Jump to content


BankFodder BankFodder


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About simountain1

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Last week we took our cat Oscar to the vet after he came in limping and in serious pain we think he may have been hit by a vehicle. The vet which we have been before with our other cat said he would have to stay in and have Xrays buit there would be no one there out of office hours and he would be on his own, but it wasnt reccomended to transport him anywhere. The day after the Xrays were done the vet called my partner and said his leg was broken in 7 places and would cost £1000's to repair after a discussion with my partner we decided the only fair thing to do was to put him to sleep. My partner called the vet back who then persuaded her that for a reduced price of around £200 they could amputate the leg and that he would not suffer from loosing a leg and many cats are like this, also that he is a young cat and why wouldnt you give him a chance (A bit pushy to be fair as my partner described it). We agreed to go for the surgery, on the day we were going to bring him home I was told you need to speak with the vet about him. She called back after 2 hours and said that Oscar had had to go on a drip that morning as he was dehydrated and was not eating any food and that he could have internal bleeding from the accident. Also she said that she suspected there could be internal bleeding and possible kidney failure due to shock, but her plan was to send him home anyway unless i heard anything different. We went to pick Oscar up that evening and was told that his bladder was showing signs of damage as there was gloucose and blood in his urine and that he had eaten a little bit of food. I don't know why alarm bells didnt ring because the nurse took us to another building to get him and she said he hadnt eaten anything not even tuna that they tried to give him. After he got home the vets was closed, no 24 hour cover and was told any problems to take him in the day after and that he would be quite sorry for himself for a few days. We couldnt get him to eat anything and all he was doing was drinking lots. In the morning he was still only drinking. We were working that day so we left him plenty of food and water down. My partner came home to check on him at lunch time and he had passed away:???:. I feel that the VET should not have let him out in this state saying that she thought he could have internal bleeding, and I am feel really guilty for the pain that we put him through, where should we go from here as I feel that the vet in question has caused unncesary suffering to Oscar and that our original conclusion of putting him to sleep would have saved alot of pain for the poor lad. Any Ideas on what to do from here as I don't want anyone elses pet to go through what Oscar had to, its not the money it is more the principle of this.
  2. I've emailed Google UK to clarify their position on this. I'll update you with their reply.
  3. Again theres no need to be sarcastic!!! I havent come here for that You are supposed to be Site Team? Its about time you behaved like it.
  4. Ive never had to deal with people like this before this is different to what Im confortable with!!! Just needed to make sure I was right, with what they are saying about the stat bar starting from scratch again, and where I go to report their dodgy practices and the letter above I have already sent recorded delivery with the responce of they will continue
  5. wooooah hang on here a minute, If this is the response from Site Tem then I'm sorry to have darkened your door. I was only asking for advise, the Aktiv Capital on was for the same debt its been passed on, normally recieve a friendly response,
  6. Hi all, After being pestered by Philips for a debt which is staute barred, the last payment being made over 7 years ago and no acknowledgement these scumbags decide that they want to have a go at chasing the debt allegedly owed to LTSB on behalf of the Zinc Group. I want to take this as far as it can go in the regulatory field as these people are utter muppets. I dont generally phone these people, but thought why not I was in the mood for an argument. First off I confimed my details and was told that I needed to confirm a telephone number before he could access my account, I told him I was not prepaired to give him my telephone number, replied with well I need one to access the account. I then suggested I should look through the telephone book and give him a random number, the response was well that is upto you, so I made up a random number and he acepted it. He asked me if I was paying in full for which I answered the alleged debt it over 6 years old, he asked "SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?" Told them they couldnt collect on this as it was Statute Barred, he replied with that because I have confirmed my details the 6 years would start again, didnt acknowlege any debt. I know with reading here this is not the fact also no proof has ever been recieved regarding this debt. I ended up speakiing to a manager called BEN who was not very helpful at all and said the letters would continue. After doing a bit of research and trading online myself I find on doing a Who Is search their domain registration, it is registered to a none trading individual which is as far as I am aware against Companies House rules and domain registration rules. Any help with these idiots would be appreciated they will probably be able to tell who I am from my name on here but who cares Im having them for this one, I dont get annoyed easily but this has sent me over boiling point Thanks in advance
