Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'challenge'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - you need to register to access the CAG library
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 45 results

  1. Hi Wondered - I recieved a parking ticket on 16th July and challenged it the same day. I had heard nothing from local authority so emailed them to check they had received it. I received a response 3 days later saying they had a backlog and challenge will nont be addressed for another 2/3 weeks. Is there a time limit for them to respond to a PCN challenge?
  2. Hi All, Looking for a some advice regarding the following situation, i've bullet pointed to make it easier to read: I recieved a claim form from County Court Business Centre, Northampton with an issue date 6th April 2018 and claimant was Shoosmiths LLP, amount being £657.02 Claims form stated day of service is taken as 5 days after issue date which would be 11th April and giving 14 days from then to respond (25th April). I agreed to debt and completed form N9A (admission form) and returned to Shoosmiths (as the County Court Form advised) with my offer of payment. I sent this form to them on 21st April first class and obtained proof of posting. On Saturday i recieved a Judgement for Claimant form dated 26th April. I contacted Shoosmiths who said they did not recieve my N9A form until 26th April and as such judgement was correct (it appears they are willing to accept offer of payment though). Spoke with Court and nice lady there did agree that she was surprised they are saying they did not recieve form until 26th April as it was sent first class but there was little to be done other that dispute judgement. This will cost £250 with no G'tee of success. So questions: Is it worth disputing for £250 and if i win can i claim that £250 back? Should i just role with judgement, contact Shoosmiths with offers of payment and then once paid get a certificate of satisfaction from court after that date? Look forward to thoughts on this.
  3. I have received a NIP for for going 39 in a 30 zone, but im 99% sure i was only going around 34 or 35... Is it possible to challenge the Camera? IE. Its not functioning properly?
  4. The property has always been let to tenants using a letting agent. Local authority are always informed of tenants who rent the property. The tenants are always instructed to register for council tax and household utilities. Between 2015 – 2016, the property was let to a tenant who was in receipt of both housing benefit and council benefit. I’ve since found out that the local authority have managed to obtain liability orders and a charging order for non-payment of council tax for the same period, between 2015 - 2016. If the outstanding £1,600 council tax arrears are not paid then the local authority will force the sale of the property. This does not seem fair or correct. The local authority refuse to speak to me directly. I have asked the local authority to show me that they followed the correct process. I have also made an identity theft report to the police because the local authority have associated my name to properties which I have never lived at or have no knowledge of.
  5. When we have a question about something that comes into our minds, we can often find the answers just by searching using Google etc. Lets see what answers we can get without an internet search. First question. Why on the same stretch of coastline, can you find one beach that is mostly sandy and within a few miles find one that is mostly pebbles ? E.g parts of Cornwall, Dorset. I don't know the answer, but my guess is that it is to do with underwater geology and general terrain. E.g if you have lots of rocks under the water near a beach, then it will be mostly sand that is deposited on a beach. If you have few rocks under the water so no natural barrier, then the force of the water will deposit larger debris including pebbles onto a beach.
