Jump to content

Showing results for tags 'deception'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • 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
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums


  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web


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

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start




Found 8 results

  1. I met Mr Toussaint Davy ("Mr Davy") whilst in Spitalfields Market, London. Mr Davy was purchasing sugar cane for his business "Jamaicadeli.com", which sells, amongst other things, sugar cane juice. I agreed to assist Mr Davy with selling sugar cane juice at Nottinghill Carnival and thereafter I occasionally assisted Mr Davy with his stand in a local food market As part of his business, Mr Davy supplies sugar cane juicers and advertises the same on his website. Mr Davy suggested I should purchase a sugar cane juicer for my own personal use and I agreed to order a juicer from one of his contacts in the Far East. On 12 April 2016, I paid £750.00 to Mr Davy by way of bank transfer. Mr Davy confirmed that the brand new sugar cane juicer would be delivered to me and he would test this before delivering it to me. Mr Davy advised that this process would take in the region of one month. Approximately one month after paying for the juicer, Mr Davy informed me that the juicer had arrived but it had been taken apart by HM Customs and damaged in the process; he was not therefore satisfied with the condition and he was awaiting a refund from HM Customs. Mr Davy assured me that he had ordered a new juicer that would arrive on or around the middle of June 2016. I tried to contact Mr Davy on numerous occasions but received no response. On 14 June Mr Davy informed me via text message that he was not satisfied with the response from HM Customs, and so he would give me a full refund. On 15 June 2016 I sent Mr Davy a letter requesting a refund of the £750 by no later than 5pm on 17 June. Mr Davy acknowledged this letter, but admitted that he would not be able to refund the money within such a short timescale. He confirmed that the money would be refunded by 19 June 2016 at the latest. On 20 June I had still not received a refund and so I sent a further letter to Mr Davy. Mr Davy acknowledged receipt of all of my correspondence the following day, and explained that he had had three juicers which had been damaged by HM Customs. He implied that a 'guy in Malaysia' was currently holding my money. I asked for proof of this and although Mr Davy initially agreed to provide the same, this has never been supplied. On 24 June Mr Davy agreed to transfer £250 to me and confirmed that the balance would be transferred the following week. I received the £250 on 27 June, but I had not received the outstanding £500, despite numerous telephone calls and text messages. Mr Davy failed to provide me the full refund, to which I am entitled and the outstanding balance amounts to £500. I entered into an oral contract with Mr Davy for the provision of a juicer and Mr Davy failed to provide the goods contracted for. He is thereby in breach of contract and accordingly, he is under an obligation to refund to me the cost of the goods. Additionally or in the alternative, by virtue of Section 28 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, it can be argued that Mr Davy has refused to deliver the goods (the sugar cane juicer) and I may therefore treat the contract as having come to an end. Mr Davy is under an obligation to reimburse all payments made under the contract without undue delay and he has failed to do so to date. Due to being messed around by Mr Davy, I took it upon myself to employ solicitors. Having received various letters from solicitors Mr Davy decided to partly pay the outstanding £500 in various parts I can confirm that I received £100 on 3 August 2016 In addition, received a further £200 from Mr Davy on 18 October 2016. Lastly I received £50 from Mr Davy on 29 November 2016. This leaves a total of £150 outstanding, after 6 months and many solicitors letters. Seeing as any legal fees will now far exceed the value of my claim, I now have no other option then to issue proceedings myself against Mr Davy in the Small Claims Court. Please can fellow Caggers be so kind as to advise me of this process? Can I claim costs in the small claims court? What happens if I receive the £150 after lodging the claim with the small claims court. Sorry for the length of this post for a first post. Best wishes and seasonal greetings to all and thanks for taking the time out of your schedules to read my thread. Regards
  2. hello guys I have recently had a very bad experience whilst trying to sell a car I would be grateful for some advice a few months ago an immediate family member wanted to sell her vehicle. vehicle was advertised on autotrader. To cut a long story short, the potential buyer, pushed me, grabbed the keys, and drove off in my vehicle. and the person who dropped him off drove off behind him. as usual, 3 months later, insurance company have come back stating the claim has been rejected on 2 grounds 1. I am not a named driver 2. theft by deception so now my family member, is 18k worse off, with a substantial amount of finance owing. So the main problem here is I was the one who was showing the car to the buyer, on instruction of my family member (the car owner) but I am not a named driver on the policy I moved the car from my front drive about 100metres away, so they could look at the car with no obstructions. However I was not driving the car at the time of theft. It was parked and locked. The thief then looks around the car, grabs the key, pushes me, and gets in the car and drives off. closely followed by his accomplice. the second problem is theft by deception. In my opinion this was a physical grab and drive off, rather than deception. The claim has been rejected. I have had several sleepless nights over this. The process has been ongoing, the story stated above was known from day one, yet it took 3 months for the insurance company to reject the claim. there departments are clueless as to what is going on, they asked for all the total loss documents, we sent them in, recorded delivery, it was signed for, yet they have lost it, including the spare key. We never got any official correspondence, regarding the claim rejection, we had to phone them up for them to tell us. we made a complaint through there complaints department to which they said there decision was final. I am unsure of where to go to next. I am totally confused and stressed, and some advice will be appreciated. They have pointed me the direction of the financial ombudsman, but is there any point if theres so many things stacked against me?
