Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you. I expect that @dx100uk will be along soon to give advice. Meanwhile, I really wonder whether the default date – as being the starting point of the six years – something which has been decided in law. It has always seemed to me to be extremely unfair. According to the limitation act, the six year period begins from the date on which the cause of action accrued. This normally means that the breach of contract occurred. Section 6 of the limitation act says that in terms of loans, the cause of action begins on the date that the debt was "demanded". Over the past two years this has come to mean the date that the default notice was issued – but I have to say I don't find that very satisfactory. If you received demands for payment before then then I don't see why section 6 shouldn't refer to that date. Did you not receive any correspondence at all in 2017/2018? What was the value of the original loan – and how much you pay off? I see that there was some kind of instalment agreement. Tell us about that. See what my colleague @dx100uk says but anyway, if I were you I would send off an SAR immediately both to the claimant and also to the original creditor. It costs you nothing. There is no downside. Get in the post straightaway with some kind of utility bill establishing your identity. You can even include a copy of the claim form as well as proof of your identity
    • £749.69 court fee £70 legal fee £70 total £889.68 MyJar TM.pdf
    • Please read and complete the following posting your responses back here for further advice.  
    • Thank you. I'm going to say that the photographs really don't say very much and once again it's a real shame that you didn't take lots of photographs of all the issues including the Windows and the state of the inside of the room. You can certainly bring a claim here if you want and we will help you but I'm really not sure of your chances of success. It sounds to me as if the manager you spoke to was dismissive and nothing was particularly agreed or admitted. If you want to bring a claim then I would start off by establishing a paper trail where you point out the things that were wrong and the fact that you discuss this with the duty manager who appeared to be dismissive. You could ask them then in general terms if they have any proposals to make. I think you're in weak position. I don't think you should start threatening them with legal action or anything at the moment and even if you did bring a legal action for the full amount I would probably advise you to negotiate a settlement of maybe 50% – if you're lucky – at mediation. Have you tried putting up Google reviews and reviews on trust pilot? This could also be a good way to start. I'm very sorry but when you deal with these kinds of issues then you need to collect evidence as quickly as possible. It is the first thing you always do when there is a poor hotel, a stone in your cornflakes or a motor accident. I'm afraid that you have to think this way and maybe it doesn't come naturally – but having run the consumer action group for 18 years, this is rather second nature. If you have any phone calls with them then you should read our customer services guide first and then confirm any admissions they might make in writing.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 161 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

HFO Services - Company House info


UK26
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5726 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

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am no accountant, but surely if both Turnbull and HFO have a negative net worth, are they not insolvent.

they would nt need to it could be company loans and that just means for tax back purposes they wont pay any uk tax its a [problem] but legal

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

HFO and Turnbull have been trading insolvently for many years. It is a [problem]. I have followed their accounts for some time and it is clear that they are trading purely to support the parent company in the Cayman Islands to whom the UK operations owe vast sums of money, which is why they run the Company at a loss and pay no corporation tax. I have several times reported this to the Fraud Dept at BERR and Customs and Excise. Surprise surprise.........no-one is interested. If I ran my company insolvently, they would close me down tomorrow!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rules for directors say that if you (knowingly) allow your company to trade insolvently, and the company is subsequently liquidated, then then directors are personally liable for the companys debts, regardless of limited liability.

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok. is there not someting we can do, that will force someone to take action.

 

what we really need, locate the Creditor who gave them there big CCJ in 2007 and make them bankrupt. but even then they will just start up again under a new company. so maybe if we can, tackle the director

Link to post
Share on other sites

If i win my defence to the court case againsts me. Can i then file a new claim for wasted time on research etc £9.25 x 100 = £925

 

then make them bankrupt?

 

If they failed to pay an invoice, that creditor could force liquidation:D
Link to post
Share on other sites

No because the liquidator would require the directors to pay from their own resources, and they can also be disqualified from ever holding a directorship again:D:D, it just takes one or more creditors to kick it all off.

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder, if i sent a completed request to the court to send in the Bailiffs and paid the fee, would the court action it? or does it really need to come from the Claimant.

the other one there for £25 is mine, they paid the full balance now, but i thought sod them, let it stay on file for 6 years, anyway, i did not get full payment until after 30 days in any case

Very good point. The CCJ shouldnt be too difficult to tackle as I believe this is public information and would be on their last filing at Companies House.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, Look at the registered office, also note the web address link within the report, its the same bunch of people

 

 

 

Subject Reported on

HFO SERVICES

 

Business Number

 

GRGR9196

 

Address

 

HIGHLAND HOUSE, 165-167 THE BROADWAY, LONDON, SW19

 

1NE.

 

Telephone

 

 

 

020 30240114

 

Web Address

 

www.hfoservices.co.uk

 

They are all using the same offices, that Turnbull Rutherford use

 

maybe they pay all there wages out of this company :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm..well that business is a sole trader or partnership, theres nothing to stop someone having both that and a company in the same name, another thing to be careful of with these things is that company registered addresses are often accountants offices where hundreds of them are registered.

 

Just trying to make helpful comments you understand

Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Link to post
Share on other sites

The phone no quoted doesn't seem right for Wimbledon, should really be 0208 xxx xxxx

 

Highland House was covered in scaffolding the last time I saw it... wonder which floor this lot are based on... probab;y just using it as a mailing address and carrying out their 'real' business in their Indian Head Office. Rumour that they were opening in Australia seems to be fake, the Aussie government wouldn't let them operate there in the way they operate here..

Link to post
Share on other sites

the company i just posted, says they do warehouse work.

 

could this mean ALASDAIR TURNBULL & Diana Nelson run around with all there cases in the warehouse 39 hours per week, and work on there cases under hfo services limited 1 hour per week.

 

 

pointless the above, but no harm having a little fun in the mean time

Edited by UK26
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it me or something smelling distinctly fishy here? Warehouse work? WTF?

 

BTW try Welcome to HFO Services

 

It seems they have an office here, two in India (the second opening in Mumbai in 2009) and it does say they are opening in Sydney in 2009. No mention of those mysterious Cayman Islands.

Edited by Rhia
add info
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its definately the same bunch of cowboys but I am surprised this has not appeared before. Generally speaking the Ltd company can trade as anything they like providing it is disclosed on the CCL. I wouldn't mind getting hold of a copy. Again this is public information and well worth a peep. Will get on the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...