Jump to content

William Burroughs

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Its to do with court staff claiming they are not required to comply with CPR. I am thinking that might well be the case, and might have something to do with Covid regulations?
  2. Yes, I am trying to work out the curious way the court staff have handled certain matters related to my case, and if what I have been told about them having no need to comply with CPR is correct, most of this would be explained.
  3. Due to staff at my local county court not serving documents on the claimant, I was unable to enter a counterclaim, and judgement was entered against me (a matter related to energy charges). Upon querying this I was told over the telephone that court staff, are not obliged to adhere to CPR, which would explain the documents not being served. When I asked for confirmation of this in writing, there was no response, and the excuse given was that the court manager had been in meetings (for more than 2 months apparently!). I wonder if anyone knows if it is correct that there is now no need for court staff to comply with CPR in relation to case management and administration? If it's not correct, then could this be taken as an abuse of process, and form the basis of a strike out application of the previous judgement? I would be very grateful for any help on this.....................
  4. I have been in dispute with my former electricity supplier, SSE, since late in 2015. During the course of the dispute, SSE offered me a payment of £500, suggesting this was in recognition of providing incorrect information and failing to return calls. In the course of the dispute, SSE generated 2 hard cut off notices, and sent agents to my business premises to disconnect the supply (the outstanding sum is related to a business account). In finality, due to my ceasing payments in 2016, due to SSE's refusal to answer simple questions from me, regarding the £500 payment (which seemed to me a tacit admission of liability, in relation to serious misconduct of staff members), and the disconnection agent visits, which they seemed to be suggesting had not taken place, SSE decided to take this matter to law in the opening part of 2021, after several years of me being on a variable rate tariff, and a bill of almost £5000 had mounted up. Due to my having little grasp of CPR, and being unaware of the fact that SSE, had no need to respond to an N266, asking for clarification of the curious way they had conducted themselves over several years, during a hearing (which I thought was simply concerned with allocation of the case), judgement was entered against me, and I was ordered to pay SSE £5000 within the next 14 days. Covid has affected my small business in a very negative way, and I simply could not afford to pay that sum of money within the required time frame. This being the case, I suggested to SSE that I would pay half immediately, and the balance in accord with a mutually agreed payment schedule. This offer was refused out of hand, with no reason given. I then contacted Citizens Advice, for help with the situation I found myself in, and was passed to a partner organisation of theirs, "Business Debtline". My primary concern, was that as my offer to settle the outstanding sum had been refused, SSE appeared to be intent on enforcing the debt though bailiff action. Business Debtline have not been tremendously helpful with this, and have provided advice, which had I taken it, would have meant I would have already been visited by bailiffs. I have tried several times to get the order of the court varied, but all the submissions I have made (via N245s), have been rejected with no reasons given for the rejections. I have also submitted EX160's as I cannot afford the fees related to various other more costly applications, but it would seem that even though my increasingly worsening health, has meant no income for several weeks, I do not qualify for any help with fees, even though I have less than £3000 in savings. Essentially at the moment, it seems all I can do is wait for notification of a visitation, by some tattooed sub epsilons, and should I not have won the lottery and be able to pay them £5000 + however many £1000s, their fees might amount to, then my small industrial unit, will be stripped bare, and my 17 year old van , which is now my sole form of transport will also be removed? Business Debtline cannot offer any accurate or helpful advice regarding this, so I would be extremely grateful if anyone on here can suggest anything other than simply waiting for the knuckle draggers to call?
  5. It seems there are 2 Symbios Solutions in existence, and the Google hits which link to pages related to scamming are nothing to do with the UK company. Actually, I was NOT scammed, money was taken from my account, but this was due entirely to my own stupidity! The UK company is 101% genuine and above board!
  6. SYMBIOS SOLUTIONS LIMITED, PO15 5TT : Companies House Number 04316056 WWW.COMPANIESINTHEUK.CO.UK SYMBIOS SOLUTIONS LIMITED HAMPSHIRE - 2018 Cash at bank £455,777 (2017: £307,521), Directors MARTIN MONTAGUE and...
  7. A Google search for "Symbios Solutions" brings up a warning about scamming at the top of the first page, so I would imagine the ex second-hand car dealer behind this concern, must have been relatively active in his criminal endeavours? I wonder if any CAG members has any info on Symbios? There is an address, but that appears to be a Finchley Road type affair, and I doubt if its anything more than a mail drop type thing rented monthly? Be very useful if anyone has heard of them.....................TIA
  8. The Consumer Contracts Regulations which became UK law in 2013 suggest 2 things. The first being that Ebay deliberately concealing business seller contact information is a direct breach of the 2013 regulations which suggest contact information much be displayed in a clear and comprehensible manner, and the second that as all UK business sellers are through no fault of their own not complying with the 2013 regulations they are also in breach of the Ebay user agreement which suggests members must comply with region specific legislation. In terms of dodgy sellers openly and freely operating on Ebay and specific legislation designed to make this more difficult being ignored I would say personally that is certainly extremely pertinent to consumer rights issues, as these laws designed to protect these rights have been set aside by Ebay for purely commercial reasons!
  9. My point is that Ebay ignoring legislation specific to any business using its services to sell online, makes it a great deal easier for the ever increasing numbers of dodgy business sellers to operate unhindered. I wonder do you feel happy that large corporations can essentially do exactly as they please?
  10. The Consumer Contracts Regulations 2014 is legislation that Ebay would appear to be obliged to adhere too but is actually ignoring! Being able to side step this sort of legislation makes it an awful lot easier for all manner of [problematic] and dodgy sellers to operate using the Ebay platform. I guess though as Ebay pays no UK tax they very likely feel there is no need to take any notice of consumer protection law?
  11. Directives "Each directive contains a deadline by which EU countries must incorporate its provisions into their national legislation and inform the Commission to that effect. The Commission assists member countries in correctly implementing all EU laws. It provides online information, implementation plans, guidance documents and organises expert‑group meetings." The directive related to ODR was I think made in 2013 so it seems strange it has 5 years later still not been incorporated into UK law?
  12. Got a response from Ebay who suggest punitive action will be taken against me should I wish to comply with EU law and the Ebay user agreement which suggests all members must comply with legislation related to online selling. They really seem to be tying themselves up in knots over this as they are not able to explain why the UK is not subject to EU law like every other member state.........................
  13. No response from Ebay as to why their German and UK pages covering EU consumer protection legislation differ fundamentally. EU seems to feel that a UK based advice centre plays a pivotal role in enforcement matters related to consumer protection legislation, but the advice centre has an entirely different view. It would seem that if the ODR legislation was properly implemented and business slellers were obliged to display direct email contact details on all listings, that it would be very easy to buy/sell without paying Ebay fees. This I guess is the reason Ebay chooses to ignore EU law in the same way as it chooses to ignore the idea of paying tax.
  14. SSE has department specific data controllers, one for supply in Reading and another for distribution in Perth. Data controller numbers provided on those web pages according to ICO are both spurious.
  15. Have contacted the EU about this and will post the response if anyone is interested? Seems to me that large tax dodging corporations can do pretty much as they please though so the chances of any sort of punitive action being taken are rather remote to say the least.
×
×
  • Create New...