Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Catweazle69

  1. Thanks for the advice. The council state quiet clearly on there website that a response to a complaint about the bailiiff will be 5 days. All other matters they quote a 10 day turnaround. It is now TWELVE days and counting. Not a word other than an acknowledgement from the council quoting there 10 day rule etc etc. I will wait a couple more days for a reply from the council. With regards to your link about wether a bailiff is certificated or not. The first one to visit appears nowhere. The second one (who came out with the £200 story etc) does show but only when his licence was granted. There is no mention that he works for Equita. I have taken your advice on board so thank you ploddertom. I may now request to move it to the bailiff section or leave it on here for 48 hours more and see what (if any) response I get from the council. Thanks.
  2. It may mention an extension cable(upto 25metres) however it does not explain as to exactly why! - A) A lot of people may not want 25m of Eternet cable tacked around there skirting board. B) When selling the service the salesmen should ascertain in advance location/requirements etc of the user. C) Anybody with ONE(non wireless) desktop situated in there property say 50M and three walls away from there main socket is either screwed or going to have to pay to have there main socket reallocated. A faster service it may be I just feel that as anyone over 50 is in the main completely naive to all things technical (6 out of 10 customers in that age range I visit have either Pcs/laptops far to advanced for there basic needs and/or have no security operating) clearer clarification and a bit of customer service wouldnt go amiss before forcing this service on people who are quiet happy with the 4/6/8 MB they where receiving on Total Broadband!
  3. £790 for 08/09 £1590 for 09/10 £950 for 10/11 All these figures include liability fees/orders. I paid 3x£80 to Enfield Council in Feb/Mar/Apr then Equita took it over in May accepting £80 per month to them thereafter. I have kept up repayments and have heard nothing from them advising because this years bill has been passed to them our previous agreement becomes null and void. It was there bailiff who told me that. As no bailiff has ever set foot in my home it is quiet clear the £200 he wanted was his deceit and fraudulent actions. Funny but he aint been back since I questioned it on the phone to him! I wrote(recorded) and emailed them on Oct 27th. I have proof they received the letter. I asked for a breakdown of monies received and how it had been allocated. You will not be surprised to hear I have had no acknowledgement from them since! - I also complained to the council and asked for a breakdown from them. Again I await a reply. On Nov 1st I paid my £80 as normal to Equita as well as a further £80 to Enfield Council (for this years debt as I offered originally to Equita before they sent someone out) I emailed them both to advise I had done this. Again I received a computer generated response from the council. Nothing from Equita. (Enfield council pathetically advised me earlier this year that once an account gets passed to equita any payments direct to the council aren't monitored. Pathetic I know!) I stated in my email again I had heard nothing regarding my complaint. Nothing saying my agreement was cancelled. And nothing regarding my offer to repay a further £80 per month to this years debt! Thanks for clarifying the law regarding bailiffs. I feel like writing to the director of revenues of Enfield Council and advising them I have no intention of dealing with Equita anymore and that all future payments will be made to the council and that any further correspondence from Equita (as its the council who employ them ) will be treated as harassment. I no that eventually it will be passed back to the council but I really can do without having to park a car around the corner etc and also sometimes I am not always at home and cannot tell everyone not to ever answer the door if I am out. So should I write again or should I just wait and see what happens?
  4. Avoid at all costs. They mis-sold this service to my parents nearly a month ago and we are still waiting for it to be rectified and put back to normal broadband. They are CLUELESS and invariably you get put through to a call centre in India. I have never come across such an unproffesional company in my life. Be warned also if you have your hardrive/modem in any other part of the house other than by your MAIN Bt socket your screwed unless you are using a wireless connection/ My parents use there computer in the upstairs bedroom. BT Infinity will install a plate (compulsory) by your main socket only. An extension kit will have to bought and installed if you want it anywhere else. BT FAIL to tell you this!! AVOID AT ALL COSTS. Use O2 they are cheaper and I have not had a problem with them in 2 years and there speeds are more than adequate.