  6. Hi folks, long time no posts. Been very ill with long term major depressive disorder amongst other things. The story. Was long term sick from civil service, put onto half pay which was paid by SSP from November 2015 to may 2016. During same period was 'single' as ex wife upped and left because of my sickness in 2015 (nice of her to support me) Applied for single person CT relief and was granted, although there was part of a joint bill still outstanding that i owed. Nobody to advise whether i could claim full relief/benefit due to being on SSP for that 6 month period. Didn't make any claim, couldn't cope with life. My head was well and truly gone. My mental health took a turn for the worse and i was off work for a further six month period where i had zero pay, no SSP but managed to keep myself housed and fed by borrowing from family and friends to pay rent and ate basic food; all whilst i was dealing with a legal issue regarding my early ill retirement issue with legal assistance from union. During the zero pay period i had claimed ESA although only received payment for about a moth before it stopped. I didn't know why it stopped; the guy at the hub said i was getting it. My mental health was bad and i just went along in my own crazy little world, out of it on my meds for chronic pain and depression. Didn't care, was suicidal and in self destruct mode in many ways. Eventually i got pensioned off in November 2016. Lump sum paid into bank and approx 1k monthly ill health pension is being paid every month. I had 20 years service with civil service dept before retirement. So, still away with the fairies, still very sick and still on the happy pills i had cash in the bank and some income coming in to eat and pay rent whilst i find a cheap house in the auction to live in without a mortgage by using my lump sum to buy a small house outright. I was financially able to pay back friends and family so paid them asap as the relationships were starting to get strained. I didnt want to lose the only friends i have, being chronically depressed you need some support and life is lonely enough as it is. Out of the blue last week get a letter from ESA that i was to be put on contribution based ESA from November last year which was to be back dated and they also paid a back dated sum for all the payments they didn't give me that were due from June last year until last week. This has been now been swallowed up in other debt payments. No explanation as to why i wasn't paid Now i have some pension money in the bank for a house, a letter that says i am and was entitled to ESA from May 2016. During this time i did not pay council tax, couldn't pay it as i had no money coming in. I had previously wrote to the council and told them of my woes although i cant recall ever making a claim for benefit using an official form. I had told a council guy on the phone once that i was getting ESA because of zero income. Then i had a note from Swift so i sent them the report from my consultant, a vulnerability notice that i had got from another bailiff over unpaid speeding fines (another long story) together with an updated report from my doctor, which cost me money. Now Swift have been chasing me for council tax from 2016-2017, after i sent them the forms and consultants report i heard nothing until they turned up yesterday. Arrogant young kid, i had taken my meds so he was lucky i didn't take his head off and shove his recording device camera up his jacksy!! I have these turns where i lose control when under any kind of pressure from perceived authority figures. At 140kg and 35 years in martial arts and a champion boxer in my youth the community psychiatric team have their concerns although i manage well with my meds. Anyway......................... I paid the outstanding bill from when my ex wife and i were together. I kept the Swift kid outside event though he asked to come in. No warrant no entry. He added on a fee to what i had owed in council tax and i took that one on the chin. I told him that i disputed the other outstanding amount because: A. I was entitled to single person discount during the chargeable period that they say i owe. B. I was claiming SSP and then ESA for the whole of that chargeable period and should have had some reduction C. I am vulnerable and have little in the way of support. He says he will come back in 2 weeks after i contact the council. I have written to them via email and they have not yet replied. This Swift goon was talking about £1800+ no way i owe that!!! I can and will pay what i truly owe in CT out of my pension lump sum, however i don't agree with paying any charges, paying any more than i was supposed to pay bearing in mind that i was on SSP and ESA at the relevant time. In any case i don't want these people at my door, it sets me off, the hairs go up on the back of my neck and i don't want to hurt anyone, don't want to get locked up so that's why i keep away from conflict as much as possible. I have sent them my vulnerability and psychologists reports previously. I never called their office because i was so wound up, in any case experience tells me that i will get nowhere with the call centre staff as they are mostly buffoons and scoundrels that try and hoodwink people into paying as they are also on 'commission'. I would have ended up getting even more angry and that doesn't help. My head went after he had gone and i had another