Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

EOS Solutions and Woolworths plc(sic)


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5575 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

Dear all,

 

Can anybody advise on how to handle EOS?

 

My Daughter used to work at Woolworths, but left to go to University last September.

 

In October she received a letter claiming that she'd been overpaid. She checked her payslips, and it did not appear she had been.

 

With this in mind she wrote to the agency concerned and asked them for evidence of the alleged overpayment.

 

No reply was received, but then today a very threatening letter was recieved threatening court action, and "Door-Step" collection at your address.

 

I tried their phone number, but they're simply permanently engaged. From what I read here, this would serve no purpose anyway.

 

Can anybody advise me on the correct response to this "threat"

 

We do not beilieve weve done anything wrong, and they appear unwilling or unable to provide evidence of the overpayment. I note most of the sample letters here are relating to Credit debt, can these be used with an alleged employment debt?

 

Many thanks for your support and advise.

D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would write to them requesting details of how they believe that the money is owed. I would also add that you don't wish to make any appointments with anybody from their company, and would see any visits as trespass and would be treated as such. I would send this SD signed for.

 

I would then wait for a reply.

 

If they don't then if they decide to take you to court you can prove that you have tried to ascertain the validity of their claim, but they were not forth coming, only being obstructive in the matter.

 

I'm sure some will be along shortly with some further advice in this matter

 

Sharpman

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your former employer, or even a debt collector, contacts you claiming that you owe money that was overpayed in the former employment, much will depend on what was stated in your employment contract.

 

Some contracts state that, if an employee leaves the employment owing the employer money that could not be recovered from final wages, the amount owed becomes a civil debt.

 

If there is no contractual provision to treat the alleged overpayment as a civil debt, the employer may have considerable difficulty in enforcing payment if you refuse to cooperate.

 

The letters you are receiving from EOS solutions are merely threats. I would try writing to them again.

 

 

 

Dear EOS Solutions

 

I Do Not Acknowledge Any Debt to Your Company

 

I am writing in reference to your letter dated xx/xx/xxxx

 

I would ask that no further contact be made concerning this matter unless you can provide evidence as to my liability for the alleged debt in question.

If you are unable to provide evidence as to my liability I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

I have duly noted your intention to authorise a collector to visit my home.

OFT rules and regulations clearly state that you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make an appointment with you. There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.).

 

Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives, to visit me at my property and if you persist in sending “doorstep callers” to my home, you will be reported for harassment and be liable for damages for a tort of trespass. You would also be liable for conspiring in a tort of trespass by acting in defiance of my instructions and sending someone to visit me nevertheless.

 

Should it be necessary, I will obtain an injunction.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice letter drob ;)

 

It is up to them to provide proof of their claim and, as they've failed to respond to a written request for this information, they just need telling to 'go away'. Send the letter to get them to either prove it, or stop hassling.

 

I'm guessing that the latest letter is not from EOS, but from a DCA. You may have to write to them to point out that the matter is in dispute with EOS and has been for some time. The matter should not have been passed on.

 

Oh - and this forum is for Debt Collection Industry, not just credit debt :)

Be good to those who give you advice that helps - click the star to give them your thanks by way of a reputation credit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Dear All,

 

Its been 4 weeks since the letter was signed for at their end (13/01/09), but no reply, nor written confirmation the matter is closed.

 

Do we need to follow up in any way, or just assume its all done with.

 

I'm just a little concerned the next thing we might get is a summons of some kind, or a thug on the doorstep!

 

Should I follow up on the threat to inform Trading Standards, and the OFT.

 

Best regards,

Donchik

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi D,

I used to work for Eos myself & there not all people make them out to be, it's just a paid job at the end of the day. But if you don't feel you can speak to them over the phone what they would probably ask for is a copy of a pay slip from woolworths showing that your daughter hasnt been overpaid.

People tend to see debt collection agencys as monsters who try to [problem] people but all they act as really is a 3rd party, everything has is legal, and trust me! I know from experience that everything sent in is confidential & strictly protected by the data protection act. Eos would have to forward a copy of the pay slip back to -in this case woolworths to close the account that woolworths is prosecuting against, and obviously this would rule out any chance that your daughter owes them money.

 

As for threatening letters all I'm going to say is any bailiff that is sent out nowadays has to be issued by court, however woolworths, not Eos, could take the account to court. You would be notified at that stage but if your daughter didn't proove that she wasnt overpaid there & woolworths have proof that she did, over £100 solicitors fees could be added to the balance and thats what you have to watch out for.

Just make sure you ask woolworths for proof that she was overpaid, they have no case if they can't provide that!

All the best

Hannah

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi D,

I used to work for Eos myself & there not all people make them out to be, it's just a paid job at the end of the day. But if you don't feel you can speak to them over the phone what they would probably ask for is a copy of a pay slip from woolworths showing that your daughter hasnt been overpaid.

People tend to see debt collection agencys as monsters who try to [problem] people but all they act as really is a 3rd party, everything has is legal, and trust me! I know from experience that everything sent in is confidential & strictly protected by the data protection act. Eos would have to forward a copy of the pay slip back to -in this case woolworths to close the account that woolworths is prosecuting against, and obviously this would rule out any chance that your daughter owes them money.

As for threatening letters all I'm going to say is any bailiff that is sent out nowadays has to be issued by court, however woolworths, not Eos, could take the account to court. You would be notified at that stage but if your daughter didn't proove that she wasnt overpaid there & woolworths have proof that she did, over £100 solicitors fees could be added to the balance and thats what you have to watch out for.

Just make sure you ask woolworths for proof that she was overpaid, they have no case if they can't provide that!

All the best

Hannah

 

Its for a county court & the debtor to sort out what will happen.

EOS/Woolworths have no say in the matter effectivley.

We all know that DCA's dont like going anywhere near county courts as it costs them money & wouldnt be worth their while just to be repaid £1 per month once all outgoings have been taken into account.

A bailiff ordered by the court is a very last resort once all other avenues have failed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surley the onus is on Eos/Woolworths to prove the debt exists, Not for Donchik to prove it doesn't. Ignore them unless they come up with some solid proof of this over payment. If they did manage to come up with proof, tell them to jog on as you now know why they went bankrupt ;)

The Grand essentials of happiness are: something to do, something to love, and something to hope for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...