  3. Hi there, In 2007 I was the victim (like many others) of the aggressive tactics of Turnbull Rutherford Solicitors in conjunction with HFO Services (they are actually the same people, or were then - HFO bought unsecured debts and Turnbull converted them to secured debts by a court order, on an industrial scale). At the time in 2007, I was ignorant of what I should have done, which was to question the validity of the contract by making a Subject Access Request. But as I didn't know about this I had no option but to complete the N9A and offer to pay by instalments. Turnbull/HFO wanted all the money and it was in their interest not to accept instalments, therefore they pretended they had not received the N9A, thus making it look as if I had not responded. The court then naturally found against me by default. Turnbull/HFO further muddied the waters by making up another bogus case which was subsequently struck out by the judge when it was discovered that the case did not actually exist. My first attempt to set aside this CO was unsuccessful because the district judge seemed to be beguiled by the paralegal who showed up to defend Turnbull/HFO. Also, by what the judge seemed to be saying, he had not actually read my witness statement. The judge dismissed my claim. I have full documentation covering this case, including all court papers and over 20 exhibits. Since this fiasco the FCA have asked to see this documentation and I have supplied them with copies of everything. As the account is in dispute I have stopped paying the £55 a month I was paying to Turnbull/HFO by standing order towards this fraudulent account. Last week I received a letter from HFO Capital (HFO Services had passed the account to their alter-ego HFO Capital) demanding the restitution of my standing order. I phoned HFO about this. I told the person I was speaking to at the start of the conversation that I was recording the dialogue. I then told him about the letter and reminded him that it was a criminal offence to demand money while an account was in dispute. At this there was a complete change of attitude! He told me that it was a terrible mistake and to "just ignore the letter". I have paid Turnbull/HFO nearly £2,000 for this fraudulent account and I seek to set aside this court order, recover my money, including all prior legal costs to date and clear my credit profile of this unjust item. I also seek compensation for the time I have been obliged to spend trying to clear up this appalling mess (by my reckoning about 80 hours and the distress caused. HFO Services and their associates HFO Capital and Roxburgh UK, all debt purchasing companies, have been barred from holding a consumer credit licence by the old OFT. Additionally, Alastair Turnbull has been barred from the group consumer credit licence of the Law Society (a hitherto unprecedented decision by the OFT) as a result of his illegal activities and has clearly brought the reputation of the law into disrepute. At this stage I would welcome the help of a solicitor to set aside this court order and to restore some justice in this matter. I would welcome any suggestions on this forum. Thanks.
  4. Anyone noticed the very large differences in prices related to motor insurance between those provided online through one of the comparison sites, and those obtained directly from a broker over the phone? Last week I had an email from Go Compare regarding insurance, and they returned 43 prices ranging from £224 to £1200. As current insurance was through BISL (Budget, Dial Direct etc etc), and bearing in mind its sometimes difficult to get present brokers to disclose NCD details, I decided to continue using BISL. BISL price was £267 through their Dial Direct trading style, and having found the prices differed greatly between online and over the phone, I called the number provided for Dial Direct, and was quoted £434 for exactly the same cover whose online price was £267! When I queried this with the BISL phone drone I was forced to listen to what seemed like a mish mash of obvious lies and prevarication. The conversation was becoming extremely tedious so I terminated the call, immediately called back and was then quoted the price I had obtained online. Strangely enough the FCA is quite comfortable with practices such as this, even though it is clear that anyone without net access may well be required to pay far more for insurance products, than anyone who can access the net. I wonder are these practices common across the whole of the insurance sector, or are they only things employed by concerns such as BISL?
  5. Ex Newsreader; Peter Sisson's has made the headlines regarding a ticket issued by Smart Parking when shopping at Homebase. The link to the story is here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2477165/How-Peter-Sissons-received-Homebase-apology-90-parking-ticket.html
