Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.    Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.   The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved.  Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
    • I was referring to #415 where you wrote "I was forced to try to sell - and couldn't." . And nearer the start in #79 .. "I couldn't sell.  I had an incredibly valuable asset. Huge equity.  But the interest accrued / the property market suffered and I couldn't find a buyer even at a level just to clear the debt." In #194 you said you'd tried to sell for four years.  The reason for these points is that a lot of the claims against for example your surveyor, solicitor, broker, the lender and now the receiver are mainly founded in a belief that they should have been able to do something but did not. Things that might seem self evident to you but not necessarily to others. Pressing these claims may well need a bit more hard evidence, rather than an appeal to common sense. Can you show evidence of similar properties, with similar freehold issues, selling readily? And solid reasons why the lender should have been able to sell when you couldn't.
    • You can use a family's address.   The only caveat is for the final hearing you'd need to be there in person   HOWEVER i'd expect them to pay if its only £200 because costs of attending will be higher than that
  • 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

lowell after old E.ON debt not on my file - sure i settled it years ago


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1764 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

urm what are a DCA doing with a utils bill?

 

that explains the discount.

 

util companies do and succeed in easily getting CCJ themselves at the drop of a hat.

they didn't they sold it on.

 

that means there is SOMETHING WRONG with the debt

the fact there is a discount also means there is something WRONG [bOGUS] with the debt.

 

is it defaulted and showing on your credit file?

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

we have an e.on rep

I've sent them a msg,

 

liaise with them

 

please stop phoning DCA's up.

 

I've created this debts own thread too

 

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

Hello bitemarx and I can confirm, we've sold some of our unrecovered debt to Lowell.

 

The sold accounts are all finalised and have had outstanding balances for a fairly long time (up to 6 years old). They've gone through our complete debt collection process but we've been unable to collect the outstanding balances.

 

We'll have written to you to let you know about the sale and what to do next. Lowell will contact you independently by letter. Please deal with them directly as they'll now look after the debt. Contact details are on both ours and Lowell's letters.

 

Should you agree this is a valid debt, you can pay Lowell directly or talk to them about setting up a suitable payment arrangement. If you've any queries about the debt, our advisors will be happy to give you as much information as possible including meter readings and supply dates. They'll be unable to take any action on the account as this now needs to be initiated by Lowell.

 

Hope this helps point you in the right direction bitemarx.

 

Malc

Link to post
Share on other sites

get an sar running to eon BM.

get the information ignore lowells for now.

 

if the debt doesn't show then make SURE the address that the debt occurred at IS showing under your linked addresses on your credit file.

if it does then this smacks that the debt is defaulted more than 6yrs ago and has been removed from your file as aged.

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

CAn you ring Eon and ask them?

 

Alternatively give them as much info as you can re addresses, type of fuel etc and see if they can find the account that way.

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

you don't need any number to send an sar.

 

just send it.

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

Hello bitemarx and just a quick heads up about the SAR.

 

Under recent changes to industry regulations, when customers ask for an SAR, we need to raise a Customer Rights Request. Once raised, we need to be back in touch within 30 days. We'll send you copies of the data on the account, including the bills, as well as any phone call transcripts we hold. There's no longer any charge for this service.

 

As Bazooka Boo says, we'll be able to identify the account from the postal address for the old property. Please also include the reference number from Lowells.

 

Hope this is of use bitemarx.

 

Malc

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Under recent changes to industry regulations, when customers ask for an SAR, we need to raise a Customer Rights Request. Once raised, we need to be back in touch within 30 days.

 

Malc, I genuinely dont know:

 

What the heck is a Customer rights request and why should that mean anything to a person making a SAR request under the GDPR?

 

especially, What has that got to do with delaying the 30 day countdown from CUSTOMERS request to the response required under the GDPR - if thats what your post means?

 

 

My understanding is that quite simply you have to get back to the customer within 30 days of their request unless there is a good reason why not, and its my understanding that your internal systems or processes or desires is NOT a valid reason for any delay ...

 

More than happy to be enlightened regarding this ..

