that out of the way. I had a CC with a bank, they merged/acquired with another bank, they then did the same with a 3rd bank. I carried out a CCA request under S78 with the 3rd bank. I queried the information provided and put the account in dispute and told bank that failure to provide requested information would lead to debt being extinguised. They apparently sold the account (no proof given) to a 3rd party interloper, DCA. DCA pursued me A LOT for the alleged debt of >5,000 but

 

DCA failed to provide a copy of a notice of assignment. First effort was a blank template with no personal details (?!?) and then on second occasion sent me a Notice of Assignment for a different person altogether!! Naughty and I imagine a breach of Data Protection Act. QUESTION - is this reportable to the Information Commissioner and if so what happens to the DCA as a result of being found guilty?

 

The bank never reported a Default but then assigned to the DCA.

 

In light of the above I started charging the DCA for each letter I was obliged to write in response to theirs. Told them they were incompetent and that they must remove any derogatory remarks from CRAs and stop harrassing me for an alleged debt that I ALWAYS denied.

 

As a "gesture of goodwill" the DCA has agreed to write off the full amount that they claim is owing as full and final settlement of any claims, existing or future, against them. I wonder if they are concerned that I may make a claim against them for damages (as in Richard Durkin example)? I am thinking this because in my last letter to them I referenced the Supreme Court decision in the Durkin vs HFC et al case!!

 

Now I am not sure how to proceed. Take the write off as a result and get on with things or go for a small claim for damages, as clearly they know they have no case against me, even though they are trying to kid me by the "gesture of goodwill" garbage.

 

Thoughts anyone?

 

EDIT - I have just checked again and on Noddle the DCA have removed all information already! I have a very recent Credit Report from one of the 3 main CRAs and it states CATEGORICALLY that the bank NEVER applied a DEFAULT to the account. They assigned it after the 6th alleged late payment and then marked as settled. The DCA added a Default dated 7 days after the bank marked it as settled!!! Double naughty!

Edited by the worm that turned
Info added about Default and correction
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...