Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • depends what the fees are, typically nothing can be added once judgement is passed bar litigation costs. on document retention time limits etc at least 6yrs previous must be held though many hold complete info. as for acronyms and abbreviations ideally yes they should     
    • Still have to submit a statement either system....if they fail they can only give verbal because they failed to file and serve.
    • OP stated they had been arrested, but not charged (let alone convicted). They DON'T have a criminal record, but do have an entry on the PNC. That information stays on the PNC (Police National Computer) for life, but doesn't get released in a standard DBS. It only MIGHT get released for an Enhanced DBS (eDBS) check  ... but it would be incredibly unlikely. (The rational behind this is that eDBS's allow for 'information at Chief Officer of Police's discretion' ..... this covers the 2 'barring lists' and is also intended for the scenario where someone has multiple arrests or investigations, where safeguarding is a concern .... it was brought in after the Soham murders / Ian Huntley case, where the information known about the now-convicted child murderer may have prevented his employment in a school, had it been made available). So, for the sake of accuracy and completeness, arrests stay on the PNC for life, wont appear in a standard DBS, MIGHT appear in an eDBS, but in reality, would be the exception rather than the norm, and I can't see them being released  to a defense barrister. What then if the defence found out a different way, and brought it up in court?. Again, unlikely, but the important feature is that the judge would make sure they trod very carefully!. They MIGHT consider using it if there were other factors that allowed them to try to cast doubts as to the truthfulness of your evidence, but on its own : No way. Anyone MIGHT be arrested (if a seemingly plausible complaint been made against them)! The approach to take if it did come up is to be truthful. "Yes, I was arrested. It arose from a vexatious complaint. I wasn't charged, let alone convicted. That could happen to any one of us, if a vexatious complaint gets made" Far better that than lying, saying you'd never been arrested, and getting caught in a lie : that would ruin your credibility. I'm incredibly doubtful it will even come up, though.
    • we dont get N157 because its new OCMC but no court dont have evidence either.   Just seems a bit of a pointless wait but oh well
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2502 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.Thank you for accepting me on this forum.

A major problem has occurred following my bankruptcy on 14/01/2011, which followed a failed IVA whichstarted in 2009.

I used the same insolvency practice (Freeman Jones of Manchester) for both IVA and bankruptcy. The IVA was officially registered as failed during the bankruptcy court appearance at Manchester Court.

The bankruptcy was discharged without problem one year later and is now removed from the records on my credit file.

A few weeks ago I received a rather ambiguous letter from Dryden Fairfax asking for my current whereabouts regarding a "personal business matter". This is when I googled their name and came across your forum. I did not respond to that letter as recommended in your forum advice.

Last Friday I received another letter from the same company advising me that since my IVA had recently????? failed, I now owe 7218.85 to their client Pco Holdco Sari. Panic set in!!!

 

I have been in touch with the official receiver involved in the bankruptcy with all the details I have and they are going to get back to me. I have always found them to be very helpful, but of course this occurred 6 years ago, so investigations are needed.

 

Would you advise that I reply to this last letter from dryden fairfax? I feel that some sort of response is needed but of course I don't want to prejudice anything by saying something stupid!

 

Do you think I should take legal advice?

 

I would add that I have been completely "clean" in my financial affairs since the bankruptcy and am steadily rebuilding my credit score. This all seems so very unfair.

 

Any other suggestions will be gratefully received.

 

Many thanks, Simon

Link to post
Share on other sites

You had included your name as part of the subject title of the thread.

 

I have removed it.

 

I don't have any particular expertise in bankruptcy, but if you have been in contact with the official receiver about this then I would suggest that you wait till you get a response before making any kind of reply to Dryden.

 

If you don't hear back from them in a week or so, and I would get back to them politely say that you badly need an answer

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are a debt purchasing company based in Luxembourg

 

PCO HOLDCO S.a.r.l

68-70 boulevard de la Petrusse

L-2320

Luxembourg

 

but they have a UK representative who deals with all their business in the UK

 

PCO HOLDCO S.a.r.l

c/o Grant Thornton UK LLP

Watch Portfolio Management

Lagan house

1 Sackville street

Lisburn

Northern Ireland

BT27 4AB

 

Thread moved to the appropriate forum.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the records are no longer immediately available because it has been more than 6 years, is it also the case that you haven't made any payment towards (or acknowledgement of) any alleged debt in 6 years?

 

If so, not only will you have a defence of "it was included in the bankruptcy and is thus extinguished" but also "even if it wasn't in the bankruptcy it is statute barred".

Link to post
Share on other sites

You had included your name as part of the subject title of the thread.

 

I have removed it.

 

I don't have any particular expertise in bankruptcy, but if you have been in contact with the official receiver about this then I would suggest that you wait till you get a response before making any kind of reply to Dryden.

 

If you don't hear back from them in a week or so, and I would get back to them politely say that you badly need an answer

 

 

Sorry. I'm new to this and not great with computer technology.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, that sounds interesting. The first communication I had was the letter addressed to me dated 24 May this year asking me to get in touch. I have not acknowledged or replied to that one or the second dated 14 June. I assume that it would be best not to reply but would like to bring the matter to a close

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...