Forgive me if I seem a bit angry but I used to be a member here asking for advice on how to avoid a sanction from my JSA signing. I got what I thought was great advice at the time. I implemented that advice. I got sanctioned. Is there any way I can sue CAG for giving bad advice? Reading around the threads now with the "benefit" of hindsight, It seems that most site team and contributors are actually on ESA and divorced from reality and the world of work. If I'd realized this I wouldn't have followed their advice. I'm now left without money for 3 months. Thanks a lot. Do I have any recourse for suing you people? I guess if you actually knew what you were talking about then you wouldn't actually be on benefits to start with. My bad then. But you've really ****ed me over. Who can I sue for bad advice please?

Hi, thanks in advance for looking at my post. Basically, in 2006 I took out a buy now pay later deal through land of leather with creation. land of leather told me i would be contacted when i needed to start making payments but never did. after taking out this deal i went through a rough patch after having a prem baby and becoming a single parent in the space of a few months with no job and was extremely depressed and i forgot about the sofa payments. the next i heard i had court papers, i contacted creation to ask if i could start making the payments asap and they told me i had to pay the full amount plus the interest i would have been charged or they would register the ccj. i couldnt afford to do it and the ccj was registed and a charge was put on my house. anyway, the house is being sold, its meant to exchange next week. my solicitor has contacted creation for a balance and it is 5139.19!! the sofa originally cost 1495 and i took a 2 year warranty 240. on my credit file under creation it states 3639 and they have logged every month since 2006 sustained arrears. i contacted creation to ask why the balance is so high, they told me it was now with drydens. i called drydens, they told me the 5139.19 is the balance creation had sent to them and they had never added any fees and didnt have a breakdown. i recontacted creation and i was given the balance of 3638.55 and they told me any other fees must be drydens adding them. i am so confused and neither company is offering to help me or give me the information i need. i am about to lose my buyer. please help me

Debt management firms We have written to debt management firms recently. This follows an increase in customers with debt management plans being transferred between firms. In a letter to firms, we reminded them of their responsibilities when buying or selling customers' contracts or contact details. In particular, the letter emphasised the need for firms, which are considering selling on their customers, to advise the FCA of this at an early stage. A copy of the letter is available on our website.

I am hoping to a better response in this forum than the other forum I riginally posted in. In May 2005 we purchased cash a Blue Dorema all seasons awning suitable for a seasonal site with a one year guarantee from a dealership nearby. Three months later we had to have all the steel poles replaced. In December 2006 we had to send the awning back to the dealer for the stitching to be redone in places as the stitching was right on the edge and it did not take much for it to come apart. This was done free of charge as I quoted the Sale of Goods Act. Now 7 months down the line from the repair in February 2007, the same stitching has come apart again making it difficult to zip up the awning in the front. However more importantly just over two years from date of purchase the awning has gone from Blue to Green! We specifically chose Blue to match with the curtains etc. Our one neighbour who has the identical awning has also changed from Blue to Green a colour they specifically did not want. It is almost as if the manufacturer had a load of green canvas left over from a run which they then dyed blue which is why we have a green awning instead of a blue awning. Our other neighbour has a proper green awning and you cannot tell the difference in colour between the three awnings that is how bad it is. Do you think I have much of a chance pursuing this through the small claims court using the following arguments; a) Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale). b) Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description c) Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety. d) For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement). The dealer has already said no ways are they going to consider it therefore as I purchased from the dealer, I have to pursue any action through the dealer. I appreciate that it is up to me to prove non-conformity but I think that the awning which costs nearly £750 no longer conforms to the colour it was when purchased and neither does the workmanship stand up to conformity considering the price paid. I am not interested in getting a refund, but rather a repair free of charge or a replacement. What are your thoughts on this one? Thanks

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 is the biggest shake up in consumer rights law in a generation and seeks to simplify, strengthen and modernise UK consumer law. The act replaces three big pieces of consumer legislation - the Sale of Goods Act, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations and the Supply of Goods and Services Act. Which? has produced a guide to the main changes in consumer rights which came into effect on 1st October http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act#link-1

I have just seen on the news that a new Consumer Rights Act has come into force, is this replacing SOGA or are the two different things? Sorry for seeming bit dim! lol Sandy xx

