Jump to content

FunkyFox

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    457
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

240 Excellent

1 Follower

About FunkyFox

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Hi, thanks. I suspect it is more for Trading Standards than the ASA. I spoke with Thomas Cook and they claim it is a system issue as it takes time to update the system after the initial booking and if I had tried to actually complete the booking i would have received an error. I'm not sure I completely believe the claim however I'm not going to book two identical holidays to prove the point! FF
  2. Hi, I was wondering if anyone has any knowledge of the legality of this very common practice. I recently booked a holiday at a very popular resort in Turkey where for the summer holiday months you usually have to book up to a year in advance. We have been 3 times previously and are very familiar with the resort and accommodation etc. Just before xmas on the Thomas Cook website it showed (for our party size and dates) the red flashing text, 'only one room remaining'. Fearing I would miss out, I booked. Out of curiosity, I then went back in and entered the same details and sure enough,
  3. Hi all, any advice on the following situation so I can advise my old Mum would be very helpful please. You agree a price for a main dealer oil & filter change. Whilst waiting for the work to be done the service manager says there has been a 'problem' and that the sump plug has stripped the thread and they will attempt a repair. They charge additional £48+vat for the privilledge of the repair. 24hours on, car has developed an oil leak, presumambly from the repaired sump plug. Garage advise they will attempt another repair and if that fails then its a new sump at £210 + vat.
  4. Please follow the advice above from Wendella. HMRC have some very considerable powers at their disposal and if ignored WILL use them. For example... HMRC given powers to raid home businesses - Times Online You partner must contact them and endeavor to resolve this. Establish the facts, be honest with them and if neccesary he will need to make suitable arrangements to repay what he owes, if indeed he does. The normal rules of engagement do not apply regarding HMRC (and if Lynn is from HMRC that applies to her too!). Best of luck. FF
  5. If it gets to court and is over £5k it would be allocated to the 'fast track'. That means that your exposure to costs could easily double the debt IF you lost. Under £5k costs are far far more limited even if you lose. It helps to be aware. As I said, try and maintain control, write back, tell them they have not provided a legible copy, that the prescribed terms are not there etc etc. It worked for me, it may work for you. Good luck.
  6. I wouldn't read too much into this either way. They are simply going through the motions. Anything could happen moving forward and probably will. Other things to consider are the size of the debt. If it over £5k it would most probably end up in the fast track and you could be liable big time for costs. Small track ( You will have to be determined, prepare for you credit file to be trashed and for them to try all kinds of tricks. Make sure they know that you know and that you won't be pushed around. You have to take the iniative and control. They know that the agreement is illegible,
  7. Hi All (its been a while) I have a quick question, grateful for any help. If a claimants case has been struck out, CPR states that they must apply promptly to have the sanction removed. Does anyone know of any authorites that defines what a reasonable time is? I have a case that was struck out 14 months ago and I fear it may be about to rear its ugly head again!! Also if the OC has now assigned the account to a DCA, would the DCA be able to apply for sanctions to be removed and carry on with the case or must it be the original claimant. Any help much appreciated
  8. here you go, I couldn't work out how to find my old posts (I don't post much these days) but sussed it in the end. My agreement is on the first post and it starts after the set aside. Good luck. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/157451-back-court-after-set.html
  9. Hi, I had the exact same agreement and back page (although my back page was totally illegible) and after a long long battle I got the charging order removed and the CCJ set aside. As the maverick says they tried every trick in the book but eventually, at the 11th hour when due to exchange witness statements they discontinued and ended up paying me £500 in costs. From my experience I would say it is not possible to link the 2 sheets and as such in not enforceable. Smile know this too but may have changed their position on these agreements so be prepared to take it all the way if needs be.
  10. Hi Stevo, FWIW I think you would have a shot a tribunal and remember 80% of claims are settled out of court. Did you read the links I posted, a one off incident of swearing at a colleague is not gross misconduct, especially if the nature of the job swearing is accepted as the norm. Doing so in an agressive manner is highly subjective and under the circumstances should have been dealt with in a different way, especially after 21 (blemish free?) years of service. Have you checked your contents insurance? Our case has been ongoing for nearly 1 year, costs likely to run to over £20k, we have
  11. Hi there, you could always appeal (I assume they notified you you had the right to do this). Just because they say it was gross misconduct, it doesn't mean it was. This is a quote from the fabulous 'Employment Tribual Claims Handbook'. I recommend you read the posts on Gross Misconduct her blog here Gross Misconduct | Employment Tribunal Claims Get some advice asap, there are strict time limits and procedures. If your dismisal is found to unfair then that will help with any questions you get in future. What they did sounds 'very' harsh. There is lots of free help around a
  12. Hi P4E, I'm thrilled you got the outcome you wanted and deserved. The order for costs just makes it all the more sweet. The next thing you must do is to make a complaint to the OFT re: Arrow and the SRA re: Copes. There is no way they could wriggle out of this like Howard Cohen did on this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/192657-howard-cohen-oh-dear.html Hang 'em out to dry I say. Well done! FF
  13. I'm fully aware that this will probably make me rather unpopular but I really don't think phoning up Marlins and abusing their staff on the phone is really the going to achieve anything, other than a temporary sense of mild satisfaction. Furthermore, to then post your actions on CAG alligns this kind of behaviour far to closely with this fantastic resourse, further undermining its credibilty in the eyes of the industry and the regulators. Not to mention that I'm pretty sure sure that using the phone system to abuse people is probably some form of criminal offence (and yes I'm fully aware
  14. Thanks for the advice Conniff. I eventually found a hyperlink on the email they sent that links through to a pfd on their website of the t&c's that apply. I thought I was onto something as this is not considered a 'durable medium' under the distance selling regulations but it would seem as far as I can tell that holidays, accomodation etc are excluded from this part of the regs so no doing there. Within their terms the cancellation is 100% loss of deposit if cancelled before 56 days, which we did. What would you suggest is my angle. I have checked the CPUTR and it all seems
  15. Wonder if anyone can help? I booked a holiday with a well known boats/cottages/parks company back in January. We booked 2 seperate locations 1 in Cornwall and 1 in Devon. As a result we had to pay a £150 deposit for each. Unfortunately due to a change in circumstances we have had to cancel the holiday and they had written to say that they have retained our deposit of £300. We booked over the phone and received an email confirmation with no terms and conditions at all and never received any. Is there any basis for challenging their decision to retain the deposit. They had al
×
×
  • Create New...