Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer and that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim and don't add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the members of suggested above – it should be the final version. court, that I would respectfully requestup but I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
      • 160 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
  • Recommended Topics

Surprised...... Help Needed URGENT


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5796 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

Recieved a letter from them today this is what it say's!

 

Further to your recent communication, we do not accept that the above account is time barred under the limitation act.

 

Even were you to demonstrate that this debt is time barred, the debt still legally exists and may be reported accordingly to the credit reference bereaux, as appropriate.

 

We are prepared, however, to offer you a substantial reduction to settle this account once and for all. Should you be interested in taking up this option, please telephone us on the above number.

 

What should I do ......?

I was on the understanding a debt can only be placed on your credit file once, when it defaulted, so can they place it on there again....?

ie: when it was originally hfc debt they would have put a default notice in 99. so can they put default notice on again after all this time...

 

many thx to all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

its statute barred, but they dont accept this?

 

am i missing something here?

 

or are they really that desperate?

post office WON 12/11/06

 

abbey.LBA sent 30/10/06.MCOL claim submitted 8/11/06.allocation questionnaire sent 16/12/06.schedule of charges sent 16/12/06.WON

 

2nd abbey claim SAR sent 3/1/07.WON.complaint letter sent 18/1/08

 

alliance and Leicester.WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

They appear to be acting as if they are above the law. They can't do that.

 

Write to them simply to acknowledge receipt of their letter dated (whenever) and state the matter is in dispute and you wish to make a complaint. You therefore want details of their complaints procedure sent to you asap. They have eight weeks to send you these details, in writing, and resolve the complaint. If they don't you can ramp up ther matter to the Financial Services Ombudsman. From what you say the FOS will take a dim view of their activities and an investigation will cost them at least £400.

 

If they refuse (or ignore the request) to send you details of their complaints procedure - which they are obliged to have as part of their consumer credit licence - then you can complain straight away to the FOS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry everyone first post should be

Defaulted in 03/1999......robinson way and company purchased debt in 06/2006.....then notified me in 03/2008.....this is the correct dates.

However I have been paying them for a seperate debt from 03/2006,

asked them why it took them so long to notify me they said only just linked addresses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi me again had a phonecall from Horwich Farrelly this morning, 13/05/08.

 

asked what it was concerning and they stated Robinson way & Co, would not confirm details as I did not know who they were, I was told I should recieve a letter by next week.....looks like there solicitor's.

 

what should I do now ?

 

so far have just sent letter back to robinson way, see above No 2.

 

shall I report them straight away to the relevant organisation's.

 

any help plz....thx

Link to post
Share on other sites

great site, help needed.

 

Basically I have 2 debt's from Feb/ March 1999, this is when they defaulted they are for approx 3.5k.

 

They were originally for HFC, however in june 2006 the debt was purchased from them by RW&Co, I only received Default notice in March 2008 from RW&C, I have since seeked advice and was told these debt's are statute barred, I asked for copies of cca's to which I recieved only 1 of them for the lower amount. (not the largest 1).

 

they then kept phoning to ask for payment so I sent them a STATUTE BARRED letter from this site, to which they replied we do not accept this, (dated 08/05/2008) however they then phoned again and as I stated I will not discuss this on the phone they have now threatened legal action.

 

Then yesterday I sent them a letter before action, stating if they continue to press for payment etc etc i will take action against them and report them to all relevant bodie's.

 

Then today I recieve a letter saying pay in full in 7 day's or a substantial payment with proposals for settlement of the balance, or they intend court action which may increase the amount owed by the addition of court fee's and cost's.

 

Also in the letter I stated I wish to have a copy of there complaint's procedure, this was sent to the MD of RW&C as well as themselves.

 

I know I have not had any contact with HFC/ or RWC from 03/1999 to 03/2008. so as far as I'm concerned this is Statute Barred.

 

Should I now report them to relevant bodie's for continuing to press for payment and what should I send to RW&C solicitors Horwich and Farrelly ?

 

Any help appreciated thank's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

great site, help needed.

 

Basically I have 2 debt's from Feb/ March 1999, this is when they defaulted they are for approx 3.5k.