  5. Avoid at all costs. They mis-sold this service to my parents nearly a month ago and we are still waiting for it to be rectified and put back to normal broadband. They are CLUELESS and invariably you get put through to a call centre in India. I have never come across such an unproffesional company in my life. Be warned also if you have your hardrive/modem in any other part of the house other than by your MAIN Bt socket your screwed unless you are using a wireless connection/ My parents use there computer in the upstairs bedroom. BT Infinity will install a plate (compulsory) by your main socket only. An extension kit will have to bought and installed if you want it anywhere else. BT FAIL to tell you this!! AVOID AT ALL COSTS. Use O2 they are cheaper and I have not had a problem with them in 2 years and there speeds are more than adequate.
  6. Hi and thanks for your reply. My repayment agreement is for two debts. The oldest one was for £790. Equita added £33 making £823 in total. The other one was £1590.Equita added another £33 making it £1623.No baiiff has ever visited or levied on anything.Those figures also include liability fees. I have letters from them clearly stating these are the amounts owed and what the repayment plan is for. It also clearly states as long as this is kept up everything will be fine. I have paid £80 each month in total since May and have nothing from them to say its been cancelled because this years tax has been passed to them as well. Furthermore when I had the letter dropped through my door the other day it referred to this years tax and amount and nothing else so as far as I am concerned as long as i keep up my agreement the two old debts are fine. Its just this new one I need to negotiate but the bailiff seems to think he is in charge of all three and I have defaulted. The bailiff came out with random figures of how my monies paid thus far where allocated but the one that raised the alarm bell was him saying £160 had been taken off £823 (ie making £663) but he wanted £874 .His reasoning was I had to clear the oldest debt then he would tie the other two together with a repayment of £100 per month. When i asked him how he worked out that 832 - 160 came to 874 he said it was his daily fees added!! - I told him that was illegal and thats when he put the phone down. Im not scared of dealing with Equita tho I could do without the hassle of wondering everytime the doorbell rings! Enfield Council hate me because of what happened in the past I know that but this is different. I have been paying it off (I made three payments to the council before May,s agreement with Equita) and quiet clearly told them I intend to do so until clear.So where do I stand? Any ideas now I have explained it some more? Thanks for your help.
  7. Hi. I have an agreement in place with Equita since May of this year. It covers the repayment of just short of 2k split over last years tax and half from the year before. The reason I am so far behind is partly thru stupidty, partly thru my flatmate refusing to pay and a period out of work when foolishly I didnt claim anything. As my name is the first on the bill I was summonsed with a commital to prison in March 09. This I borrowed to pay for and have been playing catch up ever since. Im sure In the eyes of the council I am a serial non payer so I never get much joy from them despite me telling them of my woes. Anyway this years bill was recently passed to Equita so I wrote to them telling them I already have an agreement which has been kept and that I can pay more in future to get the debt clear. I waited two weeks for a reply and then just got a standard letter acknowlidging it and telling me to phone the office ie a repayment plan. Believe it or not the guy I spoke to on the phone agreed my repayment was in order but this years bill I had to discuss with the appointed bailiff. To cut a long story short this is what the bailiff advised. A)my previous agreement was null and void now. B) if I pay off the least amount of the three he will put me on a repayment plan of £100 per month for the other 2. That by the way is £60 short of what I offered. I questioned why the previous agreement was cancelled and he couldnt answer it. I questioned had a liability order for all three debts as the letter I got from him only mentioned the most recent. He couldnt answer. He then came up with some random figures of how my payments thus far had been allocated which caught him out. On the basis of that I questioned why if the original amount of the least due was £830 in May (and he had told me £160 had been paid off it) why did he want £874? He also (surprise surprise)prefered cash and that I coudnt use my original paying in book as the agreement was cancelled. Im sure you can guess where over £200 had come from! - I told him I knew my rights and we both knew he couldnt add on fees but he rambled on about he can charge what he likes etc. I questioned him further and his words where I was insulting him, he threatened to see me this morning and hung up. There has been no sign of him today. I have read the various tags on here so I am pretty sure of rights regarding fees, not opening doors etc. I wrote to Equita today telling them what happened and cc,d in the council. I asked if what the bailiff had said was true I can pay off the least amount and accept the £100 per month thereafter. I also advised them Iwould continue with my original payment plan until advised otherwise in writing. I also offered them a further amount to start the ball rolling with this years tax. I will duly now wait for the standard two weeks later reply from both parties that will probably dismiss every point I have raised! My main concern is this. Because of my commital case in 09 (which is paid) I am seen as a non payer by the council. I have explained countless times that the other person on the bill is let off scott free, isnt harrased etc but they dont want to know. The last thing I need is for them to issue commital papers to me again. I read somewhere that one can refuse to deal with bailiffs and just paythe council instead? Should I do this? Or should I wait till they investigate my complaint and carry on with the agreement regardless to Equita and this years bill start paying direct to the council rather than waiting for Equita to agree a repayment plan? Confused? I am? I look forward to any advice anyone may have.
