Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • https://www.bindmans.com/news/neale-v-dpp-the-right-to-silence-citizens-duties-and-coronavirus-regulations   Perhaps the OP should have said nothing - and risked arrest!   "Firstly, the case calls into question the logic behind aspects of the criminal justice response to the public health crisis created by the Coronavirus pandemic...   "Secondly, it is clear that some police officers have misunderstood and misstated their powers, and citizens’ obligations, under the Regulations and at common law...   "Thirdly, the case confirms reasonable excuses for being outside are not limited to those explicitly set out in the Regulations. Police officers considering whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that an offence has been committed under the Regulations so that an FPN may be issued, or the reasonable grounds for suspicion that are necessary for an arrest, should give proper consideration to any explanation given by members of the public (and what a court might think of them) rather than only recognising those exceptions explicitly listed in the Regulations and/or government guidance...   Fourthly, the case is an example of a failure of the CPS review into prosecutions brought under Coronavirus Regulations, which has found that alarming numbers of cases were wrongly charged..."   Above quotes from the Bindman's article, not the decision.  Case arose from the first lockdown and was in Wales.  Same now?  Also was about not being at home - not mask wearing.    
    • No the first LBA was delivered by royal mail, but I responded by email, sorry if I didn't make that clear.   I look at redacting the emails tomorrow, got to get some sleep now.   Thanks
    • ok well that changes things alot. you've accepted one before by email  and now they are doing it again ..   might have shot yourself in the foot until now lets get some 1st aid done.   gonna be a pain to redact but i'm gonna need to see all the emails in/out please in ONE MULTIPAGE PDF from/inc  date of their last PAPLOC   redact them properly !! read our upload guide carefully   you may  think this is immaterial, but its not, esp important is their and your exact wording
    • OK I've looked back at my emails and it appears I've been dealing with shoosmiths since the start of 2019 when they sent a LBA that I'd totally forgot about.   I replied that I didn't recognise the debt and we got into a big letter tennis over the facts.   They then went quiet and then contacted me again in April 2020 asking for income and expenditure details to work out a payment plan with them.   After I responded with my covid comments they went quiet again.   And now they are back with another LBA and I haven't responded to that.   Hope that clears it up. 
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

I can't believe they said this...


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5337 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

After successfully receiving 2 weeks ago all of the charges detailed in my first letter (sent a month ago), I had to remind them via another "prelim" letter that I still required the repayment of several charges taken in the last month.

 

Well... Today I received an interesting secure message...

 

I've arranged for a refund of the £xxx to your account. I've also cancelled the pending charges, totalling £x, due to be removed on xxx xx.

 

The charges applied to your account have resulted from breaches of our terms & conditions. I need to let you know that, if future requests for the return of charges are received, we might need to consider a review of your banking facilities in light of this.

 

A threat - but it is an empty one - can they do this?? I was just getting geared up to go after the charges on my Smile VISA.

 

What do you think? Maybe I should leave it there. I think I do want to continue to bank with Smile.

 

Trianglehead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Banking facilities" can mean a lot of things, surely? It may simply mean that they might withdraw your overdraft facility, for example.

 

Having said that, when I was with smile I received similar messages that I found slightly patronising. This is one of the reasons I left Smile (primary being their charges!).

 

It could be an empty threat. On the other hand, if you do complain about charges again they might simply refer to their terms and conditions and close down your account. It's hard to know!

Link to post
Share on other sites
After successfully receiving 2 weeks ago all of the charges detailed in my first letter (sent a month ago), I had to remind them via another "prelim" letter that I still required the repayment of several charges taken in the last month.

 

Well... Today I received an interesting secure message...

 

I've arranged for a refund of the £xxx to your account. I've also cancelled the pending charges, totalling £x, due to be removed on xxx xx.

 

The charges applied to your account have resulted from breaches of our terms & conditions. I need to let you know that, if future requests for the return of charges are received, we might need to consider a review of your banking facilities in light of this.

 

A threat - but it is an empty one - can they do this?? I was just getting geared up to go after the charges on my Smile VISA.

 

What do you think? Maybe I should leave it there. I think I do want to continue to bank with Smile.

 

Trianglehead.

 

Alliance and Leicester have been closing accounts, and the advise is always to open a parachute account just in case. This is the first time that I have heard of threats from smile, but I think we need to wait and see what they have in mind before deciding what steps to take next.

 

As to whether they can do it, no they shouldn't. Then again they shouldn't dish out penalty charges, but they do.

 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

i sent them a secure message about the outstanding charges, and recieved a standard reply by letter a week later so have to start from scratch again.

 

at least you got your additional charges back straight away. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...