Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • See what you think of the attached. I have to do some proofreading of an English grammar book for an Italian publisher this weekend - for money! - so I'm afraid corrections and suggestions will come in dribs & drabs.  I've totally knackered the layout, the numbering and the order of your Exhibits but there will be several versions done so don't worry about that ATM. Your arguments are superb. What is less superb is the way you jump from one to the other and back again, so I haven't changed your words, but I have moved the paragraphs around and given each section a heading. New bits are shown in red. Crossed out crossed out in black is something you've quoted from the government Code of Practice, but that has since been withdrawn so unfortunately that argument has to go. Your paras 7 & 8 don't harm your case but to me are waffle and can go.  Keeping the arguments clear & concise will always impress a judge. IMPORTANT - did you ever send Simple Simon a CPR request? Defendant's WS - version 2.pdf
    • Björn Ulvaeus appeared on stage in East Yorkshire at a conference held at the Bridlington Spa.View the full article
    • Hi Schipoo and thanks for the update. This is a brilliant result as rergards your fight with HMRC. If you can manage a Donation to the site, it would be greatly appreciated. Let us know how it goes as regards the fees being sought by Independant Tax.
    • A never ending torrent of **it Outrage as ‘tidal wave’ of sewage floods historic market town’s unique chalk river WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Exclusive: Water firm pumps sewage into river Misbourne, Amersham on 21 ‘dry days’ during nearly five month period  
    • Worth noting that all of these firms - either the alleged EIS investment, the rebate company themselves or the payee were all registered to the same address. Clavering House is 3 miles away from HMRC Benton Park view offices.   Wardrop - unfortunately unsuccessful due to late appeal - assessments opened by HMRC in March 2019. Scammed by Richard Hall (Capital allowances consultants ltd - Clavering House) investments into Cryoblast Limited 15/16 (Paul Huggins - Clavering House) and Eco Cooling solutions 16/17 (Anthony Fitches - Clavering House).    Mccuminsky - scammed by Capital Allowances after providing his details to Stefan Brown Alpha Tax Consultants (Clavering House) payment made to Eco Cooling Solutions.    Robson - scammed by Capital Allowances - 15/16 paid to Cryoblast 16/17 paid to Eco Cooling.    Myself - scammed by Allan Maxwell - MaxTax (other business Maxwell electronics) registered to Clavering House.   Cryoblast Solutions and Fast Tax - Alan O’Hara    Please note there are two Cryoblasts involved - Cryoblast limited (Paul Huggins and Clavering House) and Cryoblast Solutions Limited (Alan O’Hara also director of Fast Tax).    My return simply said “Cryoblast” another thing that should have been clarified as part of HMRC guidelines before paying out the claim.    Cryoblast limited was already suspected to be involved in fraudulent claims before my investment as Huntly had open assessments issued in November 2018.    Cryoblast Solutions, the same company director as Fast Tax where my money was sent was dissolved before my claims were submitted. 
  • 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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

link want my sig 6 times before they will supply a CCA !! **WON***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5650 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

I sent off a CCA request to link and in the letter I said I did not acknowledge the debt. They have now written and said that because I do not acknowledge the debt they are not allowed to send out a copy of the agreement under the data protection act 1998 and if they sent it they would be in breach of the act. They say they want 6 speciment signatures so they can confirm I am the right person. What do I do now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

That is the funniest excuse I have ever heard from any DCA

 

Let them default on your LEGAL request and then commit a Criminal Offence. Should they make any further demands for money report them to the OFT and Trading Standards. You are legally entitled to your CCA despite what these CRETINS say

Link to post
Share on other sites

LMAO@ the specimen thing- that's hilarious.

 

As for the demand for it- even more hilarious. If they send anything to the person they are dealing with they send it to their name and address. So I have no idea what that specimen thing is about. Unless they want to forge a signature on a CCA??lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In summary, Link were sufficiently sure of your identity to send demands for payment to you, knowing that do so if they were not certain would be a breach of the OFT Guidance, but they are not sufficiently confident of your identity to comply with their legal obligations under the CCA 1974.

 

Oh what a tangled web they weave...

 

Just sit back and wait for them to default. They're hardly likely to take you to court, are they, since they clearly aren't sure you are the debtor. If they threaten any such action, of course, that will be another breach of the OFT Guidance, and grounds for complaint.

 

I like Giant's idea - you could do each signature in a different coloured crayon, and provide instructions for them to make an attractive mobile for their call centre.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But all jokes aside.... DO NOT send them a copy of your signature.