mini breakdown. Got the knives out of the cupboards etc. Was supposed to go to my brothers wedding today but cant face the world so cancelled at last minute Will i get anywhere with this battle? I have read numerous threads here that state that once its gone from the council to the Bailiffs then it is out of the councils hands. I don't agree with this as the bailiffs are collecting on behalf of the council and are therefore 'agents' of the council under contract. Regardless of my point of view on the matter, how can they (Bailiffs) try and extort an alleged debt (CT) that i don't actually owe (based on the fact that during the relevant chargeable period i was sick, claiming SSP and ESA with zero income) Long story, bad situation for me. I don't want to evade my liability, however i also don't want to pay that which i don't actually owe! Especially to scoundrels like Swift, sending out these young athletic steoid type men trying to intimidate and hoodwink people. Any advice welcome. Thanks
  7. A group of disabled people have lost a court challenge to cuts in social housing benefit for residents with spare bedrooms in England, Wales and Scotland. The High Court said the policy, dubbed a "bedroom tax" by critics, was not unlawfully discriminatory. But it criticised the government for failing to follow a 2012 ruling that said housing benefit should not be cut where disabled children were involved. The group said they would appeal. Since April, people deemed to have one spare bedroom have had their housing benefit reduced by 14% while those with two or more spare bedrooms have seen reductions of 25%. Lawyers for 10 families, which include disabled adults or children, challenged the changes during a three-day hearing in May. Their lawyers argued the benefit cuts hit them disproportionately hard and were therefore discriminatory. Some argued that the additional bedrooms were needed for medical equipment or, in the case of some of the children, because behavioural problems made it impossible to share a room. The High Court ruled that applying the cap to disabled people was based on "a reasonable foundation" and its effects had been "properly considered". It said, however, said the government had been too slow to introduce new regulations prohibiting reductions in housing benefit where an extra bedroom was required for disabled children who were unable to share. Judge Lord Justice Laws said the Department for Work and Pensions was obliged to follow an appeal court ruling and must now do so "very speedily". The government said the new regulations would be introduced this autumn. It also said it had already provided £150m to councils to make discretionary payments to those affected by its changes to welfare payments, and announced that it would bolster the fund for those affected by housing benefit changes by £35m. More: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23503095
  8. Has anybody at any stage challenged the Sale of Debts to a DCA, if the seller is prepared to sell a debt at a specific price why should the debtor not be offered to buy the debt at this price first???? I am aware most debts are sold in bulk and that there are different layers involved such as a debt being sold where payments are being made ,then another example debts sold where no payments have been made for a period of time they attract different selling prices,JUST A THOUGHT FS
  9. The appointment of a receiver(s) can be effectively challenged by scrutinising the terms and conditions of the mortgage and the contents and form of letter or deed of appointment. The appointment document must be executed in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions, which may include any or all of the following: The Law of Property Act 1925 s109(1) – Must be under ‘his’ hand The Companies Act 2006 s44 – Execution of documents - Hilmi & Associates Ltd v 20 Pembridge Villas Freehold Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 31 The Law of Property Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1989 s1 – If made by deed of appointment, although even if the appointment is not affective as a deed it may still be affective as ‘under his hand’ In practice this means that the letter of appointment must be signed in accordance the Companies Act 2006 s.44 and be signed either by: Two authorised signatories A director in the presence of a witness, who attests the signature By a person authorise to execute documents on behalf of the company under a power of attorney , in accordance the Power of Attorney Act 1971 If the letter of appointment is not properly executed the appointment is void and the ‘lender’ and any receiver(s) acting under the appointment are liable for damages. The next thing to check is whether the appointment is in accordance with the mortgage deed, for example if the appointment document appoints two receivers to act jointly and severally, but the mortgage only allows for the appointment of one or more receivers and does not stipulate that they may act jointly and severally then the appointment is deemed ineffective and void. The principle that the Lender is obliged to appoint receivers in accordance with the Mortgage is accepted and applied by the courts throughout the common law world. The Bank purports to appoint Receiver(s) without the aid of the courts in pursuant to its contractual rights under the Mortgage with the Receiver's authority being