  8. Sorry I havent been on here for a while as I have been working away but I come with good news not just for me but for everybody else who is having a problem with these charlatans! As my earlier post said I got a standard reply blah blah and a copy of there complaints procedure. As I didnt get anywhere I followed there procedure and went to a senior manager. Ten days elapsed and I got another letter saying the same thing its enforceable etc so the final call before referring it to the Finance Ombusman was the MD. In short I today received a letter saying they had took a "Commercial" desicion and would NOT be pursuing the debt any further and the case was closed!!! Postggj your letter referring to certain key points in the Credit Agreement Act work. Full Stop. On my part I would go on to say to everyone challenging Go Debt. Yes you will get a initial response saying they believe its enforceable but if you stick to your guns, dont back down and follow there complaints procedure you should get the same outcome! So fear not. Laugh @ them and rest assured you will never ever be taken to court or have to pay a penny back. Listen to postggj, follow his advice and stay strong! We Win!!!! Postggj - PM me as I would like to buy you a drink and if anybody reading this would like my help then you only have to ask!
  9. Indeed. I dont mind dragging it out. Sept 7th 2004 is my last acknowledgement of the debt. Ive no doubt there are 100,s more all heading towards this 6 year timeline! Im just sick of the phonecalls and letters. I must try harder to laugh @ them instead of it winding me up. I shall keep you and the forum posted. Thanks again for your time thus far........!
  10. Sure its 0207 831 2161 - Irang it and some guy answers by saying "Can I Help You" I just then hung up. If you google it is asscociated with Go Debt. It appears I only got half the message as others have it with the line "we arranging to send someone out etc etc before giving the number and requesting to call immediately. It is laughable! - What do you reckon? Have you another fantastic letter up your sleeve or should I just go down there stated complaints route?
  11. Got a response today. Standard rubbish saying they have noted my points but feel the debt is still enforceable and will be happy to accept an reduce amount. They state they consider the complaint closed (even though there accompanying leaflet gives two further options of complaint before passing it to the financial ombudsmen ie a senior mangers response and a MD response) They then went onto say they will now pass it back to one of their colections team who will be in touch. There arrogance is beyond belief! - This morning I got one of the "Dalek" voice messages asking me to ring a London number immediately. I have since checked this number out and it appears others have recieved such a message. The assumption seems to be it is some form of Mickey Mouse solicitors. Im not overly concerned but would apprciate your advice on my next move, if any. Thanks.
  12. That is an absoloutley brilliant letter postggi. Thank You. I will send it tomorrow and report back with (if any) responses from or indeed not from our friends in South Wales..............!
  13. You did indeed. Thanks and I look forward to your response.
  14. To true. They very kindly offered to take off the total insurance and asked me to pay 3.5k by June 2nd (how very kind of them) Im admiting to nothing trust me. I think Im just going to send another letter asking them to AGAIN refer to the details within your template letter. The only reason Im doing that is to cover my own back should they send a stat demand. That way I can show the court there ignorance.
