Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • SPM87
      Advice and insight please

      By SPM87 · Posted

      I posted a couple of years ago about our debt situation and have been trying to pay off our debt as best we can. It is a possibility I maybe made redundant in a few months time, so I am trying to find out everything I can about what happens in today’s world when you can’t pay. I keep finding conflicting advice on various sites so I wanted to post this quote to get thoughts. It claims basically that the dca will likely get enforceable documents these days and therefore it’s likely you will have to pay dca at some point during the 6 year process.    on here I read a lot of comments assuming the exact opposite of this. A lot of the threads on here state the beginning of the process but I never see conclusive stuff about what happened from start to finish to get insight into whether debts post 2015 have been enforced etc. I hear a lot here not to pay dca companies but most my debts are post 2015 debts I am all up to date on our debts but if I lose my job it is likely I’ll end up where I tried to avoid in the first place. Which is destroying our files and dealing with DCA. I’ll post it below so you can see what I mean.   It is likely that any debts incurred after 2007 will end up with all the documentation being provided and being enforceable. Therefore you should use the time while awaiting responses going through your Income & Expenditure and considering any possiblity of making a full and final settlement. It can take a number of months to reach the stage of a hearing date and exchange of witness statements and normally you would be able to settle or come to an arrangement to pay before the court hearing, once documents have been provided, although this isn’t guaranteed.
    • dx100uk
      Judge & Priestly

      By dx100uk · Posted

      depends who said sols state their client is. IDRWW vis~IDR(worldWide) are a debt collector regulated & registered in the UK & USA    they are not solicitors. they use various 'for hire' - here use our letterhead paper tiger solicitors. its just a case of who's stupid enough to join their folly. IDR law used to be their fav but they lost do much money, they broke ties after almost being struck off and now do Will/Probate disputes only. IDR Legal are their sols wing. moriarty law Judge and priestly Taheel - a foreign DCA that use absolutely any trick in the book to extort money even pretending to be any of the above inc being the bank themselves in phone calls.           
    • dx100uk
      ENBD/IDRWW/IDR Legal - letter of claim now statutory demand

      By dx100uk · Posted

      And? dx  
    • dx100uk
      UAE debt IDR - Letter Of Claim

      By dx100uk · Posted

      AND? dx  
    • dx100uk
      IDR Letter of claim for Dubai Debt ive been paying directly to the bank for years - why are they sending this?

      By dx100uk · Posted

      And? dx  

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

HFO Services Limited and barclaycard debt

UK26

By UK26
in Barclaycard

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4730 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

broken arrow

broken arrow

Posted
Posted

Hello again Uk26, have just arrived back home, my reading of the NOA issue is if you are going to shout fraud, beware of the consequences and costs if you cannot prove it.As to the rest of the hearing, it is can they produce the valid documents next time, if not I guess his patience will have been tested and hopefully he will strike the claim out.

 

All for now

 

Broken arrow

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 593
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

broken arrow

broken arrow

Posted
Posted
How can he award costs to them if you win???

The judge said UK26 could win the case but if you cannot prove their NOA is dodgy he can award costs to them.Its a mad world.

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Docman

Docman

Posted
Posted

Hi BA & UK26 (and to Mr T and Di),

I agree it’s a mad world, especially as to costs. However, I thought it was up to HFO to show that their NOA was OK. Surely, all that a defendant has to show (if anything) is that, on the balance of probabilities, the NOA was not from the OC. The fact that a SAR on the OC didn't produce a copy of the NOA, the fact that the NOA letter came from SW19 and didn't have the correct address should all go in favour of a defendant. The killer blow in my view, of course is that S196 of the LoP Act 1925 requires the OC to send by registered i.e. recorded delivery, just to avoid these kind of disputes.

UK, I suggest you leave any allegations of fraud out of the county court, galling as it is. As I said above, it just isn't up to the county court and could annoy the DJ. All you have to do in the county court is to call into question the provenance of the NOA, not prove it a forgery.

Meantime, it might be helpful if anyone with dealings with our Wimbledon crew have a good look at their witness statement and advise UK.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites
broken arrow

broken arrow

Posted
Posted

In the witness statement HFO seem to be admitting that the NOA is from them and that Barclaycard allow them this privilege as their "goodbye letter"

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
car2403

car2403

Posted
Posted
In the witness statement HFO seem to be admitting that the NOA is from them and that Barclaycard allow them this privilege as their "goodbye letter"

 

Even better.

 

They've disproven their own case to take legal action, then.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
broken arrow

broken arrow

Posted
Posted
Even better.

 

They've disproven their own case to take legal action, then.

 

Thats my thinking as well as s 136 of LOP act states any absolute assignment by writing under the hand of the assignor.

 

When you read these assignments from HFO it is written as though it is by the OC.

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Docman

Docman

Posted
Posted

I wonder if it worth asking Barclaycard if they have authorisied a 'goodbye letter'?