derived directly from the Mortgage. Therefore the receiver has to be appointed in strict compliance with the terms of the contract between the parties (mortgagee and the mortgagor). Since the receiver's authority is derived from the mortgage under which he is appointed, an appointment is not valid unless it is made in accordance with the terms of that mortgage. This principle has been recognised by the leading commentators (Receivers and Administrators, Kerr & Hunter; and The Law of Private Companies (3rd Ed, Courtney). Lynch-Fannon Corporate Insolvency and Rescue (2nd ed.) has noted that "the penalty for non-compliance with the formalities for the appointment of the receiver is that such appointment is void". She also observed that non-compliance with formalities of appointment amounts to an abuse of process. In Wrights Hardware v. Evans (1988) 13 A.C.L.R. 631 the Supreme Court of Western Australia, the deed of charge authorised the Chargee under clause 4.3 to “appoint in writing any person to be a receiver or receiver and manager ... of the mortgaged premises" and under clause 4.4 "in addition ... appoint in writing any person to be an additional receiver or receiver manager" who had “full powers and authority to exercise all or any part of the powers expressed to be conferred on a receiver appointed...". The Chargee had in fact appointed the defendants “jointly and severally to be receivers and managers" of the plaintiff. The plaintiff sought interlocutory relief restraining the defendants from acting as receivers and managers on the basis that the appointment was invalid, there being no power in the charge to appoint receivers and managers jointly and severally. The defendant argued that the proper construction of the charge authorised the appointment of joint and several receivers and managers or, in the alternative, the appointment was nevertheless valid insofar as it authorised the defendants to act jointly. The Supreme Court of Western Australia held that the relevant clauses could not have the meaning contended for by the defendants and granted the injunction. Franklyn J. emphasised the importance that the terms of the debenture be complied with by stating: "I am satisfied that the relevant law applying to the appointment of a receiver or receiver and manager, and receivers or receivers and managers pursuant to the charge is as follows: 1. The manner in which a receiver is to be appointed is prescribed by the debenture deed, in this case the charge, and must be strictly followed…” I am aware that many mortgagees are appointing two receivers to act jointly and severally, when in fact the terms of the mortgage do not permit the appointment of receivers to act jointly and severally; any such appointment is void. If the receivers appointment is void, then the receiver(s) are trespassers and liable to damages for trespassers and if they have sold your property they are liable for conversion and/or trespass with conversion. The lender may also be vicariously liable for trespassers and conversion, and liable for breach of contract. Even if the letter of appointment is valid, receive(s) will routinely act outside of the scope of their powers, and as such commit acts of trespass. Unless the power of the receiver(s) are extended by the terms of the mortgage, the extent of the powers of the receiver(s) are limited to those derived from the LPA 1925 s.109(3) – (8). This means that unless the powers of the receiver(s) have been extended the receiver(s) may not: Grant tenancies, or leases Accept the surrender of tenancies or leases Bring possession proceedings unless it is in relation to rent Market or sell the property Although under s109(3) mortgagee may delegate powers to the receiver(s), on my reading, the mortgagee can only delegate its own powers to the receivers and cannot delegate the powers of the mortgagees and this would make the receiver the agent of the mortgagee. So unless the receiver(s) powers have been extended by the terms of the mortgage the extent of the receiver’s powers as the agent of the mortgagor are limited to those stipulated in the LPA 1925 s.109(3) – (8). If the receiver(s) exercise any power that is delegated by the mortgagee, then the receiver becomes the agent of the mortgagee, and the mortgagee becomes a mortgagee in possession.
  10. Hi I am sure plenty of members are aware of Labours National Executive Committees (NEC)decision to bar all members who joined in the last 6 months (100,000 people approximately) from voting in the new leadership race? That is unless you pay a £25.00 membership fee within the next two days? The questions I would like to pose are, a)Is it illegal to, retrospectively, change the constitution/rules to deny the’ new’ labour party members a chance to vote? b) How much would it cost to mount a legal challenge against their decision? c) Would the new Labour party members be willing to pay an extra couple of quid to finance the challenge ?( here is my £2) d) Would anyone from CAG be able to assist in setting up a secure holding account etc etc if required? Now whether it’s Mark Twain, “If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it.” Or Ken Livingston’s twist on it (I think?) “If voting made any difference they would ban it.” Both quotes and the labour parties NEC decision give me grave concern in this world of “open and transparent democracy”. Regards Biff