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has launched enforcement action against Ryanair. This action follows a review by the regulator that found Ryanair is not complying fully with European consumer law designed to support passengers following flight disruption. Ryanair is now required to make policy changes or face the prospect of further enforcement steps leading to court action, if the airline remains non-compliant. The CAA has concluded that: • It is not satisfied that Ryanair is dealing with compensation claims for disruption caused by routine technical faults in line with applicable consumer law – this is despite the UK Court of Appeal (in the case of Jet2.com v Huzar) clarifying how such claims are to be treated and assurances given to the CAA by Ryanair; and, • Ryanair is attempting to impose a contractual two-year time limit, from the date of the flight, for passengers to issue compensation claims at court – despite previously publicly committing to a six year time limit and in spite of the UK Court of Appeal (Dawson v Thomson Airways) ruling that passengers have up to six years to issue such claims at court. Ryanair is now required to make policy changes or face the prospect of further enforcement steps leading to court action, if the airline remains non-compliant. https://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=14&pagetype=65&appid=7&mode=detail&nid=2484

I am not clear on some aspects of the regulations and placing a deposit on an item at a show where the business has a temporary stall i.e. NEC show. If we place a desposit for instance on a caravan and then change our minds later i.e. 10 days later, are we entitled to our full desposit back as the caravan has not been delivered and is not even built and we have paid over £100 deposit using a credit card? Secondly, if I place a deposit and the caravan is built and delivered to the dealership, but before I take delivery, there is a change in circumstances and we need to cancel the order, can we get back our deposit which will be over £100 and paid using a credit card? Just to add, we are not in either position at this time but would clarification on this aspect of the law. Thanks.

Inaccurate credit files If you believe your file contains inaccurate or out-of-date information, you can ask for it to be amended, under the Consumer Credit (Credit Reference Agency) Regulations 2000. Write to the agency giving your full name and address. It may also help to give your credit reference file number. Clearly explain what information you think is wrong and why. Provide any proof you have to show why the information is wrong. Keep a copy of any letters you send. By law the agency must tell you within 28 days of your letter if it has: • removed the entry from your file • amended the entry; or • taken no action If the entry is amended, the agency will send you a copy of the amended entry. The agency will also send the details to any lender that has searched your credit reference file in the last six months. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/291/made

hi guys, i have an existing £10k loan, with halifax taken out in 2004 with ppi, im doing the mis-sold route with a couple of arguments. i made a claim on ppi, and was told, no can do as i was dismissed. phoned to cancel PPi, told to take out new loan with no ppi, oooops! not working means no new loan. this was followed by them raiding my bank account of £65, now 11p overdrawn. this is the info on my loan agreement amount of credit (cash loan) 10,000 add total charge for credit (cash loan) 2,548.76 total i pay for cash loan 12,548.76 1+2 ppi loan ( cash price ppi) 2,364.76 add total charge for credit for ppi loan 602.96 total i pay for ppi loan 2,967.72 4+5 apr 6.5% loan 12,364.76 total charge for credit for loan 3,151.72 total i pay 15,516.48 monthly interest 0,511% arrangement fee (1% of loan and 1% ppi loan) already included in 2+5 HERE'S A GOOD ONE Your Right To Cancel 5days going to browse the spreadsheet templates to see how to work out sched of claim similar position with abbey for first my first loan although they have accepted my ppi claim on second loan. as before any comments or help feel free.

Morning All, Not totally sure if have posted in the correct place so apologies if not. Thought I'd share with you an extract from correspondence received direct from the FCA today: General information on the Consumer Credit Act Copy of credit agreement Under section 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act, a lender is required, at the request of a borrower, to provide a copy of the executed credit agreement and information in relation to outstanding amounts within the 12 working days of receiving the request. If the lender fails to comply with this request, it is not entitled to enforce the credit agreement until the request is fully complied with. While the credit agreement remains unenforceable, the lender is still entitled to take a number of actions, including demand repayment of the debt. To meet the requirements of these sections, the lender is not required to provide an exact copy, photocopy or microfiche copy of the signed original. This is reflected in the CCA which requires the copy of the credit agreement provided under sections 77 and 78 to be a “true copy”. Under the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983, a “true copy of the credit agreement may omit the signature and date of the credit agreement. The “true copy” of the executed credit agreement may be reconstituted from sources other than the actual signed credit agreement following Carey v HSBC [2009]. However, if the lender provides a reconstituted copy of the credit agreement, it should explain to the borrower that this is what it has done. The Purposes of these sections The purpose of sections 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is to provide a borrower with the relevant information about his or her contract, in particular the contract terms and the current state of the account. Parliament appears to have recognised that consumers may lose documentation, or may not keep clear records of payments, and may be unable to ascertain accurately what their contractual rights and obligations are, or how much has been paid and what is still owed. This is particularly important if there is a dispute over what is owed, or an alleged default. In those cases, preventing a creditor or owner from enforcing the contract until clarification is provided is an important and reasonable protection for the consumer. At the same time, it’s important to remember that the purpose of this legal provision is to provide information to the consumer; it is not to provide a method for consumers to avoid paying their debts. Unenforceability is merely the sanction where there is a continuing failure on the lender's part to provide the information.