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres no such thing as a customer rights request. Its a silly thing eon have come up with in order to frustrate and stall a legal request under GDPR

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

Malc, I genuinely dont know:

 

What the heck is a Customer rights request and why should that mean anything to a person making a SAR request under the GDPR?

 

especially, What has that got to do with delaying the 30 day countdown from CUSTOMERS request to the response required under the GDPR - if thats what your post means?

 

 

My understanding is that quite simply you have to get back to the customer within 30 days of their request unless there is a good reason why not, and its my understanding that your internal systems or processes or desires is NOT a valid reason for any delay ...

 

More than happy to be enlightened regarding this ..

 

Hello tobyjugg2 and the Customer Rights I mentioned above is part of the structure we've set up to make sure we comply with all aspects of GDPR.

 

GDPR covers more than just Subject Access Requests (SAR). It also covers alternative customer rights such as the Right to Erasure, Right to Rectification, Right to Data Portability etc.

 

We've set up a ring-fenced team to deal exclusively with all these requests. Any advisor can raise a Customer Rights request. It then goes to this ring-fenced team who need to be back in touch with the customer within 30 days of the request originally being raised. It could be quicker depending on what's involved. There's no charge for this.

 

Previously, for an SAR, there was a £10 admin fee and we had up to 40 days from receiving a written request with payment to send the information. The new system will speed things up and make sure we're abiding by GDPR.

 

Hope this explains tobyjugg2. Let me know if you need any more information as happy to help.

 

Malc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres no such thing as a customer rights request. Its a silly thing eon have come up with in order to frustrate and stall a legal request under GDPR

 

As above, renegadeimp. The new system will speed up our response to these requests and make sure we're complying with the requirements of GDPR.

 

If bitemarx asks for a Customer Rights request to be raised, this will kick-start our system so we can give them the information they need in good time.

 

Malc

Link to post
Share on other sites

And as i said, its something your company made up to obfuscate the process. No other company does it. They dont need to make a rights request. When they request a sar, then you fulfil it. Not tell them to call again and raise a rights request.

 

But as we always say on here, we have to at least give you a chance to show your willingness to help people.

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

And as i said, its something your company made up to obfuscate the process. No other company does it. They dont need to make a rights request. When they request a sar, then you fulfil it. Not tell them to call again and raise a rights request.

 

But as we always say on here, we have to at least give you a chance to show your willingness to help people.

 

+1

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I wasn't clear renegadeimp. Customers don't need to call back. Where an SAR is required, please ask for this and the advisor will raise a Customer Rights request there and then. This will go to the ring-fenced team I mentioned who will sort it out within the timeframe I've outlined. This will be quicker and cheaper than before GDPR came in.

 

Hope this explains a bit better renegadeimp and have a good weekend.

 

Malc

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

SorryWhere an SAR is required, please ask for this and the advisor will raise a Customer Rights request there and then. This will go to the ring-fenced team I mentioned who will sort it out within the timeframe I've outlined.

Malc

 

That is part of the point.

 

A SAR is a legal request.

If you want to call it something else and confuse the issue, then that should be handled internally and nothing to do with requiring a customer to ask for a 'eon made up gobbledegook wording request'

 

1. Customer requires SAR.

2. Customer asks for SAR.

3. EON (or whoever) complies with SAR request.

 

How the heck is a customer supposed to know you want it worded a particular non standard way, and why should they either care or comply?

 

... and if you say or imply:

'because it will be quicker and cheaper'

which also carries the implication of

'if you do it our way it isnt really asking for a SAR as defined in law so doesn't really count'

- I WILL forward this to the ICO

The Tory Legacy

Record high Taxes, Immigration, Excrement in waterways, energy company/crony profits

Crumbling Hospitals, Schools, council services, businesses and roads

 

If only the Govt had thrown a protective ring around care homes

with the same gusto they do around their crooked MPs

 

10 years to save the Vest

After Truss lost the shirt off the UKs back in 49 days

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am tempted to send this to the ICO, just get their view on this.

 

As always, corporations find a way to delay any just processes that are created to help consumers.

:roll:

Edited by dx100uk
quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

pers info showing .attachment now hidden

and we require PDF uploads please so we can zoom easily

 

pre-school letter

totally safe to ignore

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...