Jump to content

FunkyFox

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    457
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FunkyFox

  1. Couldn't find this had been posted anywhere else so apologies is posted already. An interesting inside view of what happens at these events and the faces behind the companies. Enjoy! Credit Summit
  2. A while back I made a FOI Act request to the OFT trying to see what I could uncover about the number of complaints that were being recieved and what action the OFT had taken in relation to those complaints. It was not an easy task and to be honest I did end up feeling that I never really got to the bottom of matters and it took 3 iterations just to actually get what I wanted. Anyway the most important factor is outlined below which I have to say startled me somewhat. I have included it in the context of the letter that I wrote to Andrew Mackinlay MP in respect of yesterdays debate. With all of this in mind the news that action is being taken against 1st Credit and now MH is fantastic and a sign that maybe the OFT is finally listening and taking action and investigating others. I hope this is interesting anyway, it was hard enough to get... Summary - 4 Formal Actions in 3 years after 25,000 complaints.
  3. That is an excellent point. The sickest thing is that they have now bunddled up the services that help the banks et all to screw us in the first place and have sold them back to us as the like of 'Credit Expert'. This is so we can see how much information they are storring us (legally or not) to then charge us more money and make the problem much worse. You are right, we are terrifed of having a bad record. That is why, when you decide that you don't want or need credit any longer it becomes so much easier to deal with everything they throw at you. All this is why cases such as this are so important.
  4. Well done on this excellent result. They were so screwed you kind of wish that it got in front of a DJ so he could tell them what he thought of their 'methods'. An excellent post here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1701510.html from x20 (where did he go, he is my hero!) about how to make a detailed costs application. Its one way of going about getting costs awarded and helped me get costs (£500) on one case against me that was discontinued. Not for everyone but certainly worked for me. Well done and best of luck with the costs, it may even pay for another break in Northumberland!. The more people that screw these ^&*%*%'s for costs the less likely they will be to try and screw us. FF:)
  5. Hi there, I've read this one from the sidelines so to speak and I'm thrilled that you go this result. As for costs, following x20's advice here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1701510.html I received £500 from Smile/Cobbetts for my time and trouble having initially asked for £2000 !! The thread is a few pages but the bit refering to costs is here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/157451-back-court-after-set-5.html#post1803402 It did last a year and actually went to court 4 or 5 times I recall so was high but the process for claiming following discontinuance is the same and is really straight forward compared to all the other stuff you have been through. Just have a good read of it and make sure you are fully aware of what you are taking on before you do it as it COULD end up in c court hearing for the costs if they decide to contest your bill and you may not need that stress. Some people would be content with the discontinuance without worrying about the costs. Good luck. FF
  6. Hi P4E, Nice to hear from you again but I'm sorry this has reared its head again. I had a quick read through this thread to get up to speed and to clarify if Judgement was in fact ever entered against you, which as you know it wasn't. I can't really say what I think about this as the CagBot would come along and delete all the expletives I think it is a disgrace. I would like to think that it was an admin error but frankly something this serious would be such a monsterous balls up I doubt it. I think you are right, I looks like a deliberate attempt to trick you into increasing payment upon a debt which has been proved to unenforceable and haas already been struck out from court twice in effect. I can't believe that they didn't know this when the letter was sent. I would keep you powder dry whilst you consider your options and get all the information and then go to town on these clowns. Seriously. If I can help I gladly will. Just a quickie, I assume the case no. on your letter matches the case that was struck out (safer to check these things first before going in guns blazing). Next I would start writing a letter to the OFT (this is a serious breach of their guidleines) and then we will see if there is anything else that you can do. Hang 'em high I say! FF
  7. It looks fine to me if not a little wordy. I do sometimes feel on CAG that we try to bully the Judges into submission by the sheer length of our defences and submissions. As you are no doubt aware you are perfectly entitled to apply for a set aside on the basis that you were unaware of the action at the time as you were out of the country. You have demonstrated that you intend to defend and have the basis for a defence too, so that is all good and should not present any problems. The only issue that I see is one of timelyness. If I was the DJ I might ask, when did you actually find out about the CCJ and how was it brought to your attention. Depending on that he might want to know why there was (if any) and delay in your application for the set aside. I can't really imagine you will have a big problem with this. Obviously the next thing is that you will actually need to defend the case. You might ask the judge at that point to make an order that the claimant present a agreement etc within 14 days otherwise the case will be struck out. Just my thoughts, best of luck.
  8. I'm not sure if this has been reported elsewhere on the forum but I thought I'd mention it here. In this Youtube video from yesterday Gordon Brown confirms that the Courts, Tribunals and Enforcements Act will not be implementing the proposed changes relating to Baliffs and Charging Orders. This is excellent news and the overall tone of the piece seems to indicate that they may well be trying to strengthen debtors postions and ensure good practive. Excellent news and hopefully this little petition had something to do with it. You never know. Well done to everyone who bothered to sign it. FF
  9. Just read though the thread again, have they actually issued a claim against you?
  10. I would ask for a copy of the contract that you signed and a statement showing all costs and payments. Always put it in writing and don't sign the letter. Once you can see what you signed and how they have calculated what they say you owe you can take it from there. Nurseries do seem to be doing this more and more. Best of luck. FF
  11. I don't know what to say. I searched on the licence number they quote on their website and their name and both pulled up this licence. Sorry if its not the news you had wanted