Hi all, I made a big mistake and took out a Ladder Loans loan for £400. Two days later I awoke in a sweat and knew I needed to make good this awful error. I telephoned them and notified them of my intention to cancel under the CCA 1974. I paid the balance of £401.61 and asked them if it would be registered to the CRAs. They said it would, which I found hard to swallow. I have cancelled the credit agreement in the cooling-off period and believe they cannot record the loan with the CRAs. Am I right in thinking this? Also, they have emailed me confirming settlement of the loan, not cancellation of the credit agreement. Are they trying to pull a fast one here? Any help is gratefully received. Thanks.

This may be of some use to consumers when dealing with complaints made to their energy suppliers: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1898/contents/made

Hello, I was wondering if anyone knows if I can find a written statement anywhere that states that as a consumer, under UK law, I have a right to shop around for the best deal on goods and services. I have spent a couple of hours looking around online but cannot find a statement like this anywhere. Any help anyone can give would be very much appreciated Thanks in advance. Pickles18

Hi, I'm in the process of sorting out my debts, i've just paid one off fully as I had a CCJ attached to it so i'm down to 2. I'm going to try sort these 2 out 1 at a time, starting off first with this one. A while back I bought a TV from Richer Sounds, after splitting up with the ex I fell behind on payments until I eventually stopped doing so. Now I'm looking to get a mortgage in a few years time it's time I started cleaning up my debts/credit report. Here's the entry in Credit Manager: Creation Consumer Finance Ltd Account number: ******** Name: ******** Account address: ******** Date of birth: ******** Account type: Credit Sale Account status: Default Date last updated: 01/11/2013 Account opened: 21/04/2007 Account opening balance: £788 Regular Payment Amount: £29 Repayment frequency: Monthly Default date: 28/02/2011 Original default balance: £788 Now it says the default date was in 2011 however I'm certain I was never paying anything to them (nor did I acknowledge any debts to anybody over a few years), how would I go about getting this default date rectified? (In order to help getting it off my credit report sooner). I'm not trying to run away from it, I'll pay what I need to but first I want everything clear on what I owe so then I can set up some sort of plan. What would be the first step towards this? CCA first then take it from there or what? I also had this posted in another thread along with the other 2 debts (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?406740-3-different-debts. for reference), it was said that it probably will be enforceable however I may be able to claim extra charges etc back? If you need any further info don't hesitate to ask. And thanks in advance!

We will no longer be able to give advice or to comment on the Npower Nightmare Facebook group because we have been blocked. If you are a member of one of the other groups – Npower Boycott, Nasty Npower, Consumers Against NPower, etc and you see comments which are posted on this forum or in one of those groups and which you feel might be useful to the people who are on the Npower Nightmare Facebook group, then you might think to relay those comments to those people because we will be unable to do so directly. Some of you might also feel inclined to let the members of the Npower Nightmare Facebook group know that the Consumer Action Group has been blocked because I expect that most of them don't realise it. The way that the Npower Nightmare group is being conducted would almost lead you to believe that it is a shill group of Npower – but of course that is just being fanciful, isn't it?