  6. hi,i received a stat demand from bw legaL regarding two lowell acounts firstly can they join two accounts together to make one some part of the stat demand has been deleted which would notify me of my rights to seek legal advice, does this mean it is not valid and are they allowed to stamp the envelopes stating they are a debt collection solitor, i have missed the deadline for setting aside and have arranged to pay monthly but i regret this now and was only done because my partner was so worried ,i think it was just a scare tactic, i have now sent a cca request for both accounts to lowell and bw legal and sent a much lower full and final settlement offer to them aswell but i doubt they will accept it i also sent a letter to the oft regarding the above, am i doing the right thing or should i just pay my monthly payments,
  7. I've just noticed this:- Of course, it is true, they are a "not for profit" ... but at the same time, it is not true - because they are a non-independent organisation which is set up to ensure the interests of the parking industry members. The BPA is set up with the intention of fronting and protecting a highly profitable industry. There is no altruism about them. The exist for the profits of their members. Their members join them and support them in order to ensure their continuing profitability. So, "not for profit"? ... Yes - but at the same time, somehow - No.
  8. Hi guys, There are a lot of threads on this site already dedicated to Roxburghe (RB) / HFO Services (HFOS) and Hutchinson 3G (H3G) but I would like to bring to attention my own case as I have a few issues that I hope to seek advice for (... and apologies if you guys are bored to your back teeth with more of the same recurring themes ). My experience with HFOS and RB has been distressing and upsetting. They appear to use deceitful and dishonest tactics to bully their victims into submission and I am determined not to let them win. I have no knowledge of the alleged "debt" for which they are attempting to recover as I closed my account with H3G with a zero balance back in 2004. Background details (pieced together from recollection and the very little written correspondence I have had with the trio of aforementioned companies): 24 July 2003 : Contract with Hutchinson 3G for a mobile phone handset and monthly tariff underwritten for £38.00 per month 28 December 2003 : Due to extremely poor reception and quality of service (phone call drop-outs, SMS messages not being sent / received) I cancelled the contract via a telephone call. The service centre employee was happy to oblige under these particular circumstances. No written confirmation given. No further written correspondence from H3G (including bills) March 2004 : H3G informed me of an outstanding balance of £49.84 from November 2003 30 March 2004 : Final balance paid to H3G 09 July 2008 : I received two letters from HFOS titled "Notice of Transfer" and "Notice of Assignement of Debt". The letters stated that the debt was assigned by H3G on 31 July 2007 for the amount of £173.20. The signees were 'D Hashan' ("Telecoms Team") and 'Jane Parker' (Manager, "Telecoms Team"). The Assignment letter claimed to include a letter from H3G stating that the debt had been assigned. There was no such letter included in either items of post. 01 August 2008 : I responded to Jane Parker expressing my surprise. I stated that to my knowledge there was no outstanding balance with H3G. I also noted that there was no letter of assignment from H3G included in their correspondence. I received no further mail from HFOS. 24 November 2009 : I received a letter from Jonathan Stock at RB stating that the debt had been passed to them by H3G (not HFOS?) and the amount to be recovered was £298.21 (!) 27 November 2009 : Feeling empowered by various forums (possibly this site) I found a template letter stating that I do not acknowledge the debt and require documentary evidence that the debt exists. I made the schoolboy mistake of signing the letter... December 2009 : RB responded with a compliment note (no letter or explanation, not signed or dated) stapled to a printout of a screenshot of the H3G accounts software with what appeared to be a ledger of my account with H3G. This ledger showed that H3G continued to bill me for 4 months after the account closure. A balance of £163.20 is visible on 28 May 2004 and this is flattened with an adjustment on 6 June 2007 (possibly the sale of debt to HFOS). As this screenshot in no way constituted proof of an outstanding debt I chose not to humour them further and to get on with my life. Oct 09 - Sept 10 : RB continue to send SMS messages to my personal phone and leave voicemails from random mobile numbers pretending to be solicitors and requiring urgent response. Solicitors do not work like this. I ignore them. 25 October 2010 : I received a letter from Nick Krauspe of RB stating that I agreed to make a payment to them as part of a plan to settle my debt. They state this agreement is legally binding and as I have failed to make a prompt payment they will charge me £12.50 for the pleasure. The letter also mentions HFO CAPITAL LIMITED for the first time? I am HIGHLY concerned about this letter as it would appear that SOMEONE has entered me into a CCA without my knowledge or consent (possibly by lifting my signature from previous correspondence?). If this was the case would it reset the timer on the "debt" to avoid being Statute-Barred? Should I send a letter to RB by special delivery demanding to see proof of this "agreement" such that I can forensically analyse the content (if it exists) and thus be in a position to take legal action? I have signed up to CreditExpert to check my credit report and hope to complete this in the coming days. I will attach censored versions of all the correspondence I have had in the next posts in the hope that you can give me the confidence and empowerment to fight these intolerable, abusive, dishonest scalliwags (!). If you can help then I will happily donate the entire alleged debt amount to CAG (and even if you don't I may well dig deep as you give many others the courage to speak up and fight their cases). Many thanks in advance.
  • Create New...