 

It seems to me they are allowing another limited company (HFO) to pass themselves off as BC. If they say they DO allow another company to issue letters as though that company was BC, then I think letters are in order to the DTI (or whatever Mandy will call his new department); another to the OFT querying whether this is a breach of BC's consumer credit licence; and to the FSA for allowing an unregulated firm to pass itself off as BC - all the letters copied to the CEO of Barclays Bank in his ivory tower in Canary Wharf.

 

Of course, if BC do not confirm the 'goodbye letters', well HFO do seem to have cooked their goose with the Court

 

- oh, sorry nearly forgot my manners - Hi, Mr T & Di. Bye, bye Mr T & Di.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites
car2403

car2403

Posted
Posted
I wonder if it worth asking Barclaycard if they have authorisied a 'goodbye letter'?

 

It seems to me they are allowing another limited company (HFO) to pass themselves off as BC. If they say they DO allow another company to issue letters as though that company was BC, then I think letters are in order to the DTI (or whatever Mandy will call his new department); another to the OFT querying whether this is a breach of BC's consumer credit licence; and to the FSA for allowing an unregulated firm to pass itself off as BC - all the letters copied to the CEO of Barclays Bank in his ivory tower in Canary Wharf.

 

Of course, if BC do not confirm the 'goodbye letters', well HFO do seem to have cooked their goose with the Court

 

- oh, sorry nearly forgot my manners - Hi, Mr T & Di. Bye, bye Mr T & Di.

 

I'm sure Companies House would be interested in hearing what is going on, especially regarding one Company plagarising themselves as another in written form.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
miss muppet

miss muppet

Posted
Posted

Yes, a very good point by Car and also wouldn't Companies House be interested in two companies trading whilst insolvent, think thats an offence. You can email them about this, they're quite quick in replying.

 

Don't worry too much about the warning about losing and costs, this is what my daughter and I were told in our battle against 1st Crud at a set aside hearing but on reflection after we got over the upset of the first hearing, I realised that the Judge may have been trying to help us when she pointed out that we had raised several matters of contention i.e. the default, NOA etc and made sure I did overkill with the next hearing which we won. Sent a very wordy statement in before the case to the Judge and the other side which I'm quite sure he had read before daughter's second hearing. Think the judges have to be seen to be playing fair with both sides. By the way was the default in the name of the original creditor and did it have their address on it ?

 

Also from my earlier post which I forgot to add is a quote from Susan Edwards, Head of Credit Investigations and Enforcement, Office of Fair Trading (May 2008)

 

"...There has been a suggestion that debt collectors can avoid complying with section 77 and 78 by claiming that the agreement is no longer 'live' in some way as it has been 'terminated' based on section 103 of the Act. This talks of a 'trader' who was the creditor under a regulated agreement, implying that 'trader' is no longer a creditor once an agreement is ended. Section 103 however deals with where the customer no longer owes any money at all and therefore it is correct to say that he is no longer a debtor and the trader is no longer his creditor. Where money is still owed, section 103 would not apply, since the consumer would not be entitled to a termination statement..."

 

I'm quite sure it will all go well next time thats if the other side is still trading by that time!:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites
broken arrow

broken arrow

Posted
Posted

From a post by Bluefairy.

Hi again - just had an interesting conversation with someone at Barclaycard, they confirm that this fake letter is not sent out by them - HFO send them oiut. They are aware of it, but the lady I spoke to didnt know why they were doing it (but we do dont we!!). I asked her to confirm in this in an email, but she couldnt due to virus dangers but she did ask me to write in with a copy

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
lectus123

lectus123

Posted
Posted
Yes, a very good point by Car and also wouldn't Companies House be interested in two companies trading whilst insolvent, think thats an offence.

 

Trading whilst insolvent in itself is not an offence. The directors have to take every step to minimise losses to creditors, and if continuing trading enables this, then the directors can quite legally continue trading. Turning the corner of insolvency may just be one deal with creditors or a new investor away.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
broken arrow

broken arrow

Posted
Posted

Have spoken on the phone to Goldfish with regard to NOA and their not being a copy in my SAR documents,the answer, we leave this to the asignee to inform,when I stated this goes against the LOP 1925, he stated this was their policy.I then asked for a copy of this policy in writing he declined saying I have already had this document, which I have not, he was unwilling to send me a new copy.If HFO are allowed to inform on the OC,s behalf, why are they writing these letters as though they are from the OC.

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
broken arrow

broken arrow

Posted
Posted

have posted a thread on legal issues re: NOA,s any input would be appreciated.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/163133-notice-assignment-question.html

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
broken arrow

broken arrow

Posted
Posted
Can not say to much at the moment but have had some very interesting conversations today!

 

Have got some people very interested in these NOA,s, they even got away with using one in court against me and got judgement in their favour, there may be trouble ahead!

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
patrickq1

patrickq1

Posted
Posted

Wasted Costs Orders

and see also Section 53 of the Practice Direction about Costs supplementing CPR Parts 43 to 48 ("the Costs PD")). However it should be noted that parts of CPR 44.14 (and Section 18 of the Costs PD) appear also to deal with some aspects of the same subject, although not in identical terms or to the same level of detail as CPR 48.76.

hope this helps

patrickq1

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...