So... We have recently had a case come up where a DCA was stating that a Mobile Phone Contract was part of the Consumer Credit Act of 1974. This raised a few questions so we'd like to clarify this stance. Currently - No Mobile Contract is subject to a Consumer Credit Agreement however they are exceptions to this rule and it is not always clear. When taking out a contract it can be done in one of 2 ways and this is becoming a focus of some companies. This provides a lot of flexibility allowing customers to upgrade early and their tariff automatically reduces after paying off the handset device cost on its own to the airtime agreement. Useful if after 24 months you want to keep the same tariff and dont have to adjust the tariff to get the best deal.

A motor vehicle has always been a most attractive item for a bailiff/enforcement agent to seize and in particular; because of its value and the fact that in many cases, the vehicle is located on the debtors driveway thereby easing the removal process. In 2014 significant changes were made to bailiff enforcement under the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 but unfortunately with motor vehicles, the regulations may result in reduced protection for many people and in particular, business debtors. A short while ago I wrote a new STICKY for the forum entitled Bailiff enforcement: A Simple Guide to the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013. To ensure that the forum does not get clogged up with too many stickies I included with that STICKY a separate Guidance regarding bailiff enforcement and motor vehicle. Given the importance of this subject I thought that it may be useful to post a copy of the guidance (on motor vehicles) on the main forum as well (see copy in the next post). A link to the Guidance is here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?453292-Bailiff-enforcement-A-Simple-Guide-to-the-Taking-Control-of-Goods-Regulations&p=4800997&viewfull=1#post4800997

Earlier today I completed the last STICKY on the very important subject of vulnerability. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?456344-Bailiff-enforcement-All-about-Vulnerability(1-Viewing)-nbsp If any regular posters have any comments that they would like to raise about the thread they would be most welcome. A copy of the thread can be read in the following post.

I seen this user name(sticky) before on the anonymous.uk. site!

Unhappy with Brighthouse? Share over Social Media! Brighthouse Twitter and Facebook https://www.facebook.com/BrightHouseUK https://twitter.com/BrightHouseUK

Train companies are being forced to offer commuters the cheapest rail fares possible, following criticism that passengers can pay an excess of £100 when purchasing tickets at self-service machines instead of paying at a ticket counter. The changes, which are expected to be implemented by March, are aimed at ending the anomaly in prices available at the counter, where staff have access to a complex database of fares, discounts and promotions, and the more limited options in a self-service machines. Some machines have been found to promote expensive fares, bury cheaper options and do not apply discounts for groups or families, leading to a difference in train prices of up to £100, according to the Daily Telegraph. As a first step, they must label all self-service machines by March to warn passengers they could save money by using the counter service. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rail-bosses-told-to-show-passengers-how-to-get-cheapest-tickets-9952838.html

Hello everyone, I haven't been on here for a while long story, I was surprised to see all the important sticky threads closed and just the Food Bank one left open is there a reason why? I'm I allowed to ask? ose threads was very helpful just wondered why they have been closed? After just browsing and reading in the benefit forum I see many people still having problems with the dwp and ingeus, I am so glad that my young son start permanent work on Monday, he was claiming jsa after finishing his accounting college courses, he is lucky to not have to endure the like of Ingeus as others have, he's worked hard at finding a job that he has studied for a Junior Accountant. I went with him to the jobcentreplus to hand over his jsa booklet and give a copy of the letter from his would be employer to show his start date, one of the staff after congratulating him said to him you have escaped knowing the same day he was to start his work program is the day he'll start full employment instead, yes he has indeed I told the staff. I myself working hard on my health to get better and intend to go back to work next year Spring, I'll be glad to see the back of corrupt DWP and Ingeus. Good day to you all. helen

Should we have a sticky, in capital letters,saying that ignoring is not the advice in most circumstances? This may help a little with the 'real' newbies , and the fake ones...

The following are lists of legal cases /Judgements and a description of the relevance of each case. As an example I will be providing copies of the following: Toseland Building Supplies v Bishop Groundworks Ltd: This appeal court case is relevant if claiming that goods or a vehicle are "Tools of the Trade". DSI Foods etc: This vitally important appeal court case regarding Shergroup Ltd confirms that a bailiff CANNOT assume that all goods in the property belong to the debtor and that he must ensure that he reads any documentation given to him. The 2nd most crucial part of the judgment is that a bailiff should only visit the address given on the writ of fi fa/warrant. Michael Throssell v Leeds City Council: This case was one where Mr Throssell was seeking "detailed assessmant" of the bill from a bailiff and where the District Judge confirmed that a bailiff cannot charge "multiple charging for enforcing more that one Liability Order. Anthony Culligan v Marston Group Ltd: This is a simply stunning Judgment which related once again to a dispute regarding legal fees charged by Marston Group. The Judgment handed down by District Judge Avent is by far the clearest and most easily understood Judgment and details in clear language the fees that can be charged by a bailiff when enforcing an unpaid parking charge notice. Of vital importance this Judgment confirms that a bailiff cannot charge a fee for clamping a car. There are other Judgments that will be included as well and I will be updating this thread with details over the Xmas holiday period. If anyone has any suggestions etc these would be most welcome.

Not sure if anyone can help, Last year without me knowing my sister decided to take out BT broadbandTelephone services in my name at her address, Why? I don't know, I wasn't happy as she said its because she wouldnt get it in her name. She promised to pay and change name, To cut a long story short, she didn't pay and got in to debt and moved. She went back to old property to pick up post ( as its only recent) i noticed a collection letter on side in my name, I was fuming, Ive contacted BT and explained that its not my debt and not my address, My sister even rang them asking the debt to be changed in her name but they will not change the name until the debt is paid. I am now worried, I'm guessing this is going to trash my credit rating? The only thing BT advised me to do was to call the police and get a crime reference number, But i simply cant do this to my own sister, Is there any other way round this? Would there already be a default on my name?