 

Theres a very high chance they will fraduently copy it onto an agreement.

 

 

 

DO NOT send a copy of your signature.

 

 

And as ODC says, its there problem now. You made a legal request and they choose to ignor it. There problem, not yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Feck it. Why wait. Complain to TS and the OFT now. You have written proof of Links reason for breaking the law. Report their sorry asses now. Data Protection my a**e. S77, 78, 175 and 189 of the CCA 1974 spring immediatly to mind. In fact while you are at it ask Link for a copy of their complaints procedure and if they fail to supply it then report them to the FOS

Link to post
Share on other sites

They suggested I send a copy of a drivers licence, passport or official bill so they can confirm the claim is correct before they proceed further. They also say that the information will be treated in the strictest confidence and my privacy will be respected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strictest confidence?

 

They sent a demand letter to someone detailing the OC and the amount owed, yet they arent sure that the person they sent it to is the person that owes the money?

 

I would be on the phone so fast to simply laugh at them (dont do this though, everyone will advise you never to ring them, I have done it in the past for fun only).

 

As others have said you have sent in your request. They have replied that they have no intention of dealing with your request at this time. Escelate it to the next level now.

Lowell Financial - No CCA available

NDR - CCA request sent 08/04

Link to post
Share on other sites

My advice, send them a letter stating that you do not believe this matter to have anything to do with you and that they must prove that it does. State at a time when identity theft is at a high you would not send personal information to anybody unless you are certain the matter relates to you.

 

Then add that they can resolve this if they are certain it is you by sending the information required, however you would point out that should they information not relate to you you would feel compelled to report them for breaching principle (?) of the Data Protection Act by releasing data without first being certain that the person requesting the data is the subject.

 

In effect you have them caught in a catch 22 here. They can't send proof unless they are certain it relates to you, but how can they be certain when you yourself have denied it? You don't even need to send a CCA request since you're denying you're the person they're looking for and any attempt to pursue from here on would be met with a firm 'this has nothing to do with me'.

 

Same thing happened with me when Thames contacted me a while back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think you meant 'they' commit a criminal offence...sure you didn't mean what you typed! :)

 

LMAO. missed that completely!! I'm sure ODC was not insinuating that Angel104 celebrate them defaulting on his/her legal request by going out joyriding for kicks afterwards. Or anything else like that. ;)

No I meant what I said let THEM default and THEN commit a criminal offence.

 

 

They have to default before THEY can commit a criminal offence 1 calendar month later.

 

Bloody pedants:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Can someone please advise me what to do now only this morning I recieved a nasty letter from link saying I have ignored their request for 6 specimen signatures and they are demanding I provide them withing the next 7 days. They are still claiming that sending out the credit agreement without seeing them would be in breach of the data protection act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone please advise me what to do now. I have received a letter from link giving me 7 days to comply with teir request for the signatures. They also said they will only supply the credit agreement if I acknowledge the debt. They said if they send the credit agreement without my acknowledgement they would be in breach of the data protection act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Link are not sure you are the correct person then it is THEY who are breaching Data Protection by sending you demands for money if they are unsure you are the correct person.

 

Send them this letter of Pauls

 

Dear Sirs,

 

RE Account NO XXXXXXXX

 

Thank you for your letter dated xx/xx/2008 the contents of which are noted

In your letter you make reference to requiring my signed authorisation /specimen signature** before you comply. I draw your attention to the fact that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not require that i supply you a copy of my signature before you comply with my S77/78** request.

 

If it is for Data Protection purposes then i can happily supply you with documentation to substantiate my identity to you.

 

However please note that to date you have happily sent statements and correspondence containing extensive sensitive private information to my address. I have to ask if you are concerned that you are corresponding with the correct person why has it taken so long to raise this?

 

As you are aware, disclosing data without adequate checks of identity is contrary to the 7th principal of data protection, listed in schedule 1 of the Data protection Act 1998:

 

7. Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data.

 

My request for a true copy of my credit agreement under section 77/78** was made on xx/xx/2008 and the 12 working days for your compliance expire on xx/xx/2008. I note that there is no provision that removes the requirements of the act to provide this information on time, even if you are unsure of my identity.

 

I look forward to receiving the documentation requested

 

Regards

 

Print dont Sign

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter is quite correct.

 

You ARE ignoring there request and your well whitin your to do so.

 

The whole we need your signature thing is twaddle.

 

If you havent already made a complaint to the powerrs that be I suggest you do it now.

 

Dont send them your signature, they dont need it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5650 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...