Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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

H L Legal/Scotcall/Capquest-The baliffs we didnt know !!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4964 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

  • 2 weeks later...

I got this the morning off Capquest

 

""Please be advised that as you require subject access information the following is needed in order to proceed with your request

Cheque for 10 pound, admin charges record fee only written on reverse

 

Proof of ID like drivers licence and a document which links to your address.

 

We have placed your account on hold till dec 15th if we do not hear from you by this date your account will be passed to our collection dept for further action."""

 

It is now th 10th which does not leave much time can you advise

on the top of the letter it gives voda's account number.

 

best regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also recieved a letter from Scotcall returning my letters and saying

 

Invalid Scotcall reference, unable to locate account by surname or post code

 

I sent them my name and address the only acc ref I had was H&L Legal

 

Any advice

 

regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Er... Capquest have sent you intimidating letters, you DO NOT need to send them proof of identity, they need to send you proof of the debt! Send the letter to the FOS as part of your complaint, it is NOT a SAR request but a request for info under the Civil Procedure Rules.... completely different kettle of fish.

 

They sent me a letter of 7 days notice of legal action back in August and nothing heard since, I think I might use one of the letters above on them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I have now had a letter from the FOS andthey say they cannot deal with the complaint because quote

"We can only listen to complaint regulated by the FSA or that have agreed volunterily to be covered by the FOS or services that are provided by businesses that are licenced by the Fair Trading for Consumer Credit purposes"

 

They also say get in touch with Credit Services Association as they may help

 

regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well thats a really helpful reply. Contacting the mutual arslikhan organisation like the CSA is a bit like asking Robert Mugabe to investigate the ANC.

 

I have to say that I would trust Mugabe more than the CSA

Link to post
Share on other sites

The FOS' response is totally unacceptable and they should be asked to explain why they are referring this matter to an association whose has not regulatory authority at all. If the FOS are unwilling to reply take the matter to your MP and get him to write to them. The FOS will find it harder, if not impossible, to refuse to reply to MPs.

 

In the meantime you should pursue complaints with each and every one of the cretin companies who have tried to extort money from you. These companies have eight weeks to sort out your complaints. If they don't then you can take the matter back to the FOS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All this is B.S.

You did not request a SAR from Capquest,they are skating around the pond !

 

Scotcall would know perfectly well your account reference too.

Looks like they have all collaborated.

 

The FOS have been very unhelpful also.

Capquest ARE regulated under the Consumer Credit act in their business.

Licence number 0475757 expires 06/01/2010

 

 

HL legal are regulated by the law society.

 

There have been clear breaches of guidelines as set out in the letters.

Now that they mention the CSA-there will be breaches there too under their own codes of practice-which then deems a breach of the unfair consumer terms regs 2008-failing to uphold a code of practice.

 

So Capquest seem to have ignored your request ?

Have you heard anything further from any of them since December 10th ?

I would wait and see what comes next and post again here.

They would be foolish to serve Court papers after your warnings to them.

Additionally they would be equally foolish to instruct further collection agents.

The FOS may be getting confused about the alleged debt and your complaint.

They are correct to state that your Voda account would not be coered under the Consumer credit act-that is not disputed.

However we are talking about breaches of rules and codes under OFT and FSA regulations.

The FSA is responsible for overseeing the fitness and integrity of traders,and the OFT and FOS report to these.

 

I would go and see your local trading standards officers in person and demand an explanation.

If they are not prepared to take up your complaint,then you could make a complaint to your local Government Ombudsman.....who I am sure they WILL be forced to answer to.

HL Legal should be reported to the Law Society without a doubt too.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hi, They have just done the exact same thing to me- threatened me with people who are not bailiffs, but who certainly sound like them. Who will be visiting my home.

 

mine is over a capital one debt- i've paid £200 this month and they wanted the rest of the settlement (£233) but i just cannot afford it as i don't start my new job until next week.

 

i know this is illegal, but i'm still worried because these guys are unlawful jokers.

 

My letter says too:

 

'the doorstep agent is instructed to collect the full amount due and to compile a report to assist in possible further action.'

 

to avoid a visit, they want me to contact them by 28 august, to discuss my account, and they want 3 monthly instalments to clear it. I probably will do this because I am sick of this **** company bothering me.

 

Despite your letters, two years on they are still doing this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just ignore their letters and threats. IF they send anyone, they won't be bailiffs and whoever they are just tell them to sod off, there is nothing they can do, they have absolutely no legal powers whatsoever. They have the same right to "collect the full amount" as a Jehovah's witness. Tell them to go away and shut the door, they are powerless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, They have just done the exact same thing to me- threatened me with people who are not bailiffs, but who certainly sound like them. Who will be visiting my home.

 

 

 

 

to avoid a visit, they want me to contact them by 28 august, to discuss my account, and they want 3 monthly instalments to clear it. I probably will do this because I am sick of this **** company bothering me.

 

:mad:and this is what they want.

bombarding with threats to wear you down,try to scare you into paying,or just p you off so that you give in just to get rid of them.

 

you can not,as you say,nor should not be forced to pay more than YOU can.

 

can you give us more details?

you have many more options to deal with these muppets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, well i'm with CCCS, but they can't deal with my renewed budget because my circumstances are about to change (new job and moving in 2 weeks) Crapquest have taken advantage of this by saying that as ccs will not confirm they have details of my income, by hassling me. i was supposed to pay a settlement figure of £300, but when it came down to it, i offered them 200 as i didnt have the money. They then rang me up asking me why i no longer had the money and what I DID with it! I was fuming. i told them i was on a DMP (CCS are still paying them £10 a month, but they are trying to bully me into a settlement figure.) i told them i was dealing with ccss and they let it go for a week. Then this letter arrived. They have just called, telling my housemate that they are DM company, asking for where i am, my mobile, and when i will be back!! How dare they disclose that? She knows anyway, but what if i didn't want her to know, or they called my work? I just want to pay them because I'm sick of the stress. No doubt when i move i'll have it there too!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...