 

They were originally for HFC, however in june 2006 the debt was purchased from them by RW&Co, I only received Default notice in March 2008 from RW&C, I have since seeked advice and was told these debt's are statute barred, I asked for copies of cca's to which I recieved only 1 of them for the lower amount. (not the largest 1).

 

they then kept phoning to ask for payment so I sent them a STATUTE BARRED letter from this site, to which they replied we do not accept this, (dated 08/05/200:cool: however they then phoned again and as I stated I will not discuss this on the phone they have now threatened legal action.

 

Then yesterday I sent them a letter before action, stating if they continue to press for payment etc etc i will take action against them and report them to all relevant bodie's.

 

Then today I recieve a letter saying pay in full in 7 day's or a substantial payment with proposals for settlement of the balance, or they intend court action which may increase the amount owed by the addition of court fee's and cost's.

 

Also in the letter I stated I wish to have a copy of there complaint's procedure, this was sent to the MD of RW&C as well as themselves.

 

I know I have not had any contact with HFC/ or RWC from 03/1999 to 03/2008. so as far as I'm concerned this is Statute Barred.

 

Should I now report them to relevant bodie's for continuing to press for payment and what should I send to RW&C solicitors Horwich and Farrelly ?

 

Any help appreciated thank's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

great site, help needed.

 

Basically I have 2 debt's from Feb/ March 1999, this is when they defaulted they are for approx 3.5k.

 

They were originally for HFC, however in june 2006 the debt was purchased from them by RW&Co, I only received Default notice in March 2008 from RW&C, I have since seeked advice and was told these debt's are statute barred, I asked for copies of cca's to which I recieved only 1 of them for the lower amount. (not the largest 1).

 

they then kept phoning to ask for payment so I sent them a STATUTE BARRED letter from this site, to which they replied we do not accept this, (dated 08/05/200:cool: however they then phoned again and as I stated I will not discuss this on the phone they have now threatened legal action.

 

Then yesterday I sent them a letter before action, stating if they continue to press for payment etc etc i will take action against them and report them to all relevant bodie's.

 

Then today I recieve a letter saying pay in full in 7 day's or a substantial payment with proposals for settlement of the balance, or they intend court action which may increase the amount owed by the addition of court fee's and cost's.

 

Also in the letter I stated I wish to have a copy of there complaint's procedure, this was sent to the MD of RW&C as well as themselves.

 

I know I have not had any contact with HFC/ or RWC from 03/1999 to 03/2008. so as far as I'm concerned this is Statute Barred.

 

Should I now report them to relevant bodie's for continuing to press for payment and what should I send to RW&C solicitors Horwich and Farrelly ?

 

Any help appreciated thank's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

RWC are just up to their usual threats that they cannot enforce, id be more worried about this default they registered. A Debt Collection Agency cannot add a default notice to a credit reference file after it barred in accordance with the Limitations Act. You need to initiate a complaint against RWC on this straight away , also inform OFT and the information commisioner , trading standards and dispute it directly with the CRA . Get in touch with the national debtline too. Thats bang out of order.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would get in contact with your local TS straight away - this can be construed as harassment as you have stated you won't pay because it is statute barred.

 

Send an email to this guy: [email protected] and advise this is what you have done and that you view this to be harassment and may report the matter to the police.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have purchased your debt thats nice of them :)

I wonder if they would pay your other debts. :rolleyes:

 

 

Thats just a bad bussiness investment purchasing someone's debt.

hehehehe

 

Ask them to validate the debt in a sworn affidavit.

They probally won't incase they perjury themselfs. :D

 

 

The contents of this post should not be construed as being legal advice

 

Peace

 

Truther

Link to post
Share on other sites

RWC seem to be under the MISapprehension that it is up to a debtor to prove a debt is Statute Barred when actually the converse is true. You have told them the debt is Statute Barred so the burden of proof rests with them to prove otherwise.

 

Time to make the formal complaints as advised above

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats what they told me after getting a statute barred letter . They didn't 'accept' it was statute barred . Not at all interested in proving that it wasn't.. just they didn't 'accept' it . It's like ..' we dont care about what the law requires, if we don't like it then we're not having any of it. So pay up.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...