Jump to content

questioning

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    826
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by questioning

  1. ]Just found this in a very old thread of mine, it was written by R&B after we had been talking about the fact that DCA's will hang up on you as soon as they realise you have become empowered and will no longer take their persistent bull. Next they stop phoning altogether, just as you were gaining the confidence and knowledge to help yourself................ Here it is, it might make you laugh............................................................. TELEPHONE HARRSSMENT, THE LACK OF.. Dear sir, i write in relation to the above and your complete lack of backbone when threatened with anything at all. I would like to point out that several other companies in the same business as yourselves take absolutely no notice of anything I say or write, indeed they take no notice of anything that the Courts, Office Of Fair Trading and even the Government say or write either, leaving you sadly lacking in the harrassment trouser department. I would like an explanation, on the phone. Please do NOT try and write as i shall refuse it at the door, causing undue embarrassment to the postman and, depending on the local trade union representative, a potential all out strike in the postal services. This would further inconvenience yourselves as you would be unable to send any futile attempts at frightening people into paying sums they simply cannot afford, by saying that you MAY send a chap who blocks out the sun at midday to collect our childrens toys or even our children, in order that they be sold to Madonna at some future stage should Malawi run out of 4 year olds. However, may I point out that I find it disgusting that recently, my children have not been woken at 9pm by your persistent calling on home and mobile phones, I have not received threats of CCJs, Charging Orders, possession orders or bailiffs ringing in my ears when I finally attempt to allow my eyelids to meet at 4am and I can have a normal phone call with friends and family for more than 5 minutes without the bleeping interruptions of caller waiting every 60 seconds. A situation Im sure you will agree is highly unsatisfactory. What I Require: I require you to put my number back into that computer algorithm which allows phone calls at intervals deliberately designed to annoy the living hell out of human beings. I require regular calls from your staff direct, such that I may explain, in full detail, my financial situation from the age of 17 to the present day, including the unforgivable exhuberance of a pic n mix in the summer of 1985, so that once finished they can still ask "so do you have a debit or credit card to cover the arrears today?" In essence I miss you. There is no chance of me paying you the sums requested as once I do I will no longer be able to receive those wonderfully stereo-typed calls from your staff and my life would be that little bit poorer (unlike my accounts) for not having to deal with you. Up Yours Faithfully (print dont sign) sorry Q, had a bored 5 mins...... [/size]
  2. Hi CB hope you are well. I'm sure they would have trashed my file with it, but yes its another thing to look into. I've not been well for months but seem to be getting a bit of spirit back (well for today anyway) so that's on my to do list. My credit file should be looking much healthier in the near future.
  3. Thats good, I clicked on his name to see when he was about last but only got an error, just tried again and it worked so got to see his profile with the info on. Thanks Night Owl.
  4. Update. Well I paid this so CCJ was satisfied. I cancelled DD with IND knowing that would get some sort of response from them as something as simple as asking them to give me details in writing as to why they are trying to take more money than they were awarded simply led to no reply at all. Any way, they quickly wrote asking asking me to re instate the DD with the bank. I phoned them and sent a covering letter telling them they weren't going to get any more money as I had not just paid the full CCJ but I had over paid by two months (my error) so they actually owed me money. the lady on the phone fumbled with her words a bit saying I owed more than that blah blah blah. i told her they would have to take me to court if they want another penny but warned any legal action would be defended and why, blah blah. Surprise surprise, not, I have not heard a thing from them since, this was back in summer last year. Thought I would update with the out come as it may help someone else in a similar situation with IND.
  5. Gosh I wish there was an update from the OP as if you read post 19 it sounds like the out come may have been death!
  6. Update Just before Christmas I found out that my records say that I was cancelled the day before:jaw: not on the day which is when I was actually cancelled It now boils down to a complaint to the hospital. The person at PALS who told me to put in a complaint believes me and told me to complain however she said "it will be my word against theirs" I received a letter saying they would look into my complaint and when they complete their investigation they will respond to me within 25 working days in writing. So another cop out as the time line for the 28 day guarantee is up in a couple of days and I'm sure they will just respond with "well our records say you were cancelled day before" My doctor is writng to the hospital to let them know that I am in pain all day every day so that my help. Anyway just up dating incase its of interest to anyone else in a similar position. This is the most frustrating situation I have ever been in so I hope others aren't going through the same thing.