  15. Well after sending my letter to them by email and recorded mail 7 days from last Monday (as promised) I today received a reply. To me it appears to be stalling tactics as I quiet clearly stated take me to court or cancel the agreement. I list below there laughable response on the issues raised. Unenforcability - Amount Mis Stated You will note from your agreement that you signed to both a conditional sale agreement and a credit agreement - one for the car and one for the insurance. Both clearly set out the balances due. I cannot see anywhere on the agreement where the amounts are incorrect Agreement being non compliant Please confirm why you think the agreement is not compliant. I would refer you to the terms of your agreement to which you signed and agreed to be bound. Allocation of Deposit I refer to section 7.3 of your agreement. Customer Declaration. where you confirmed that you paid the down payment in box 3.0 and the vehicle deposit in box 2.0 of page one of the agreement. Clearly you agreed to the allocation of your payment being against the insurance by ticking yes. Prescribed Term Agreement Your agreement was set for a period of 48 months and the instalements where calcuated on this basis. Please explain why you feel this agreement is unenforceable. They then go on to offer a deduction of the insurance (£1161) but still want 3.5K! This to me seems like a standard letter they have set up. The template letter clearly tells them to refer to the Consumer Credit Act yet this letter is asking me to explain to them again why I think its unenforceable. Right or Wrong? I look forward to a quick response and your views.
  16. From the beginning,due to my lease company advising Westminster of an incorrect address for me and subsequent letters not being received added to the fact that the street I was parked in a street that had no proper signs told me that these Pcn,s where issued incorrectly. Furthermore I queried as to why a supposed CCTV unit (they advised it was being watched in real time) didnt allow the 5 minutes grace a CEO would give if they observed the vehicle. I challenged also that I was being penalised in a private vehicle so it looked as if I had just parked even though a walk past CEO would observe my business from the courier sign in the window and see my hazard lights flashing! Because the offences happened in May 07 and I didnt start receiving notification to Sept 07 (when mail was eventually passed on) I was already in a vortex of confusion where there was no escape and they never answered most of my letters. However during the period from Sept 07 to June 08 one Pcn was cancelled with no reason. I questioned why one had been cancelled and not all the others as they where all for the same offence and all mentioned in my various letters. I never got a detailed response/reply. What eventually got Westminster was the PE2/3 forms that I filled out (for the 3rd/4th time) in June 2008. The very next day Newlyn turned up and took nearly 6k from me. I then started to hassle Newlyns for proof of visits and querying of there charges. A SAR I twice sent them. They applied delaying tactics, blaming Westminster etc etc then they offered me "Without Predjudice" £700 back in Mar 09. In the meantime during Oct/Nov 08 Westminster started refunding me (blaming technical errors) £155 at a time. After being advised on this site regarding local authorities total responsibility regarding the acts of the bailiffs and the "constitutional claim" I decided I wanted it all back and wasnt prepared to accept Newlyns pathetic excuses and Westminsters attempts to blame other parties etc. I wrote 2/3 times to there chief executive (Kevin Goad) and also contacted the LGO for there advice. I also requested all info/pictures etc they held on me and my vehicle under the freedom of information act. I never received any response. Ping pong letters continued without much headway until.................. In late Jan/Early Feb this year Weastminster Council offered me a local settlement citing late statutory decs were allowed for late pcns and should have been opposed as these where not, the councils own procedural instructions where not followed. They also accepted the bailiff fees should have been refunded at the same time. They never answered the FOI request, they never explained why there CCTV unit was operating in an area not clearly marked, they never answered as to why when I informed them of the incorrect address the procedure wasnt reset so I could contest them. They never answered why I was getting tickets going against there ParkRight policy on there website. With there refund, plus the re-offered £700 from Newlyns plus what I had already received in multiples of £155 at a time I was fully refunded plus an extra £50 and it cost me not one penny (apart from about 15 registered letters!) in legal fees. Who what or why made them decide to refund me I guess I will never know. I spent the best part of 18 months fighting it and I never gave up so for anybody reading this - if you believe you are in the right challenge it. Pester pester pester! - Scrutinise the councils website, scrutinise the street, take pictures, dont be bullied by bailiffs and listen to peoples stories and advice on this site and believe because eventually you will win!!!!!