  11. Foxtons is facing an £80m “class action” lawsuit that if successful could force the giant estate agency to pay back hundreds of pounds in fees and charges to every tenant who has rented a property from them. Michael Green, whose law firm CaseHub is behind the group action, has obtained legal opinions from senior barristers that Foxtons’ fees – such as a £420 adminstration charge, £300 for name changes and £165 for checking out a property – could be illegal under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, and its successor the 2015 Consumer Rights Act. Green estimates that the real cost for administration and references should be around £55, and a renewal fee should be no more than £10. But if the claim is successful, Green says it will not just be tenants of Foxtons that will benefit, but millions more people as all letting agency fees charged to tenants could be challenged. In total, he estimates that tenants in England and Wales pay moe than £300m a year in fees to letting agents and could potentially claw back £2bn paid over the previous six years. https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/jun/25/foxtons-fees-80m-lawsuit-tenants-legal-fight
  12. Need guidance: Purchased the following three days ago, from a store: http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/phones-broadband-and-sat-nav/broadband/mobile-broadband/ee-osprey-2-mini-pay-monthly-mobile-wifi-10132535-pdt.html Personal Hotspot Device - £9.99 + 30 day (rolling) data contract (I choose the 32gb tarrif - £28pm). At purchase - I had to put my debit card in the pay machine to pay twice - 1st - £9.99 for the device, 2nd - for the 30 day rolling data contract validation (£5). I've been using both for the last three days (The device box & the separate data sim were both sealed when we left the store). I opened and used both. I want to return and get a refund for the device + as much as possible for the contract. I have friends that have warned me 'not to trust this high street retailer - and to understand that they 'game' customers to avoid refunds as much as possible'. What are my consumer rights - and how should I approach this to get back as much as possible? My sincere thanks to any and all that help and contribute. Libertas
  13. I have a historic debt with Welcome Finance which, after a prolonged period of time, has gotten back in touch with me. Having read a few posts on this site, I think there may be a few options I can look into with regard to possibly reducing the balance on this debt. There is quite a long story here, so let me explain as best I can.... 18 Aug 2001: Purchased 2nd hand car from Direct Car Finance. Finance provided by Welcome Finance. No PPI. Shortfall Insurance also taken out for full loan term. Breakdown and recovery insurances also taken out, not for full term. Loan repaid erratically. ?? May 2002: Car stolen and not recovered, motor insurance paid out for a total loss. Shortfall insurance also paid out. Both lots of money went to Welcome against loan balance. Loan continued to be repaid erratically. April 2003: I signed a new loan agreement to enable the balance to be used to pay off the car loan, which now had no security as the vehicle was stolen and I was left with an unsecured loan to pay off. I have in my possession a full list of transactions on my account from inception to this date. Jul 2005: After once again falling behind with my payments, I signed another new loan agreement. If i recall correctly this was to allow me to reduce my payments by taking the balance over a longer term. May 06: Last payment to Welcome I have a record of. Jan 2007: Moved house, lost contact with Welcome, heard nothing from them until March 2010 when a letter from Willen arrived. I have my copies of the Aug 01 and Jul 05 agreements. I also have a large number of cash receipts from payments I have made, probably most but definitely not all of them. I have the vast majority of correspondence from them. I have read reports of some people having success in defeating Welcome due to incorrect clauses in the Credit Agreements. The two agreements I have clearly state that PPI is not a part of the agreement, and I think it is extremely unlikely I have it on the 3rd agreement. It is over 6 years since my last payment to Welcome, if my final receipt is indeed the final one. My frustrations are two-fold. Firstly, despite a large total amount of money being paid to Welcome by me, and additional payments from the motor insurer and the shortfall insurance company, I still owe over £2000. Secondly, Welcome were a rude and scary company to deal with, to the extent that I had cause to place a written complaint with witnesses to them regarding a DPA breach in 2004. To be totally honest, I am sick of this having been a millstone around my neck for over a decade now and am looking for any way I can to reduce / clear the balance, perhaps with reference to the original agreements, charges applied, statute of limitations, etc. The end-game I am looking for is where this shows as fully settled and satisfied on my credit file, and I am prepared to negotiate some sort of settlement to achieve this if I have to, but would like to explore all the options. I have scanned and uploaded copies of my loan docs, but unfortunately cant attach the link due to a low post count. Thanks in advance for any help anyone can offer. I am just a bit confused as to what my options might be....