Hello all, I'm brand new here, been passed to the forum by a friend at work who mentioned it would be a good place to get some advice. I'll try to be brief... On Wednesday 11 Feb last week, I purchased a car from a dealer based in East Kent. The car was advertised on EBay, with all the company details. Two things have happened since. I paid a £600 deposit for the car via Debit Card prior to picking it up. I visited the premises, was treated well, everything appeared on the surface totally above board. On Thursday 12th I drove the car home from Whitstable in Kent to East Sussex. I then drove back to Whitstable and home again the following day (for my working commute). No problems until I got approximately 5 miles from home where the car broke down. No drive in any gear, inspection discoverers the drive-shaft has shattered. I contact the seller to discuss, the salesman says on the phone he has no powers to make any decisions and only the owner of the business will respond, and this response will only be done via letter. Alarm bells start ringing. I have been totally calm and pleasant on the phone, as the salesman was to me, no point aggravating the situation at this point. I write a letter and post it to the owner at the business address via Special Delivery on Feb 13th. I the discover that the car is also CAT C written off by insurance. This really worries me. I have a slight problem with this issue though. The original advert on EBay for the car on the front page doesn't make any mention of the CAT C anywhere (I have taken screenshots and printed the advert off). However, on the EBay advert, there is a link to click on called "About". If I click on this it makes in small text a generic statement of the following: "Terms & Conditions *Terms & Conditions. All payments including holding fees are non-refundable. We make every effort to ensure all prices and vehicle details are correct. However, as these are used cars, the specification can sometimes differ from that displayed. Please satisfy yourself that a vehicle has a specific feature that’s important to you before purchasing – our staff will be more than happy to assist you. Prices, offers and details of vehicles are subject to change without notification. The vehicles offered for sale have been previously accident damaged and have been the subject of an insurance claim/s and categorisation/s at some point in its lifetime. Either; Category C-repairable total loss vehicle where the repair costs, including VAT exceed the vehicle’s pre-accident value or Category D- repairable total loss vehicle where the repair costs, including VAT do not exceed the vehicle’s pre-accident value. All cars where appropriate have been inspected independently by VOSA and have a VIC test completed to their satisfaction. Vehicles are offered with a new 12 month MOT when arriving into stock, therefore may not have a full MOT on purchase/collection.*Please see our full terms and conditions at the office. " I feel I may have made a fatal mistake in missing this statement. However, I would really appreciate some advice on where I may stand as I feel the behavior of such an advert and the staff not making any attempt at all during face to face meeting to state what I am buying. The advert doesn't mention in the primary text anything about the car being specifically CAT C The only mention of CAT C/CAT D is in a generic message under the "About" section The staff made no effort to ever mention anything about the car being CAT C The car broke down on the way home - can I use this to return the vehicle for a refund? Many thanks to anyone able to offer any help / advice. Dale

CAG Flyer A4 CAG Flyer A4.pdf CAG Flyer A5 CAG Flyer A5.pdf

Hello This is just a little warning for anyone searching for information on the following three companies.harrington jones limited, cobley johnson partners ( cjp) and consumer claims ( consumer-claims dot com) They are all sening letters to people fishing for work, they are not including their fees and cleaverly miss out vital pieces of paper work where these fees are contained Do not sign any letters of authority from any of these companies hopefully people searching will see this and be warned.

They sold me a membership over the phone based on a lie in that I could save 4% off e.g. my Morrisons bill by presenting the card at check out. In fact I have to apply to Morrisons with my membership number and buy a £10 coupon for £9.60 and take that to Morrisons. Far too much trouble. They also acknowledged that they could not arrange for any of my utility bills to be cheaper. I demanded my money back but they point blank refused and told me to wait for 1 year so that they would have the chance to prove themselves. No further contact and they, one year later, are refusing to reply to any communications. It is now too late to claim back from my debit card. This is, no doubt, intentional. Avoid like the plague. They operate an American style [edited]. Any comments you read on this forum will be produced by themselves!!! Have reported them to both my local Trading Standards and their local Manchester Trading Standards office. They will, in my opinion, simply fold when the business model becomes untenable.

Has anyone had any dealings with consumer care direct that they are prepared to share?