  17. So basically by putting peoples down payments against PPI or Mech Breakdown or Gap insurance then adding a shortfall by way of credit then finally adding interest is where they failed eh? Sorry if I sound dumb, just curious and as Im studying consumer law its a very interesting case! As I stated in an earlier post they left my PPI column (No10) blank then just added 11 & 12 together (whatever Gap Insurance is for God Only Knows) sub my down payment then added on a load of interest. So what that figure of £22.10 a month was for god oly knows. Very crafty. Must say I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when someone/somewhere realised the error of there ways..................!!!
  18. Has nobody ever taken this [problem] to Watchdog? - Obviously people who are aware of this site have taken your good advice but there are no doubt 100,s out there that are getting ripped off and stressed to breaking point. A Stat Demand should not be allowed to be issued unless the proper channels (ie-taking the individual to court first) have been explored. I personally would like to see this company highlighted nationally by Tv or a Newspaper and consequently obliterated from trading ever again!
  19. I have today (after posting the letter to them, emailing it last Thurs, then again yesterday as I had no reply) received an email from a Stuart Barns (@GoDebt) though the email was signed in the name of the clown who rang my mother (breaking the data protection act in the process by revealing the alleged debt amount etc) scaring the life outa here last week. The email reply simply states - we acknowledge reciept of your email dated Mon 13th May (the 13th was last Thurs!!) and email today, the contents of which have been noted. This matter has been escalated to a manager who will respond to you in the next 7 days! The header was also changed from my initial one (that just had the agreement number in it) to FW - DIRECT AUTO FINANCIAL SERVICES, yes in bold instead. I await there next communication!
  20. As I thought. Interesting! Thanks for your quick confirmation of my thoughts. I await to see if (and how) they reply to your template letter.
  21. Fingers crossed indeed. Your latest letter sent is the same as mine. Your a day in front of me. It will be interesting to see if we are dealt with the same way etc. You can click on my thread and see my post. In the meantime I wish you well with yours and await any further developements. Keep The Faith!
  22. As of April 15th 2010 after over a year of letters/threats/counter threats etc I can confirm I got back every single penny plus a £50 bonus for my time and efforts. Thanks to the advice from people on here, my own investigations on Westminsters Website and a little help from the LGO I won!! - It cost me nothing but my time and anybody with a reasonable intellect I feel can do the same. It would appear that 60/70% of PCN,s issued are false or are bound by rules and regulations that councils simply make up for there own personal gain! - Challenge these and you will find they invariably wrong. The whole system is corrupt so my advice is (unless you are 100% sure you are in the wrong) challenge it. Dont accept the legal jargon and threats. Play them at there own game and good luck!
  23. Any upate or a deathly silence from our foolish friends in South Wales?
  24. I have yesterday sent the letter as you advised by Rec Del. I also emailed it to them on Thurs evening. I await there (if any) reply! - Im guessing they will have got the letter today or by Monday @ the latest. One thing I cannot understand. Normally if you have a debt with someone the first port of call for the creditor is a court summons to the debtor so why are GoDebt going down this route? They,ve had 4-6 years to chase these people or is it because they know the YCC credit agreement is worthless and this Stat Demand Bankruptcy status scares alot of people? Also you would think the courts are now aware of this company and it should be law that before a stat demand is issued the person who is accused of owing money is allowed to defend themselves in court. Then only if they are found guilty of owing it and still refuse to pay should such a demand be issued. Secondly it appears from reading of other peoples woes that a lot of cars (like mine) where returned for being faulty/rubbish/undriveable etc. I dont know who it was who discovered the mis selling of PPI thus making the agreements null and void but I cannot help but wondering what would happen to everyone if this wasnt the case. How can a company be allowed to hound people like this? If anybody can answer It would solve my curiosity and Im sure others. In the meantime I will keep this thread updated with developements.
  • Create New...