Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
  • 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

Ripped off by Locksmith


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2186 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

Well not actually ripped off, I have not paid them.

 

I hold my hand up to being a bit slack here.

A tenant complained of a broken lock on a patio door.

I googled and called a locksmith in Reading without doing my usual due diligence as I am busy refurbishing two flats.

 

Locksmith arrives, does the job, and phones me.

He wants £281, ask him for a v.a.t. invoice and he gets nasty, threatens to "break my door" or sit in.

I threaten police action and he calms down, will ask office to phone me.

 

That afternoon he phones me, office has reduced the cost to £181 including v.a.t.

Ask for an invoice. Invoice arrives next day for £254.00

 

Query this with head office, (a one man micro company), and next day they send a revised bill for £181.

 

I am now negotiating a further discount on the basis that, if I make a complaint to the Police about Reading locksmith's threats it could hurt their business.

I have told him I shall be contacting Trading Standards. FWIIW,

I found a similar complaint of this company over-charging on MSE.

 

I have been away from this board for some time and have forgotten the rules,

can I name and shame?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you asked someone to do a jb without asking how much will it be, and you get nasty about the bill.

 

Look at it from the locksmiths point.

Customer phones with a job

You do the job

You tell customer how much

Customer refuses to pay.

You would get angry too.

Your taking food out of his children's mouths.

 

How about you come work for me for a month and ill pay you for two weeks.

 

Pay the £181 and move on.

 

You can name and shame if you want to but remember.....

 

You had a choice, you employed the company's services.

 

Also you might feel what you wrote as a bargaining tool or leverage....

.. A lawyer may see it as blackmail if he took you to court for non payment.

 

Think carefully before you act please

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I know all that, but his remedy is to take me to court, not threaten to "break my door" or stage a sit in. Some trades are known for overcharging, that is why TDA, SOGA, DSR, CPUTR el al were all enacted.

 

 

I regret that I find your contribution unhelpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are both wrong (you & the locksmith).

You should have got an estimate / agreed a maximum price before he started work.

 

He shouldn't have threatened to break anything or sit in.

Going to court was not his only viable and lawful option.

He should have removed the new lock, which was still his property as you hadn't paid for it ......... and then decided if he wanted to go to court for his labour / call-out charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bazza, no doubt the original poster will Say your unhelpful as well.

People do not like it when its pointed out they are as much to blame.

Pay the bill or he may take you to court. From what I've read he is not charging you a lot compared to others

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have got an estimate / agreed a maximum price before he started work.

 

 

I agree, but I own several properties and am always prepared to pay a reasonable price. If people treat me fairly I reciprocate.

 

I would suggest, from the horrendous reviews on TrustPilot, that he does not treat people fairly. Have you ever watched "Rogue Traders"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bazza, no doubt the original poster will Say
your
unhelpful as well.

 

The chances of committing such a gross grammatical error are indeed slim Mr Bush.

 

Pay the bill or he may take you to court

 

That is precisely what I am hoping for. I am no stranger to the SCC, with five wins from five appearances, I do not fancy his chances.
It is time rogue traders such as he were taught a lesson.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The chances of committing such a gross grammatical error are indeed slim Mr Bush.

 

I'm oft minded of the adage that "if they have to resort to criticising grammar or syntax, they've run out of substantive argument"......

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can assure you that there is much more where that came from Bazza, (substantive argument that is). I do not usually resort to grammar/spelling flames, but the Sergeant set himself for it. I rather think that he is trying to box above his weight.

 

He seems totally unaware of the nature of this company. Facebook, Trust Pilot and Money Saving Expert all contain damning reviews, and allegations of overcharging, surely they cannot all be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

What we really need clarification on is when the Locksmith called you back and informed you of the cost £281 was it mentioned as either a Quote or an Estimate as there are differences between them.

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked for a job to be done and it was done, The plumber phoned me two hours later and demanded payment of £231 plus v.a.t.. I asked him to send me an invoice and the threats started.

 

I then started investigating the company and found a series of appalling reviews on Trust Pilot , Yell, Facebook, and Money Saving Expert, no doubt there are more elsewhere.

 

Normal behaviour in such circumstances is to attempt to resolve the situation by negotiation, failing that go to ADR, and finally, if all else fails, go to court and let a judge decide. This case is somewhat different, threats were used and there appears to be serial over-charging and breaches of the Trade Descriptions Act by the company.