Hi all, It is a bit of a long story so please forgive me if I paste what I sent to trading standards. If you can answer the questions I ask in the following email I sent then that would be very much appreciated... Hello, I have been having a problem with a company that I bought a £690 Gaming PC from. I bought a PC from this company for my brother who has severe depression. It was to help him as he never leaves the house. It was to enable him to play online games with other people. I went to see my brother 10 months after purchasing the PC and ask him how it is and he informs me it has never been any good. I did ask why he did not tell me sooner and the fact is it made him more depressed and he doesn't like confrontation. I realize that this would be classed as accepting the goods but I read on the citizens advice site that there would still be a case for the PC not lasting as long as it should. It was even still under warranty. I contact the company and they tell me I have to ship it to them but I will be liable for damage. I then decided to do a 5 hour round trip to drop it off to them in person to avoid any damage. Fast forward a few weeks later... They email me saying the cannot find a fault with it. I reply telling them which games it was struggling to run (I gave them a list) and I offered them my password to an account which had all the games on so they could test them on my PC as the repair place may not have these games to hand. They replied saying they would test the games and never asked for the password. Weeks pass without any update so I contact them. They say no faults. I ask if they have been testing those games. They say yes they have been testing them all this time and no faults were found. In the end they take over 2 months claiming they were testing my PC. They finally send it back and when it arrives it turns out they didn't even screw the side panel to the PC. Not exactly a good way to ship a near £700 PC. The side panel had bent considerably in transit and was dented. The CD drive also wasn't even connected to the power supply. They simply chucked my PC into a box without it being fully assembled. I phone them up to complain and they insist they screwed the side panel on before dispatching it. There is no way that could have come loose in transit. They say the screws must be in the box to prove this.. You guessed it there were no screws. I have witnesses who saw me open the box. This was the first lie I was told by this company. I complain and they say a new side panel will be with me shortly. I contact them 12 days later asking where it is and they tell me they don't know. I ask for the companies contact details who they ordered it from as I highly suspected they hadn't even ordered it to begin with. They ignore my request and say they will chase it up. Miraculously the side panel is then due to be with me one day later. After this I sat down and went through over 40 emails between me and the company as I knew something wasn't right. No PC company keeps a PC and tests it non stop for 2 months if they think it doesn't have a fault. It would be a huge waste of time and money. I remembered the email I sent them about halfway through the time of it being in their possession which I described above somewhere. It was the one where I asked if they had tested the list of games I had given them. They replied "Yes, they have been running all this time". Now I knew something was fishy here so I emailed them yesterday asking them to confirm what games they had tested on my PC. They replied Battlefield 4. The problem with this is that Battlefield 4 was not on my original list and that is just one game and not GAMES as they told me they had been testing. Seeing as they lied and they were not actually testing my games all that time then they could not have been testing anything. They only mentioned Battlefield 4 towards the end of the 2 months it was in their possession. When I received the PC there was no evidence of Battlefield 4 ever being on my system and the case of the PC was extremely dusty like it had just been left sitting in the corner or in storage. I check my games to see if they had been run and they hadn't. As you can see they have lied to me twice so far! Another concern I have is that in one of their emails to me they say the PC must just be full up with data and to give it a format. The problem here is the PC was still in their possession and this is a very simple thing to check for. As they were meant to be testing and repairing my PC they should obviously have known this. It was about 2 months in when they said this to me. This to me suggests that they had never actually tested the PC as they would have known that it was a freshly formatted hard drive with a fresh copy of Windows on. It has now been 3 months and 1 day and I still cannot use my PC as it is dangerous to do so without the side panel. It was in their possession for just over 2 months and has been in mine without a side panel since. The questions I need you guys to answer are: 1) Do I have a right to seek compensation for loss of use caused by a significant inconvenience caused by this company. They obviously were not testing the PC all that time and I have emails showing they were lying. 2) Seeing as I have already suffered a significant inconvenience do I have the right to reject another long repair? I read on the citizens advice site that I can reject a repair or replacement if it would cause me a significant inconvenience. Surely the 3 months so far are of significant inconvenience enough to reject another repair and ask for a replacement PC instead? I did ask them this and they said they will not replace the PC and that seeing as it has been more than 6 months the law allows them to replace parts inside with second hand ones. .. is this correct? From what I have read I can request a repair or replacement up to 6 years after purchase. Do you think I have reasonable grounds here to request compensation due to the loss of use for 3 months and also the depreciation of the goods? I have asked for a partial refund and they can take the PC back but they refuse. They keep insisting they will repair it and say they can do so with second hand parts. I have no idea why they mentioned second hand parts other than to scare me as I never asked if the parts would be new or not. This time they have said they will send the parts back to the manufacturers which can takes months. Surely they should have done this during the 3 months I have waited so far?? Surely I can refuse them to take away the PC for months on end again when they lied to me and didn't test it all that time the first time around and caused me a significant inconvenience and loss of use and ask for a replacement? Surely I can ask for compensation due to the lies of which I have proof which caused the long delays as well as the negligence when they didn't bother to even assemble the PC before sending it back to me which ended up causing another 2 week delay on top of the months they had it? I still have all the emails between me and the company as proof. I also have the photos of the PC from when I received it back damaged. I also have witnesses from when I opened the box. Also is there any way I can request from the company they ordered the side panel from the order date of the side panel? Going by past performance and how it miraculously is turning up one day after my phone call when the same morning they informed me they didn't know how long it would be suggests to me they did not order it nearly two weeks ago like they said in an email to me. If I could get proof of this that would be lie number 3. Sorry for the long explanation. I actually tried to keep it as brief as possible. I would appreciate any help you can offer on this matter. I did go to the citizens advice building but they seemed to know less than I did about their own website. I went in there quoting stuff from their site and they disagreed with it until I told them it was on their site which they then changed their mind and agreed with me. I assume you guys are experts in consumer law so it would be great if you could clear this up for me. I do not mind putting my complaint in writing to them which will include my compensation request. If that fails I do not mind going to the small claims court seeing as I have evidence of them lying on more than one occasion to their customer which surely would not look good on their part. Do you think I have a case here?