  14. Hello, First post so here goes. I am about to challenge the validity of a default notice issued to me by OUSBA dated 4 Jul 2014 (which was a Friday). The date for remedy on the DN was the 18th July 2014. Assuming they used first class post then this does not give me the clear 14 days as required. The correct date should have been the 22 July. Am I correct? I have also received a letter stating on the 25th July 2014, that the agreement was terminated in accordance with CCA. So, my challenge is, is the DN valid? Equifax are also displaying incorrect info. They have the date of default as the 25 July 2014, which is incorrect. The default date should have been the 22 July 2014. They are also displaying the amount in default as 325 which is incorrect. It should be £323.49. Do you think I have reason for this to be removed?
  15. I have been trying without success to challenge a Lloyd's bank default from 2010. After 2 years of letters Lloyds have finally replied and told me they didn't actually send me a default notice but its all ok as they sent a solicitors letter instead . This seems off to me and i smell a large rat They also sent me a cheque for £50 as a gesture of goodwill !! Any advice on the next steps ? The debt is fully repaid and just trying to clear my CRA file thanks
  16. Hi I have payday loans with the above dating back to 2012 and despite Being in a IVA at the time I was accepted for the loans which were rolled over numerous times. I hold my hand up and should never have taken these out but I feel they did not carry out correct checks which would have shown I am in a IVA. They were not willing to accept payment plans which then resulted in the debts growing. I have managed to get 3 other pay day loans written off. QQ is highest at £1,900 from a loan of £400. Does anyone know if I can get these written Off? QQ confirmed my account is not one of the recent 4000 due for refund and confirmed my account is at bankruptcy status not sure what they mean by that as I am already in a IVA. Any advice appreciated.
  17. Hi Just after some good advice if anyone can help. I received a PCN about 2 weeks ago for parking in a street with temporary restrictions. The town is Tenby in SW Wales and an Ironman event was going on. I challenged the PCN on the basis that to me, there appeared to be no restrictions in place where I parked. There were no yellow lines anywhere near my vehicle and although there were temporary yellow signs strapped to lampposts, the nearest one was around 50 yards from my car and I was not between any of them. I took photos and supplied them with my challenge. The challenge has been rejected. Have I got any grounds to appeal this? Its only a £35 fine if I pay within about 2 weeks. An extract from the challenge rejection letter says: "I note from your letter you say you had ensured you had parked where there were no restrictions. I also note you say you di not park on yellow lines. I also note you say the nearest sign showing a restriction was 50 yards away. However, the restriction was clearly shown throughout the area, (please see attached photograph). It is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that they check for signage and are aware of restrictions before leaving their vehicle. Unfortunately your reasons are therefore not accepted as grounds for cancellation of the Penalty Charge Notice." The photo that they have sent me is attached. The vehicle in the photo is not mine and this sign must have been at least 50 yards from my car.
  18. "A daughter whose late mother left her whole estate to animal charities has won a six-figure payout in a decision legal experts have said could make wills more open to challenge. Heather Ilott has been awarded £164,000 by the Court of Appeal following a lengthy legal battle after she was initially left nothing by her mother M elita Jackson, who died in July 2004 at 70. Mrs Jackson wished her net estate of around £486,000 to be split between The Blue Cross, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, with no provision for her only child. The pair had been estranged for 26 years and several attempts at reconciliation had failed, the court heard. The appeal judges ruled in Mrs Ilott's favour, stating her income was "not reasonable" for her maintenance and future, as she was on benefits and had no pension. Mrs Jackson had "no connection" with the charities during her lifetime, they added. She was awarded £143,000 to buy her rented home from a housing association and a further £20,000 in cash as "additional income". https://uk.news.yahoo.com/disinherited-daughter-payout-paves-way-wills-challenge-045135134.html#McbnMvP
  19. Hi, In 2014, I filed tax returns for 2008/09, 2009/10, 2010/11, 2011/12 and 2012/13.... Yep, I know I was stupid but at least I'm clearing my conscience and paying them every last penny (last £30k to pay in a few days time through family loans and selling a property). On a self declared basis, I owed them £38,000, now £48,000 with charges for late filing. Until I filed, they had no idea how much I might owe them, they never sent any estimates etc, just letters saying I needed to file. They seem happy that the amount I've filed for (done by an accountant on my behalf). I was told that as the amount owed is a "declared amount" I can't "negotiate" any of the charges. Does anyone know if any of the charges can be challenged and if so on what basis? (not using the rip off accountant any more so can't ask them) Thanks
