I have just had a text saying "We have been instructed to proceed formally on this claim in 7 days in respect of the balance due to the Photo Studio Group unless discharged or an arrangement made. This will result in a formal letter before claim and court proceedings" I don't know what tis means as I have already had a letter before claim?

The same thing is happening to me. If it helps I have had confirmation this company "the Photo Studio Group" is being investigated by Westminster Trading Standards where they are registered so other people must have complained about them as well.

No not since that. I looked at the hype-digital web site and there is no complaints process so should I just email them and demand they cancel the contract and return the money i've already paid?

I like the reassuring advice I get from this site and I like to keep you in the loop as it develops I have already wriien to the studio that sent me the contract and they replied with this "Please liaise with CRS and their Solicitors who are dealing with this matter, They will be able to furnish you with all the details required as they have all relevant information."

I don't think that will stop the solicitors letters or court action as the company driving that seems to be visualStudios.co.uk, not the Photo Studio Group who are supposedly the creditors. I think they are all part of the same web of scam companies. I see other people have had a hard time trying to complain to get their money back, they are mostly ignored and end up taking the company to court themselves. I think I would rather see what AJJB law are going to do next if I reply to their letter of claim.

I am still out of pocket by about £750 which is why I am waiting for the Sectiion 75 claim to start. I think I should reply to the letter before claim as I suggested above otherwise they might think I've moved away and can file a claim thinking I won't turn up to court and get a judgement by default. I don't think their clients will want to go to court if they don't know anything about it as suggested by the ADR email. Although I was sent the contract by somebody from visualstudios.co.uk when I asked for it and not the photo studio group so I don't know where they come into it. Maybe part of the same scam?

This is a proper letter of claim. I posted the first page of the letter on this thread message #58. I have 30 days to respond. Or have I had a letter before claim and I still have a letter of claim to come?

They are now conducting a pre-court action review (whatever that is) so I am going to reply to the letter before claim as Nobby_v suggests :- I dispute the debt because your client is in breach of a number of consumer protections that have been in place for many years, and the service provided was not fair or acceptable which is how I successfully managed to recover funds already paid, that claim went unchallenged. Given that your client has had the opportunity to discuss this well in advance of your involvement I am surprised you are attempting to pursue. So far you have ignored any "pre court protocol" and I request for any claim to be closed - what you are threatening is an abuse of the legal process. Any attempt at formal legal action will of course have an immediate request that it is struck out as it has no chance of success. It’s clear that you do not have no intention of adhering to a formal process and are hoping that I will settle this matter. In order for me to continue discussing this matter with you please provide full details of the dispute, A copy of the Default Notice A copy of the Notice of Assignment A complete set of statements detailing exactly how the debt has accrued detailing all Transactions and an explanation as to why there was no attempt to settle this at the time of chargeback process. Please do not send me any further correspondence with out answering the above points which I believe is a far and reasonable response. If you do write without supporting evidence I will take the matter up with my MP and the local police as an example of harassment. Note that this matter is already under investigation by trading standards/action fraud which you are now implicated in.

That sounds good, but I have already had the signed contractual agreement which I posted on this thread at message#20 and the section 75 claim has not started yet because of a backlog, it was charge backs I have already done.

This is how I am going to respond to the Letter of Claim :- I dispute this debt because the contract is illegal for the following reasons :- 1. Among the services provided by Hype-Digital is introducing work-seekers (models) to (other) agencies. That makes Hype-Digital itself an employment agency. Under the Employment Agencies Act 1973 (the Act), an employment agency is defined thus: "13(2) For the purposes of this Act " employment agency " means the business (whether or not carried on with a view to profit and whether or not carried on in conjunction with any other business) of providing services (whether by the provision of information or otherwise) for the purpose of finding persons employment with employers or of supplying employers with persons for employment by them." In addition to the Employment Agencies Act 1973, employment agencies are governed by the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003 (as amended) (the Conduct Regulations). The taking of photographs of work-seekers (models) is not a work-finding service, it is an additional (other service). Under the Conduct Regulations, it is a criminal offence for an employment agency to make the provision to work-seekers of the agency's work-finding services conditional on the work-seeker using any other services - whether these other services are provided by the employment agency or by any person with whom the employment agency is connected. In addition, where the service is the "production of a photographic image" of a work-seeker seeking employment as a fashion/photographic model (and/or actor etc) the employment agency is prohibited from charging the work-seeker a fee for 30 days from the date of the agency entering into the contract with the work-seeker (whether the contract is oral or written), during which time the work-seeker is entitled to withdraw from or cancel the contract without suffering detriment or penalty, and without being obliged to pay any fee to the agency. Both offences placing Hype-Digital, the "agency" in breach of the Conduct Regulations. 2. Hype-Digital have employed practices banned by the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 in order to secure a contract :- Limited offers Falsely stating that a product will only be available for a very limited time, or that it will only be available on particular terms for a very limited time, in order to elicit an immediate decision and deprive consumers of sufficient opportunity or time to make an informed choice. Pressure selling Creating the impression that the consumer cannot leave the premises until a contract is formed. In addition, this business model is a known scam as stated on the Action Fraud web site under Advanced Fee – Career Opportunity Scams https://www.actionfraud.police.uk/a-z-of-fraud/career-opportunity-scams Also, Hype-Digital and the Photo Studio Group are run by Michael Hannah who was exposed for committing this fraud by BBC Watchdog with the same company prior to changing its name from Kube Studio to the Photo Studio Group. This is the link to the report: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2DJ6GCxl7JWHd08jZMb4kSG/kube-studios The Guardian newspaper have also reported on modelling scams run by Michael Hanna here: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/dec/18/modelling-agencies-platforms-scam-studio-c I have reported this scam to Action Fraud and it is being investigated with case number: NFRC201003978557 It is also being investigated by Trading Standards case number WK/009785539 I have initiated a Section 75 claim against the Photo Studio group with my credit card company to recover the monies paid so far and as they have already upheld and processed two chargebacks for direct debit payments which were unopposed, I am confident the Section 75 claim will also succeed. I will be fully represented in court and very happy to expose this scam. Press and TV journalists are already interested.