Hi, I've had a look through the sub-forum lists and think this looks like the best place for me to post. Forgive me if this is incorrect and please move this thread to somewhere more suitable if that is the case. I am a self-employed personal trainer and have signed a contract with a company (call it X) whereby they allow me to sell my training services in a gym (Y) that is part of a gym chain (Z) in exchange for a monthly fee from myself. This is a minimum 6 month contract. Part of this contract states as one of the responsibilities of X that there will be no more than 1 personal trainer per 600 members in gym Y. There are less than 1000 members and I am actually the only trainer in a contract with X that is in gym Y. However, gym chain Z provides it's members with free 30 minute, 1-1 sessions with an employee of any of it's gyms including health checks, nutrition advice, motivation and a training programme. In gym Y I have watched those employees deliver these sessions and then book those clients in again for their next session later in the week. As far as I am concerned (and also the gym members I would assume), those sessions ARE personal training sessions. They are also advertised online on the membership benefits webpage as "Free 1-1 personal training sessions". The director of X has been dismissing my complaints of this activity stating "that is not personal training". So after detailing that long story (sorry) I have two questions: -Is it within my rights to terminate this contract on the grounds of a breach on the behalf of X as the ratio of personal trainers to gym members is more than they stated? - Would I be considered a consumer or a business in this contract? I signed it at home before sending it off and have signed it as myself (I have a LTD business but did not sign the contract under the name of the LTD business and the contract states my person as the 'licensee'). My reasoning behind the second question is that I have found some information regarding a cooling off period of 14 days as a consumer; the contract went live on July 1st and I have received an email from the director of X today (7th July) saying that he will get back to me in 7 days (I asked what my next steps would be to terminate the contract). I am wondering if I can simply step out of the contract right now under the cooling off period clause before this gets into a terminology war of what is and isn't "personal training". Thanks in advance. Reise

Hi All, Me, my Husband and daughter(18) rented three storage "garages" from a storage company three years ago. In February 2014 they had problems with leaky roof which caused damage to daughter's stuff in her garage, which they never compensated for saying beyond their control as rain is an act of God (????). They put the charges up this year (contract to run April 14 - March 15) which we weren't prepared to pay as they still haven't repaired the roof. We therefore gave a month notice and removed our stuff on the 25th April. On the 2nd of May they then issued three invoices, mine & husband's storage fee for 1st to 25th April at double the previous rate and daughter's at three times the rate! I recalculated at previous rate and paid on the 17th May. They weren't happy with this and sent me emails threatening court, I stated that charging double/treble amount not reasonable under Supply of Goods and Services act, and charging more to cover loss of profit for loss of custom not fair under Unfair Terms and Conditions in Consumer Contract Regs 1999. They have now made a claim using MCOL for the rest of money on all three invoices - but only showing Daughter and Husband as defendants not me! I think this is as they know that husband and daughter are not as hot as me on consumer rights - and don't have as much fire in their bellies, plus both work full time whereas I have time for research! Can anyone give me advice - I believe I have a relevant defence but I'm not trained so can't become the family's legal representative. If I go I won't be able to say anything as not a defendant - can I become a defendant??? Help! - and thanks in advance for any knowledge

Hello Fellow Caggers, So after 3 years of fighting etc, I finally get to the bottom of yet another "Payday Loan Debt" where they haven't done the proper checks to determine that the account was fraudulent when i was out of the country and some F***** decided to go play hell on my credit file. This time its Payday UK who have informed me 2 successful loans were taken out in my name, (Oh joy) One was paid back the next wasnt and left me with a £562 debt which has been reduced to just short of £450. Ive complained , clawed and everything to prove my point but its another one of these situations . Anyhow for your amusement they end the letter as follows; I just want to laugh at this and I actually do genuinely give up[ trying to prove it wasnt me.