Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They couldn't afford to cut the NI level - having to borrow to do it - which breaks common sense rules let alone fiscal rules Unc   .. and thats just based on what we know of their fiscal incompetence, let alone any hidden costs
    • Interesting question regarding what Government accounts opposition parties have access to, before an General Election. From what I understand, Government department accounts that are published are always lagging behind and would not include some amounts which are classified as 'commercially sensitive'.  Therefore opposition parties and Parliamentrary select committees would not have access to accounts which contain real time up to date information. If a new Government have found £20 billion of spending liabilities they did not know about, this could be true, as £20 billion is not that much when you look at total Government expenditure. Government department are making decisions on spending all of the time and it could be the previous Government were planning tax changes and/or spending cuts to balance the books.  Jeremy Hunt has recently said that if the Tories had stayed in Government and held an Autumn budget, it would have been very difficult to cut taxes as some had wanted.
    • Everyone knows the tories were hiding the costs - and even added 4 billion quid to the taxpayers high interest credit card to fund a chunk of the NI tax reduction - prime example - look at how much cost was hidden re the Rwanda dogwhistle -10 Billion quid     and re the handful of rebels on the benefit limit If the disasters (like the Rwanda rubbish) of Tory dogs being wagged by the extremist minority ERG tail doesn't highlight the issues .. Enlighten yourself here .. (fat chance) Sir Keir Starmer is right to show Labour rebels the door WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Editorial: Suspending seven MPs following their rebellion over the two-child benefit cap is more than a prime minister flexing his political muscle. It is a...  
    • Trump instigated that didnt he @theoldrouge despite losing the election - and Biden mitigated as much as he could within his boundaries?   "President Donald Trump ordered a rapid withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Somalia in the wake of his 2020 election loss"   “The order was for an immediate withdrawal, and it would have been catastrophic,” said Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., one of two Republican members of the special panel. “And yet President Trump signed the order.”   Trump ordered rapid withdrawal from Afghanistan after election loss WWW.MILITARYTIMES.COM The memo was among the latest revelations from the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol building.   Although i agree that Biden should have done more to mitigate Trump driven disasters
    • ok your WS is wrong. Paragraph 16 and 17 says  you did not contract with evri but this is not true - see below  Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency post 251 of occy thread - £844 lost    you should also add a paragraph on donough v Stevenson talking about the fact that even without contract there is still duty of care to goods and by failing to deliver this duty has been breached.   Make those changes and post it back up here and I'll check over things again
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Help Please Someone


Denton243
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6084 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi im having some problems with Moorcroft,

 

I moved into supported accomodation 2 years ago on the 18th of dec 2005. I got a bt land line put in and got the internet, i became very depressed and stoped going out, i had to start claming income support and lost control of everything, my rent started getting out of control, i wouldnt leave the house to pay it and i couldnt pay my bt bill. i was cut off by bt. the bill was £380 and moorcroft bumped up to £595

 

It was passed over to Moorcroft to get the money. i started getting letters from moorcroft dec last year and i just ignored them for about 4 months, i hated each morning looking to see if the post had been and if i had any rude nasty letters from them.

 

i called them once and the person was very rude and put the phone down on me, i got very upset and worryed. then i just left it about a month and more and more nasty letters was coming through the post. i thought to myself i have to do somthing about this so i called them agen and said i can only afford £10 a month as im only living on £44 a week. they said no and bumped it up to £20 a month. so since april i have been paying them there £20 a month going 4-5 days with out money or food to live on.

 

3 weeks ago i coouldnt pay it becasue i had to add extra money to my rent account because they started getting nasty so yes i got another letter from moorcroft saying pay up or bailiffs will be knocking at my door.

 

I ignored the letter and havent had one to date, but the thing im worryed about is, i rent a room in a flat, i live with somone else who has nothing to do with me. i have no belongings as i was homeless before i moved into the flat, the only things that are in there are the white goods and the sofa in the communal areas witch is not mine. if they come round and want to take the things out the flat what am i going to do? they dont belong to me. im worryed about them forceing there way in and forceing there way into my flatmates room.

 

I dont want to call them because i will jsut get a nasty person on the phone and they never reply to my letters.

 

i just want this nightmare to stop as i have so much going on at the moment. its making me feel the lowest i have ever felt, i even cryed writeing this, i hope somone out there could give me some advice or somthing i just dont know what to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before they are able to send bailiffs arround they would need to get a ccj against you through the courts, even if they do obtain a ccj you dont have to let a bailiff in and should not as once they have come in peacefully they can force entry at a later date, work out what you can actualy afford to pay them and stick to it, its taking the pi55 expecting £20 a month when you are only on £44 a week benefits, depends on how quick you wish to clear it but i would be looking to pay £5 a month, if it did go to court you would be able to offer them a repayment plan and i very much doubt the court would have you pay more than this based on your circumstances

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you wanted to reduce your payment, try this letter, or the one above it:

 

Token/Delayed payment

Pro rata payments

 

You don't have to provide them with an income/expenditure sheet, but it does show willing. If they refuse and take you to court to obtain a CCJ, with your stated income the repayments will most liekly be smaller than you're paying at the moment.

 

Remember, Moorcroft in this instance are acting as debt collectors, not bailiffs - debt collectors have no right of entry to your home. Neither can they remove goods - it is simply not within their power. They must take you to court and win first before any bailiffs get involved. Have a read around the debt section on this forum for what you can expect from Moorcroft.

-----

Click the scales if I've been useful! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...