  7. sorry what does FOI mean? I wondered if contacting the consultants secretary would help too. I have read where other people have had surgery cancelled but they later found out that the info held about them actually said that they cancelled it which was utter lies as the hospital cancelled. Thinking out loud ... i will telephone consultants secretary first thing monday to make sure they have the correct facts, rather than sitting here and hoping they have. Thanks Bankfodder
  8. Sorry i haven'ty been able to read the whole thread as my eyes are really sore so can't read much at the mo. I just thought i'd add what i know, for an enhanced CB check then any information that has been recorded about you can be disclosed by the relevent person in the police authority. From what i have been told a person who was arrested is this, A dna swab , mug shot and fingerprints are always taken at the station after your arrest, if you are not charged, cautioned or what ever the fact that you were arrested and what you were arrested for are documented. I was told by someone who was arrested for something they were not guilty of that when they were released they were just about to start a college course where enhanced CRB was needed and always will be for their chosen profession, they complained and so did the parents at time of release that this information would ruin there life as the enhanced CRB check would bring this up. They were told not to worry by the police, the police new they were innocent and that they were a victim of a complaint that should never have been taken that far as there was no truth in it, so they said that they would make sure that it would not come up on any CRB check. The way they did this was to make a note next to the arrest detailing this. Then when ever a enhanced CRB was needed the person giving details would not include this info. They have had four enhanced CRBs done to date and all have come back totally clean.
  9. thanks for the quick reply, thats an easy thing to do, I have been looking for info on how one would force the procedure but can't seem to find anything. I have even found documents detailing how they (the hospital staff) should file cancelled appointments, what code they should use, flow charts to follow etc. but funnily enough I can find nothing much about the process which would help the cancelled patient.
  10. I've had my surgery cancelled on the day i was due to have surgery with the reason of "no beds", it seems as if i may not get the surgery within the 28 day guarantee as the hospital shuts down for surgery for two wks over xmas apart from emergencies, Does anyone know anything about this 28 day guarantee ? This is basically what it says....... If your operation is cancelled by the hospital at the last minute (on or after the day of admission, including the day of surgery) for non-clinical reasons, the hospital will have to offer another binding date within a maximum of the next 28 days or fund your treatment at the time and hospital of your choice. the 28 days for me is up beginning of january, although i would really rather not use NHS funds to pay for my surgery to be done privately i have no choice, i am on sick leave at the moment due to needing surgery and this sick benefit is running out. Does anyone have any experiences relating to this post, if so i would love to hear from you.
  11. Hi Andy, Yep, few more payments to make then this CCJ will be satisfied, My mistake (when looking at the original judgment amount) so I resurrected the thread a bit early, I think thats a good thing though as it gives more time to get ready for them. Luv. Q.x.
  12. Hiya, I have located the original suspended attachment of earnings form, the fee for attachment of earnings has been added to the CCJ so that explains the differing amounts, the charge of £65.oo has been added which is the cost of enforcing an AOE's.
  13. Many thanks CB, you're an with a fab memory! luv Q.x. two links re. Estoppel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoppel_in_English_law and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoppel
  14. Excellent, Any link for this particular case please CB.
  15. SOME INFO i COLLECTED A few years ago, may be helpful to anyone reading this thread, including any guests who seem to be interested.. Issue estoppel Where the issues raised in an earlier claim are identical to the issues raised in a later claim, there is an absolute bar on the later proceedings unless fraud or collusion is alleged (Arnold v National Westminster Bank plc [1991] 2 AC 93). Where an issue decided in a previous claim between the parties is central to a second claim between the same parties, the whole second claim will be struck out (Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation v Minet Ltd [2002] EWHC 1622 (Comm), [2003] PNLR 18). Issue estoppel applies where an order is made, and it does not matter whether the order was made by consent or after argument (Lennon v Birmingham City Council [2001] EWCA Civ 435, LTL 27/3/2001). Issue estoppel also arises to prevent a party reopening a liability issue after a judgment for damages to be decided by the court on the assessment of damages (Item Software (UK) Ltd v Fassihi (2003) LTL 28/1/2003). There is no issue estoppel if there is no definitive decision on the issue in the first claim (Tannu v Moosajee [2003] EWCA Civ 815, LTL 20/6/2003). Where the parties in the two claims are not the same, issue estoppel does not apply (Sweetman v Nathan [2003] EWCA Civ 1115, The Times, 1 September 2003), and further, the factual findings in the first claim are not admissible evidence in the second claim (Hollington v F. Hewthorn and Co. Ltd [1943] KB 587). A person claiming title to goods or land is treated as being privy to the interests of those through whom title is claimed, and so will be bound by the decision in proceedings in which any predecessor in title was a party, but only if judgment in those proceedings was given before the presently claimed title was acquired. A person who purchased title before judgment is not regarded as a privy (Powell v Wiltshire [2004] EWCA Civ 534, [2005] QB 117). Issue which should have been raised in earlier proceedings It is an abuse of process to raise in a second claim an issue which should have been raised against someone who was a party to earlier proceedings (Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100; Talbot v Berkshire County Council [1994] QB 290). Where it is alleged that an issue was or should have been raised in earlier proceedings, it is first necessary to consider whether issue estoppel applies, which can only be negatived by fraud or collusion It is only if there is no such estoppel that it is appropriate to consider whether raising the issue now would be an abuse of process under the principle in Henderson v Henderson (see Coflexip SA v Stolt Offshore MS Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 213, [2004] FSR 34; Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation v Minet Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 905, [2004] 1 All ER (Comm) 60; Bim Kemi AB v Blackburn Chemicals Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 1490, The Times, 22 November 2004). In Johnson v Gore Wood and Co. [2002] 2 AC 1 the House of Lords held that when considering whether a second claim is an abuse of process a broad, merits-based judgment has to be made, taking into account all the public and private interests involved, and all the facts. 7. The general position relating to finality of judgments is set out in Zuckerman, Civil Procedure: Principles of Practice (2nd ed.) at 22.40 – 22.41: 'Once a judgment has been perfected, the court's jurisdiction is exhausted. Both justice and public policy demand that once a dispute has been determined by court judgment, the parties and the community should be able to proceed on the assumption that that matter has been conclusively settled once and for all. Justice requires that there should be a limit to the uncertainty created by legal disputes. … This idea finds statutory expression in CCA 1984, s.70, which provides that "[e]very judgment and order of a county court shall, except as provided by this or any other Act or as may be prescribed, be final and conclusive between the parties". The principle of finality dictates that once a judgment has been given on the merits, the court has no further jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matter and cannot reopen the case.'
  16. Hiya Freddie, Hopefully they will see by your letter that you know the score and that if they did proceed with litigation you would obviously defend a SB debt. They would be stupid to proceed. I know its easy to say but do try and relax and stop worrying, you know you haven't serviced or made contact re. this account since 2005 so its SB. I'm hopeful they will drop it once they receive your letter. They can still chase you for a SB debt but they cannot enforce it through the courts. Did you send the letter by recorded means, if you did it will help to make sure its delivered and not lost in the post.
  17. Hi ya CB, thanks for looking in. Yes I have everything CB thanks. Luv Q.x.
  18. You would prove its stat barred, if it is I would get onto them straight away and inform them of the fact, In writing only and don't sign with your usual signature
  19. Hiya, Have a look at this....should help you, http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?146535-Have-you-been-threatened-with-court-action-over-a-debt-more-than-6-years-old By the way an attachment of earnings can be suspended if you say your employment may suffer if your employer were aware of a ccj, and they can only apply for an attachment of earnings if you haven't paid a ccj. And you haven't got a CCJ at the mo so try not to worry but do start getting ready to defend if they do litigate. Look out for a court form which will be sent to your address, if one is you must defend, if you don't they will win a ccj by default, so just get your self prepared,
  20. IND answered their phone as ARROW, when I said "I wanted IND sorry must have dialed wrong" they said" No you are correct, this is IND but we work for Arrow!
  21. After reading info on the forum it seems that many people say that NCO and IND are the same, it seems thay are not but obviously work very closely. IND answer the phone as Arrow.! There has been a significant update to my thread but i'm going to PM a trusted friend at cag with the info as I don't think I should post it on here at the moment as I've read thet IND frequent the forum, but I will when I can as I'm sure it will helpful to others.
  22. oK i FOUND THE NUMBER AND GO THROUGH, sorry caps lock. IND no. is 08715 994447 Lady says she has no record of a CCJ for that amount OR for any amount for a CCJ at all, she spent ages looking and umming and arrring, She did come up with a figure , WAit for it £6000. then when I said no the amount claimed was £300. she said she could see I had been making payments, ( i won't say too much about that, prying eyes) Boils down to she could find NO mentyion of a CCJ for any amount. She said she would send a statement of account out today. Gets confusing as I found a statement of account from NCO from a few years back and that has six payments on it all to IND. (they are definately the payments off the CCJ) I phoned them too and they said account says closed, she said she had NO info on me, the screen just says closed. I've also found a letter of assignment saying FV-1 has been assigned it and IND will collect on their behalf. it also goes on to saay its a letter before legal proc. and states it will sue for whole amount of 6 grand plus interest of over one grand and court costs 190 and sols. costs 100. and I may have to pay further costs when taken to court in addition to those mentioned. I'm pretty pleased that I've found them, I do try and file but organisation in any area of my life has never been a strong point of mine, but I usually do find things in the end. Sorry intentions, your post has nothing in common with my thread as far as I can see, so if you stick to your own thread you will have a much better chance of gaining help you require,
×
×
  • Create New...