  7. What would you do now Wescott have passed it onto Credit Security Limited who are again threatening collectors calling or legal action? It stated Wescott - Barclaycard as the ref
  8. thaks for that ill get it fired off tommorow
  9. so I have spoken to Lloyds about 5 years ago this doesnt count? The last payment was well over 6 years ago
  10. Hi I recieved a letter 2 weeks ago from this outfit but the letter was sent to number 23 not 11 where I live but the post office had wrote on it that it should be 11. Ignored the letter as no payment has been made on this account for over 6 years but I have spoken with LloydsTSB about it I think but could not be correct that it was less than 6 years ago. It relates to an old debt back from when I was in financial turmoil and couldnt afford my outgoings and ignored my debts. The letter said that they had found my address via public databases? even though this is the only address LloydsTSB ever had for me, but was offering a discount to pay it off. I decided to ignore the letter and have recieved today another one to my correct address stating they will let me pay them £488 to clear a debt of £2000????? I dont want to contact them if this is going to start the 6 years rolling again. With not being exactly sure does the 6 years start from last payment or last time I spoke to someone about the debt? Im a bit confused on this one and any advice would be much appreciated Thanks in advance
  11. I was in the similar situation but I Volentary Terminated the agreement and gave the car back after half of the agreement was paid. All fine as far as I was concerned until nearly 3 years after I get a letter from Marlin Financial saying that I owe the remaining balance of the account. On questioning this I told them that the agreement was VT'd but they insisted that there was a default on the account which there was not. No joy comunicating with the normal Monkeys as they were just stating that because of a missed payment the account was due for payment in full. Basically Auto Credit Trust went into administration and Price Waterhouse Cooper the administrator sold on all the accounts to Marlin. I emailed a guy at Marlin I'll PM you the email address if I still have it and that seemed to have got the problem sorted within a few days Hope this helps I just explained the details as they were and the agreed that the account was settled when the car was handed back. Just prooves that sometimes its better speaking to the organ grinder
  12. My scanners not working at the minute, but they are just the usual you have not made an arrangement to pay with us and we may take the following action: Arrange for a door step collector to visit Or court action
  13. Threatograms have started again, what do I do to finally sort out these idiots?
  14. Hi The agreement wasnt through a company called Auto Credit Trust was it by any chance? I ask this because I've had exactly the same problems with Marlin on this issue and sorted them. If it is let me know
  15. What do I do now I have posted the reply below, this is the reply back from Wescot: You made a request under sections 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act (“CCA”) for a copy of your credit agreement and this request was forwarded to our client. Under these sections of the CCA it is not necessary to produce a copy of the actual signed agreement – it is sufficient to provide a true copy (without a signature) which contains the relevant terms to enable you to ascertain what the agreement was. The document which was provided to you satisfied this requirement, was signed by you and clearly states that it is a Consumer Credit regulated agreement. Although you state that the account is in dispute you have not provided any details to substantiate this. As you have not raised any valid dispute, collection activity could continue as this is not enforcement action. This has recently been confirmed in the case of McGuffick v The Royal Bank of Scotland, in which the court stated that such activity as requesting payment and issuing legal proceedings was not enforcement action. Therefore, further collection activity in the absence of a dispute would not be in breach of the OFT Guidance on Debt Collection, however the account remains on hold at this time. I do not understand your comments regarding telephone calls from Wescot as our records show that the only two telephone calls have been made, one on the 18 September, when we spoke to your partner and the notes indicate that you would not come to the phone, and another on 6 October when we were informed we had the wrong number. I therefore totally reject your comments that our activity could in any way be construed as harassment. (THIS IS A LOAD OF RUBBISH, I have told them nearly daily at one point to stop ringing) I note that you are now raising the argument that the agreement is unenforceable under sections 60 and 61 of the CCA. In the circumstances we shall forward your comments to our client for further instructions. In the meantime your account will remain on hold. Yours sincerely
  • Create New...