I know but up until now they have done everything that people have said they wouldn't do like send a letter before claim so now i'm not so sure they won't take me to court

I thought someone on here said it was only the creditor that could take a debtor to court unless the debt has been purchased. It seems like the solicitor is doing this without the creditor knowing.

The ADR company that have Photo Studio Group as a member has said this :- Further to my email below and after liaising with the trader, they have confirmed the following: “We have never encountered it and have no communication from the client. He's being chased for an unpaid debt by a third party. He needs to contact us and go through our complaints process before we will consider ADR.” This is strange as the corresondance from AJJB Law and CRS say their client is the Photo studio Group but they don't seem to know anything about it. So what now?

I found a statement on a Facebbook page called "Modelling Information Service" that states Kube Studio (Renamed to The Photo Studio Group) is breaking the law because it is actually an employment agency and it is illegal for them to charge upfront. Maybe that would be a good defence? This is the quote:- Kube Studios - getting your money back: Kube Studios is one of those "agencies" which is using hard sell tactics to persuade models to pay the "agency" for photographs. In its feature on Kube Studios, the BBC's "Watchdog" programme repeated Kube Studios' claim that it is "not an agency". It also referred to the "contract" as being "non cancelable" (see posts below - re BBC). The "contract" as shown by the BBC bears the name "Fusion Photographic Studios Ltd T/A Kube Studios". That is confusing - as Kube Studios itself is a limited company Companies House https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08043958 Further to which, Fusion Photographic Studios Ltd no longer exists. On the 2nd April 2016 it change its name to: "Thomas Street Studios Ltd" (Companies House https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/.../043.../filing-history) The tactics being used are both a scam and illegal. As they are illegal this giving you the right to claim your money back - regardless of what the "agency" states (about "cancelling") in its "contract". The question is raised as to whether Kube Studios is an (employment) agency(?) Under the Employment Agencies Act 1973 (the Act), an employment agency is defined thus: "13(2) For the purposes of this Act " employment agency " means the business (whether or not carried on with a view to profit and whether or not carried on in conjunction with any other business) of providing services (whether by the provision of information or otherwise) for the purpose of finding persons employment with employers or of supplying employers with persons for employment by them." Among the services provided by Kube Studios is introducing work-seekers (models) to (other) agencies. That makes Kube Studios itself an employment agency. In addition to the Employment Agencies Act 1973, employment agencies are governed by the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003 (as amended) (the Conduct Regulations). The taking of photographs of work-seekers (models) is not a work-finding service, it is an additional (other service). Under the Conduct Regulations, it is a criminal offence for an employment agency to make the provision to work-seekers of the agency's work-finding services conditional on the work-seeker using any other services - whether these other services are provided by the employment agency or by any person with whom the employment agency is connected. In addition, where the service is the "production of a photographic image" of a work-seeker seeking employment as a fashion/photographic model (and/or actor etc) the employment agency is prohibited from charging the work-seeker a fee for 30 days from the date of the agency entering into the contract with the work-seeker (whether the contract is oral or written), during which time the work-seeker is entitled to withdraw from or cancel the contract without suffering detriment or penalty, and without being obliged to pay any fee to the agency. Both offences placing the "agency" in breach of the Conduct Regulations. Regulation 30 of the Conduct Regulations: "Civil liability 30. - (1) Without prejudice to - (a) any right of action; and (b) any defence, which exists or may be available apart from the provisions of the Act and these Regulations, contravention of, or failure to comply with, any of the provisions of the Act or of these Regulations by an agency or employment business shall, so far as it causes damage, be actionable." That is, because Kube Studiso has acted in breach of the Conduct Regulations, and the work-seekers (models) have suffered damage - the loss of money, they have a claim against Kube Studios. Because Kube Studios has acted in breach of the Conduct Regulations you are entitled - under Regulation 30 of the Conduct Regulations - to claim your money back (damages) from Kube Studios, it matters not what Kube Studios state in the "contract".

The ADR company said they would contact their member within a few days after my application is submitted so that will be well within the 30 days of the letter before action I looked at the PAPLOC for consumer credit act claims and the debt has not been purchased so I can't ask for a copy of the Notice of Assignment. also i'm not sure what to put for the dispute as the "recommended reason as advised from your thread"?