  20. Hi, I was pressured into accepting two CCJ's as appearing in court would have been devastating, if it got that far. Is it possible to mount a new challenge against the debt as I am sure that there is no enforceable agreement? One was a Debenhams store card and the other was a Debenhams loan. Both were taken over by CL Finance. They are a millstone around my neck, in more than one manner. Thanks,
  21. I was taken to a room for questioning, upon leaving a departmental store, for allegations of shoplifting. I had picked up several cosmetic tester samples from the stands, as often (for products apart from foundations), the staff do not give you free samples and it is difficult to get an accuracy of colour matching in lighting outside the store. I wish to emphasise that these were all tester products - they had been used already/ were not brand new. Some were also smaller than the standard product size. So it wouldn't be fair to equate them to the price of a brand new, full-size product, nor the theft of an actual product. Though, I do feel it was not the right course of action. Nevertheless, I was given an exclusion order from the store. When I was questioned, I was asked to put out all the Make-Up testers I had picked up, and I co-operated fully in returning these. Given they were for high-end brands, the total was estimated at around £200 (in any case, given they were opened, non-full size testers, this estimation is inaccurate in itself); I was told by the Store's Security Officers that this would affect the charge RLP would ask for. However, in the letter RLP wrote to me, they contradict the store staff - RLP are saying that due to all items being recovered, the £197 I owe is purely for the "substantial amount of time...in observing, apprehending, interviewing you..". I believe this is quite an extortionate amount in light of the circumstances, and the fact I was fully compliant. Moreover, when I was questioned by the Store staff, they asked for my University address (assuring no correspondence would be sent there), as well as home address. They may have confused University with University residence, but they did not make this clear. Eitherway, RLP addressed their charge letter to my University, who had to open it before redirecting it to me. This is infringing on my privacy, and I am now also concerned if this could affect my employability? I didn't receive any Police Order (it is a civil matter), but could future employers see this on an DBS (CRB) check or elsewhere? Does paying the fee clear my name from any databases? Should I dispute this case, or ask for a reduced settlement? Any advice would be much appreciated. This is really worrying me, and making it hard to focus on my work.
  22. Hi, Has anyone had any luck challenging a default on their credit file? I read somewhere that if the creditor (in my case Santandar bank) doesn't inform you that your account is going into default, that it can be challenged. I didn't get any written communications regarding this before it happened. I have a loan (£25K) which I paid for 2 years but then couldn't keep up payments. Would be grateful for any help and advice. Krem
  23. The Department for Communities & Local Government today issued a Consultation Paper giving the public and businesses the opportunity to challenge yellow lines and unfair parking charges. The full details and the Consultation Paper are below: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/right-to-challenge-yellow-lines-and-unfair-parking-charges https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/348848/140830_-_Right_to_challenge_parking_paper_FINAL.pdf
  24. Hi all, received a PCN on my vehicle for parking on a single yellow line. Used the local authority website to challenge and was told that a response would be received within 10 working days. Nothing was forthcoming, and the next thing was a Notice to Owner being delivered by post, stating that the full amount was now due (£70, rather than the £35). I spoke to the council and told them that I did not receive a response to the initial challenge. They stated that it had been sent by email and resent by email, the copy. My question is this; does a response by email constitute proof of posting? What I mean is, how can I be sure that they sent the initial email as it did not appear in my inbox or Junk, however, the second email did. Also, they sent the Notice to Owner by post rather than email. Id there some kid of challenge I have here to pay the original reduced amount (£35) rather than the full £70? I am not now disputing the original PCN, rather I am challenging the fact I did not receive the response to my challenge, and therefore did not have an opportunity to pay the reduced amount once their decision had been reached. Apologies for the rather protracted post; but hopefuly someone can advise? Many Thanks, AG
×
×
  • Create New...