  12. They do come up if you search for bullock or their licence number. Seems legit to me. Application / Licence Details Licence Number:0610011 Licence Status:Current Current Applicant / Licensee: Business NameCompany Registration Number Bullock & Clarke Collections Consultancy Limited Categories: Debt adjusting/counselling Debt collecting Right To Canvass Off Trade Premises:No Trading Name(s) (Current): Collect-A-Debt Issued Date: 11-Dec-2007 Expiry Date: 11-Dec-2012 Legal Formation: Charity / Trade Union / Other Current Individuals that run the organisation: NamePosition Ms Anne Peace Ms Beth Louise Clarke Ms Carol Ann Bullock Nature of Business: Debt Collection Current Address(es): Address TypeAddress Correspondence29, Walker Street, Burton - on - Trent, Staffordshire, DE14 3PZ Principal Place Of Business56, Doveridge Road, Bridnocte Valley, BURTON-ON-TRENT, Staffordshire, DE15 9QD, United Kingdom Registered OfficeClaremont House, 223, Branston Road, Burton-on-Trent, Staffordshire, DE14 3BT Historic Address(es): Address TypeAddress Principal Place Of BusinessBridnocte Valley, BURTON-ON-TRENT, Staffordshire, DE15 9QD, United Kingdom
  13. WOW, admissions like that are few and far between. File it in a safety deposit box!
  14. Interesting use of the word phoenix. A 'phoenix company' would be very naughty... Regulatory action against Phoenix Firms
  15. Snooping around again I noticed that the peeps behind 1st Credit incorporated a new company on 10th March, 1st Credit (Finance) 3 Ltd, and applied for a new Consumer Credit Licence for that company on 16th March, which is currently pending. I wonder what they are up to and whether or not the OFT will be inclined to grant them yet another licence in light of recent warnings etc. I wouldn't put anything past them (1st Credit that is!). FF
  16. That's very interesting thanks. As this thread is now 'factually inaccurate' it may as well be deleted. Thanks again for the clarification. FF
  17. Interesting that the second letter I received was actually dated the 18th, so technically sent whilst they were unlicenced so to speak.
  18. Hi all, I received a brace of letters recently from Connaught regarding a disputed debt with 1st Credit. All the usual bla bla bla stuff. Anyway, as it was the first time I had had the pleasure of receiving communication from them I did a bit of digging and was supprised to note that their Consumer Credit Licence expired last Wednesday, the 18th March. Now I assume that this is an oversight on someones behalf (either connaught or the OFT) OR perhaps in the current climate 1st Credit are doing away with Connaught. Either way its quite interesting and for the time being at least, the threat-o-grams from Connaught really arn't worth the paper they are written on. FF:)
  19. I have only just found out about this. What fabulous news. Interesting point I discovered when looking into this further I discovered that.... Not only in Alan Milburn (lined up by David Milliband as Chancellor during his oh so brief leadership tussle) on the advisory committee (read influencer and arm twister) of Bridgepoint the VC company that actually own 1st Credit BUT ... and this is where it gets really interesting...so is Sir James Crosby, the once Chair of HBOS and the now infamous ex Head of the FSA as appointed by dear old Gordo himself. Now surely this is super embarrasing for both these given the OFT's quite gargantuan (by its standards) slap on the wrist of 1st Credit. Questions should be asked. FF
  20. Hi, I have posted this info before but the potential importance of it always seems to get overlooked in my opinion. Essentially what it indicates is that where the debt is a sole debt but the property is jointly owned a Restriction can only be entered, not a charge. The implications of this are explained below but I would recommend seeking further legal advice if such an application is made. Hope this helps, the info was from a senior Land Registry official and was obtained by another forum member. Thanks, FF
  21. didn't think it was defamatory but deleted post just in case.
  22. Hi Master Woody, Just to balance some of the comments above I would urge a little caution. I have written about this a number of times in other threads. My understanding is that a strike out is not always the final throw of the dice that people wish it to be. Unless you applied to the court for Judgment in your favour following the strike out (as per CPR 3.5) the claimant can apply to the court to have the sanction (the strike out) lifted as per CPR 3.9 shown below; If the claimant can demonstrate a case for the above based upon the fact that they now have a enforceable contract then they could be succesful in their application to get the sanction lifted. The case could then continue as it was, but this time with the claimant having an enforceable agreement. Henderson v Henderson would apply where a matter has already been judged upon. Your case has not been judged upon as the claimants case was struck out before it could be, therefore this case would not apply as they could apply to have the sanction lifted. This highlights the importance of applying for judgment after a case has been struck out. Obviously what you actually do in these circumstances is up to you but I hope you will take this information into consideration. Any questions please do ask.
  23. Hi VG, I've not been around for a while. Hope all is well. What you have posted is the copies of the interim charging order which informs you of the date for the hearing for it to be made final (or not). The interim order is made without a hearing and will be removed if your representation for it not to made final are succesful. MOst important is that you serve and file your objections at least 7 days before the hearing.
  24. hehe, more a nip than a bite! thank you all for your support, I just hope it inspires others to make costs applications too.
  25. Hello all I just wanted to update anyone who is interested that I have today agreed with the claimant a figure of £500 in costs. I think I may have managed more, in fact I did make a counter offer once I had put them straight on the procedure for commencing detailed costs assesment. On reflection however I decided I no longer had the stomach for anymore nonsense and I wanted to draw a line under it once and for all. All the shenanigans today started to have an effect on my health. I could do without another 3 months of worry and hassle. Anyway I hope it shows anyone that it is going through anything similar that it is possible to be compensated for your time and efforts once the claimant is shown the error of their ways. For what its worth, if they had only listened to me and not been so aggresive in their collection activites in the first place, then instead of writing off £12k and paying me £500 for the privilege (+ their own legal bill, probably >£2000 I would think) I would now most likely have started repayments again. When will they learn. Treat people with compassion and reason and they will respnd in kind, threaten, bully and try to undermine and threaten a persons home, family and their security and they will often come out fighting. Thanks again for eveyones help and support. FF
×
×
  • Create New...