 

The MD of the company has failed to negotiate, (I have offered him£140.00 in full and final settlement, and his reply was to threaten me with court. I have no fear of County Court, I have won five cases out of five, and have some good stuff to show the judge.

 

Some of you are correct in telling me what I should have done, but I did not. Wrongly I gave the company the benefit of the doubt. Mine is an honest business, and I expect the same from those companies with whom I deal. If I am cheated I use my knowledge of consumer law to obtain satisfaction.

 

I own several rental properties and engage plumbers, electricians, etc., several times a year. I have never encountered this sort of thing before in 40 years of trading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you pluck your figure of £140 out of the air? You were prepared to pay £181 + VAT before so why not now? Is it a hurt feelings discount you're looking for?

 

The way this reads now - after removing what is essentially handbags (or manbags for the sake of equality) - is that you agreed a price with them after works were carried out, they eventually invoiced you for that price and you're now refusing to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked for a job to be done and it was done, The plumber phoned me two hours later and demanded payment of £231 plus v.a.t.. I asked him to send me an invoice and the threats started.

 

Hang on! It started off being a locksmith, and now it's a plumber?

 

I googled and called a locksmith in Reading

 

.......

 

Locksmith arrives, does the job, and phones me.

 

I own several rental properties and engage plumbers, electricians, etc., several times a year. I have never encountered this sort of thing before in 40 years of trading.

 

I've never encountered (in my 40+ years) a locksmith morphing into a plumber 2+ days later either....

Link to post
Share on other sites

You were prepared to pay £181 + VAT before so why not now?

 

 

Where did I say that? In any case that figure included vat.

 

 

Bear in mind that locksmiths undergo training of between a few days and less than a year. It is hardly rocket science.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that there are three issues here, admittedly connected, but need to be treated separately.

 

First potentially criminal behaviour , the OP claims that he/she was threatened by this locksmith. This an issue surrounding Criminal Law, as such is not a Civil issue. Report the alleged instance to the police and let them sort it out.

 

Secondly the issue of “I am now negotiating a further discount on the basis that, if I make a complaint to the Police about Reading locksmith's threats it could hurt their business.” My view is that this is unethical and potentially criminal behaviour on the part of the OP, and he/she should cease this course of action immediately. Irrespective of the alleged action of the locksmith, to try and extort money or services through the use of threats is in breach of Section 21 of the Theft Act 1968.

 

 

Finally the OP refusal to pay for worked carried out by this locksmith. As the OP, by his/her own admission did not have a quote prior to commencement of work I see that there he/she has little choice but to the pay the invoiced amount in full. If payment is not made a can see that the OP would be taken to court, which would likely increase the overall liability as costs would most likely be incurred.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are being naughty, I mentioned plumbers as an analogy.

 

Ohh, after I posted I wondered if autocorrect had changed a mis-spelling of "owner" to "plumber", but you have confirmed that wasn't the cause.

 

You've "used plumber as an analogy"?

 

Funny that, it looked like you were describing the events again, but slipped and made up "plumber" instead of saying "locksmith".

 

Why would you even need to use an analogy when you say you were describing actual events............. that doesn't make sense, and as Judge Judy says ............

 

Are you sure it is me being naughty?. People can make up their own mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you GSi416, (Rover?) I agree with para 2 it was unethical and I have decided to report the matter to the police and inform Trading Standards.

 

My position is, if chummy rejects my offer of £140.00 IFAFS I shall pay a lesser amount (s ay £125) into his bank account and he can sue me for the balance if it wants to. I am no stranger to the CC and my hobby is helping people battle the private parking cowboys. I very much doubt that HH will view his behaviour with approval.

Link to post
Share on other sites

worse than that, if it is viewed as a B2B matter the court may well decide the OP's behaviour is enough to grant a full coats recovery order and will certainly take the contract at face value as agreed at the outset. If the locksmith is reading this thread then your record in court is about to change

If the OP was a little old lady with a problem I would be amongst the crowd baying for the blood of the locksmith but if you are in business then you cant afford to be "too busy" to miss the vital details that save you or cost you dear. The behaviour of the locksmith after the event is though, irrelevant.

I see it like this. You asked some one to do a Job, they do the job, you don't like the price. A court might take the view that you, by accepting the work to be done, you have agreed the final invoice irrespective if you knew what the amount would be.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...